When the train and track got struck it probably knocked out all power on the train. It may also have knocked out telemetry on the track. No power for the radio, no telemetry and the train just disappears from the control display. Even if they have a backup battery radio they have to find it, call in, identify their train, and identify their location. That takes time. In that time the train behind them could have been too close to stop.
Passenger trains are not freight trains in that passenger trains are much lighter and stop much faster due to much less inertia. So no they probably couldn't just not apply brakes and coast a while.
You miss the subtext. Terrorism is not a single person killing people or destroying property at random. It is organizations planning and carrying out acts of violence and destruction on civilian populations with the intent of changing policy. A terrorist campaign says that we will hurt your people any time we want until you do what we say. The individual acts do not mean much; it is the campaign that causes fear. A drunk driving through a crowd is a tragic accident. An agent of an organization driving through a crowd where the organization states they will do it again and again is a much different story.
Don't be afraid is an empty platitude. Would you feel safe knowing that there is an organization planning and carrying out acts that could kill you at any time or place? Sometimes fear is justified.
You seem to be implying that the USB standard was languishing on obscurity for years until the iMac came out. Sure there was the USB 1.0 spec that came out in 1996 but no one really adopted that. USB 1.1 spec, the one that be came popular at the time, was published in September 1998. So the standard was languishing in obscurity for all of a couple of months before the iMac came out.
Just because Apple was the first to build computers with USB doesn't meant that they popularized it. Considering the fact that IBM, Intel and Microsoft spent money on creating the spec don't you think they had plans to use it? The "if Apple didn't popularize USB it would never have been used" is pure Apple fanboy propaganda.
Two killed and 15 injured. Windows shattered in a 400m radius.That is a lot more damage than a drunk driver.
The main fact is that a drunk driving accident is not planned and intentional. Yes, a drunk driver know it is possible to kill someone but that is not their intent. We accept the fact that accidents happen but we are unwilling to rink planned bombings on our city streets.
Sorry math mistake. I should have said "All companies sell a total of 500" since Apple had a 10% share of personal computer sales. As a single manufacturer Apple is very big but as an operating system OSX is still quite small when compared to Windows.
I don't think an Samsung Galaxy is a personal computer either. It has nothing to do with the manufacturer. It has to do with the fact that I do not think a device with just a touchscreen as standard is a personal computer; it is a tablet and therefore a different class. Tablets can do things that personal computers can not and vice versa. By considering them the same class sales figures are muddled.
I can also point out that I didn't say anything about "real computer" just "personal computer". Servers, smart phones, mini computers and mainframes are all "real computers" but they are not "personal computers". In my opinion sales figures for personal computers and tablets should be separate as they are different classes of devices. Acer shouldn't have sales of their Iconia Tab A500 added to their personal computer sales any more than Apple should do the same with iPad sales.
I do have issues with many things Apple does just as I have issues with many things Microsoft does. In this instance I am calling Apple on the inflation of their personal computer sales figures by including tablets in them.
I guess I should have been clearer. I define a real keyboard as one that does not involve a touch screen and disappear when not in use.
To those who think that I think Blackberries are personal computers, "real keyboard" is only one criteria. A personal computer would not fit in the average pants pocket. Just trying to cut down on the responses that deliberately misunderstand statements.
Try this chart. Yes, Apple is the fourth largest manufacturer of personal computers yet they only shipped 9.5% of the total. Yes they have tripled their market share in a year by 3X3 is still only 9. Those figures even include iPads which is debatable. To me, anything without a real keyboard is not a personal computer and should be in its own class.
The Moris device uses three technologies to identify people; facial recognition, iris recognition and fingerprint recognition.
To me it is equivalent to an officer asking for my ID. Police do not have the time to wander around randomly snapping pictures of people and checking to see who they are. If a police officer has cause to ask for my ID they have cause to verify it using Moris.
The iris scan does not require someone to hold their eye open for a period of time; the picture is taken just like any other iPhone picture. It is the same as getting a DMV photo taken; stand there, don's blink till I say.
Carrier Criminal Bob Smith who has dozens of warrants out for him is stopped because he ran a red light. He produces a fake drivers license under the name Frank Jones. The police run the license, it appears valid and Mr Smith goes free.
Or Carrier Criminal Bob Smith who has dozens of warrants out for him is stopped because he ran a red light. He produces a fake drivers license under the name Frank Jones. The police take a facial picture/iris scan, run it and the ID through the system ad discover that Mr Smith is lying and arrest him.
Currently the only bio metric available to identify someone is fingerprints. To check someone's fingerprints requires going to the station to have the fingerprints take. That takes time. There are portable fingerprint scanners but that seem to have the same issue as facial/iris scanners.
This is how it is different than being booked, fingerprinted, and mugshot. 1. The photograph does not go into a permanent record. 2. You are not detained and required to spend time at a police station. The photos are taken for ID purposes. Once checked they become useless.
The fact that fake ID exists makes accepting information from it on face value naive at best. It is much more difficult to fake a face than an ID.
Try this analogy. Company A sells 100 company, B sells 75, C sells 50, D sells 40 , E sells 10, F sells10 ,... Z sells 1 All companies sell a total of 5000, All companies except C sell computers that use the same software. If one is a hardware manufacturer would one target the 10% or the 90%? Apple is big in their own playground because they won't let anyone else in.
Apple is the only source computers that run OSX. Considering the hundreds of computer manufacturers that make Windows based computers, Apple is still a small player in the computer market. OSX and iOS combined only have a 10% share of computers that use browsers. As a manufacturer they are a big player in their own small yard, but the people who make the other 85% of computers probably drive the industry more.
While that's true, the fact is that Apple has a track record of strong consumer support. The standards their devices use have a strong bearing on what other manufacturers integrate into their own devices.
Can you say Firewire? Yes, some manufacturers support ot buy a much greater proportion support USB.
Safety standards do not prevent accidents. They exist so that when an accident occurs injury and death are minimized. Not I said minimized and not eliminated.
Head on collisions are not illegal in that, unless deliberate, they are considered accidents. Your example if a 200+MPH BiPod striking a Suburban is irrelevant as it is illegal for a BiPod pilot to put the vehicle in that situation. The issue is safety standards. The safety standards for four wheeled vehicles are different than motorcycles (or bicycles). For example, seat belts are not required on a motorcycle yet they are required on a four wheeled vehicles.
I one is hangering the vehicle at home then it means that the vehicle will be driving on roads with other vehicles. A 60mph head on collision is possible if both vehicles are moving at 30 mph in opposite directions; a situation on many residential streets.
If a BiPod is flying at 200+mph it is illegal and unsafe to be 4 feet from the ground.
I worked for a company that installed GPS/disabling devices in exotic rental cars for the purposes of ensuring the car was not improperly used and to retrieve it if necessary.. The renter was never told.
The main point is that activating a laptop camera and installing a hidden camera in an apartment are two different things. That's like equating shooting someone who is attempting to kill you with shooting someone who looked at you wrong. They both use guns. Used as it is intended, no pictures of the renter would ever be taken. If the camera is only activated when the device is reported stolen or out of lease then who ever is being observed in no longer a party to any agreement. In this case, due to the acts of a dishonest employee, an error was made. Maybe the manager should have called first to clarify the decision and the company is probably liable for that.
Camera do help in the retrieval of the merchandise. First, if a picture is taken and it is one of the renters that it is pretty good chance that the renter still has the device and their "it was stolen" statement is false. Otherwise the picture can be taken to the police who may be able to identify the person through a search.
The single party recording refers to verbal communication and not pictures which is why the police have tried to use wiretap laws.
Devices are installed in rental items all the time, g-force meters in aircraft to ensure they are not used for stunts, GPS and disabling devices in cars so they don't not go out of designated areas or raced. These devices may or may not be disclosed to the renter.
The software is only supposed to be used to find the location of stolen equipment or equipment out of lease so that the equipment can be easily retrieved. The problem was that when the plaintiffs paid cash for the laptop the cash was diverted by a dishonest employee and never got recorded. As far as the manager knew the laptop was out of lease and needed to be retrieved. The plaintiffs failed to make the case that the software was being used on a regular basis to spy on owners or renters of the equipment. There was evidence that the software was being used but the purpose of that use is unclear. Due to that, the injunction was not granted.
The out of context quote 'Moreover, it is purely conjecture that the other members of the putative class will be subjected to remote access of personal information' is salacious at best. Not it says "will be subjected" not "can be subjected". It is not proven that other renters will have their money stolen by an dishonest employee and their laptop considered out of lease.
Aircraft have to be light to fly. Ground vehicles carry extra weight to handle impact by other vehicles. I'd like to see how they are going to incorporate bumpers, crumple zones, airbags, side impact protection, etc that make a vehicle safe on the road. Any vehicle light enough to be used as an aircraft would be weak enough to get a one star crash rating. I would like to see what would happen to a BiPod if it was hit head on by a Suburban doing 60 miles an hour.
In fact the more I look at the vehicle the more I think that it will never be a real product. There are certain minimum safety standards for vehicles driven on the road. One main one is bumpers. I see no bumpers on this vehicle. I doubt very much if it would pass any DoT standards as a legal road vehicle. I looked at the company web site, http://www.scaled.com/projects/bipod, and noticed a couple of things. First BiPod is a test bed not a prototype. Second they use the term "roadable" and not "street legal". "Roadable" just means that it is able to drive on a read not that it can legally drive on a highway with other vehicles as "street legal" implies.
Another point that seems to be missed is that the propellers have not even been fitted to the BiPod. The "flights" are accomplished by driving the aircraft down the runway using the rear wheels for propulsion, lifting off and gliding back to the ground. At this point it is not a flying car; at best it is a gliding car. Talk to me when you can fly further than the Wright Flier
Slashdot Mirror
It is easy to create a picture of a cool craft based on technology that does not exist yet. The trick is in implementing the technology.
When the train and track got struck it probably knocked out all power on the train. It may also have knocked out telemetry on the track. No power for the radio, no telemetry and the train just disappears from the control display. Even if they have a backup battery radio they have to find it, call in, identify their train, and identify their location. That takes time. In that time the train behind them could have been too close to stop.
Passenger trains are not freight trains in that passenger trains are much lighter and stop much faster due to much less inertia. So no they probably couldn't just not apply brakes and coast a while.
I think the message was that this application can be done with any cellphone.
You miss the subtext. Terrorism is not a single person killing people or destroying property at random. It is organizations planning and carrying out acts of violence and destruction on civilian populations with the intent of changing policy. A terrorist campaign says that we will hurt your people any time we want until you do what we say. The individual acts do not mean much; it is the campaign that causes fear. A drunk driving through a crowd is a tragic accident. An agent of an organization driving through a crowd where the organization states they will do it again and again is a much different story.
Don't be afraid is an empty platitude. Would you feel safe knowing that there is an organization planning and carrying out acts that could kill you at any time or place? Sometimes fear is justified.
You seem to be implying that the USB standard was languishing on obscurity for years until the iMac came out. Sure there was the USB 1.0 spec that came out in 1996 but no one really adopted that. USB 1.1 spec, the one that be came popular at the time, was published in September 1998. So the standard was languishing in obscurity for all of a couple of months before the iMac came out.
Just because Apple was the first to build computers with USB doesn't meant that they popularized it. Considering the fact that IBM, Intel and Microsoft spent money on creating the spec don't you think they had plans to use it? The "if Apple didn't popularize USB it would never have been used" is pure Apple fanboy propaganda.
Two killed and 15 injured. Windows shattered in a 400m radius.That is a lot more damage than a drunk driver.
The main fact is that a drunk driving accident is not planned and intentional. Yes, a drunk driver know it is possible to kill someone but that is not their intent. We accept the fact that accidents happen but we are unwilling to rink planned bombings on our city streets.
Sorry math mistake. I should have said "All companies sell a total of 500" since Apple had a 10% share of personal computer sales. As a single manufacturer Apple is very big but as an operating system OSX is still quite small when compared to Windows.
I don't think an Samsung Galaxy is a personal computer either. It has nothing to do with the manufacturer. It has to do with the fact that I do not think a device with just a touchscreen as standard is a personal computer; it is a tablet and therefore a different class. Tablets can do things that personal computers can not and vice versa. By considering them the same class sales figures are muddled.
I can also point out that I didn't say anything about "real computer" just "personal computer". Servers, smart phones, mini computers and mainframes are all "real computers" but they are not "personal computers". In my opinion sales figures for personal computers and tablets should be separate as they are different classes of devices. Acer shouldn't have sales of their Iconia Tab A500 added to their personal computer sales any more than Apple should do the same with iPad sales.
I do have issues with many things Apple does just as I have issues with many things Microsoft does. In this instance I am calling Apple on the inflation of their personal computer sales figures by including tablets in them.
I guess I should have been clearer. I define a real keyboard as one that does not involve a touch screen and disappear when not in use.
To those who think that I think Blackberries are personal computers, "real keyboard" is only one criteria. A personal computer would not fit in the average pants pocket. Just trying to cut down on the responses that deliberately misunderstand statements.
Try this chart. Yes, Apple is the fourth largest manufacturer of personal computers yet they only shipped 9.5% of the total. Yes they have tripled their market share in a year by 3X3 is still only 9. Those figures even include iPads which is debatable. To me, anything without a real keyboard is not a personal computer and should be in its own class.
The Moris device uses three technologies to identify people; facial recognition, iris recognition and fingerprint recognition.
To me it is equivalent to an officer asking for my ID. Police do not have the time to wander around randomly snapping pictures of people and checking to see who they are. If a police officer has cause to ask for my ID they have cause to verify it using Moris.
The iris scan does not require someone to hold their eye open for a period of time; the picture is taken just like any other iPhone picture. It is the same as getting a DMV photo taken; stand there, don's blink till I say.
Then they just use the facial recognition part.
Carrier Criminal Bob Smith who has dozens of warrants out for him is stopped because he ran a red light. He produces a fake drivers license under the name Frank Jones. The police run the license, it appears valid and Mr Smith goes free.
Or
Carrier Criminal Bob Smith who has dozens of warrants out for him is stopped because he ran a red light. He produces a fake drivers license under the name Frank Jones. The police take a facial picture/iris scan, run it and the ID through the system ad discover that Mr Smith is lying and arrest him.
Currently the only bio metric available to identify someone is fingerprints. To check someone's fingerprints requires going to the station to have the fingerprints take. That takes time. There are portable fingerprint scanners but that seem to have the same issue as facial/iris scanners.
This is how it is different than being booked, fingerprinted, and mugshot.
1. The photograph does not go into a permanent record.
2. You are not detained and required to spend time at a police station.
The photos are taken for ID purposes. Once checked they become useless.
The fact that fake ID exists makes accepting information from it on face value naive at best. It is much more difficult to fake a face than an ID.
Try this analogy. ... Z sells 1
Company A sells 100 company, B sells 75, C sells 50, D sells 40 , E sells 10, F sells10 ,
All companies sell a total of 5000, All companies except C sell computers that use the same software. If one is a hardware manufacturer would one target the 10% or the 90%? Apple is big in their own playground because they won't let anyone else in.
Apple is the only source computers that run OSX. Considering the hundreds of computer manufacturers that make Windows based computers, Apple is still a small player in the computer market. OSX and iOS combined only have a 10% share of computers that use browsers. As a manufacturer they are a big player in their own small yard, but the people who make the other 85% of computers probably drive the industry more.
While that's true, the fact is that Apple has a track record of strong consumer support. The standards their devices use have a strong bearing on what other manufacturers integrate into their own devices.
Can you say Firewire? Yes, some manufacturers support ot buy a much greater proportion support USB.
Safety standards do not prevent accidents. They exist so that when an accident occurs injury and death are minimized. Not I said minimized and not eliminated.
Head on collisions are not illegal in that, unless deliberate, they are considered accidents. Your example if a 200+MPH BiPod striking a Suburban is irrelevant as it is illegal for a BiPod pilot to put the vehicle in that situation. The issue is safety standards. The safety standards for four wheeled vehicles are different than motorcycles (or bicycles). For example, seat belts are not required on a motorcycle yet they are required on a four wheeled vehicles.
I one is hangering the vehicle at home then it means that the vehicle will be driving on roads with other vehicles. A 60mph head on collision is possible if both vehicles are moving at 30 mph in opposite directions; a situation on many residential streets.
If a BiPod is flying at 200+mph it is illegal and unsafe to be 4 feet from the ground.
Wiretap laws cover the recording of audio by an electronic device. Single photos do not have audio.
I worked for a company that installed GPS/disabling devices in exotic rental cars for the purposes of ensuring the car was not improperly used and to retrieve it if necessary.. The renter was never told.
The main point is that activating a laptop camera and installing a hidden camera in an apartment are two different things. That's like equating shooting someone who is attempting to kill you with shooting someone who looked at you wrong. They both use guns. Used as it is intended, no pictures of the renter would ever be taken. If the camera is only activated when the device is reported stolen or out of lease then who ever is being observed in no longer a party to any agreement. In this case, due to the acts of a dishonest employee, an error was made. Maybe the manager should have called first to clarify the decision and the company is probably liable for that.
Camera do help in the retrieval of the merchandise. First, if a picture is taken and it is one of the renters that it is pretty good chance that the renter still has the device and their "it was stolen" statement is false. Otherwise the picture can be taken to the police who may be able to identify the person through a search.
The single party recording refers to verbal communication and not pictures which is why the police have tried to use wiretap laws.
Devices are installed in rental items all the time, g-force meters in aircraft to ensure they are not used for stunts, GPS and disabling devices in cars so they don't not go out of designated areas or raced. These devices may or may not be disclosed to the renter.
The software is only supposed to be used to find the location of stolen equipment or equipment out of lease so that the equipment can be easily retrieved. The problem was that when the plaintiffs paid cash for the laptop the cash was diverted by a dishonest employee and never got recorded. As far as the manager knew the laptop was out of lease and needed to be retrieved. The plaintiffs failed to make the case that the software was being used on a regular basis to spy on owners or renters of the equipment. There was evidence that the software was being used but the purpose of that use is unclear. Due to that, the injunction was not granted.
The out of context quote 'Moreover, it is purely conjecture that the other members of the putative class will be subjected to remote access of personal information' is salacious at best. Not it says "will be subjected" not "can be subjected". It is not proven that other renters will have their money stolen by an dishonest employee and their laptop considered out of lease.
Aircraft have to be light to fly. Ground vehicles carry extra weight to handle impact by other vehicles. I'd like to see how they are going to incorporate bumpers, crumple zones, airbags, side impact protection, etc that make a vehicle safe on the road. Any vehicle light enough to be used as an aircraft would be weak enough to get a one star crash rating. I would like to see what would happen to a BiPod if it was hit head on by a Suburban doing 60 miles an hour.
In fact the more I look at the vehicle the more I think that it will never be a real product. There are certain minimum safety standards for vehicles driven on the road. One main one is bumpers. I see no bumpers on this vehicle. I doubt very much if it would pass any DoT standards as a legal road vehicle. I looked at the company web site, http://www.scaled.com/projects/bipod, and noticed a couple of things. First BiPod is a test bed not a prototype. Second they use the term "roadable" and not "street legal". "Roadable" just means that it is able to drive on a read not that it can legally drive on a highway with other vehicles as "street legal" implies.
Another point that seems to be missed is that the propellers have not even been fitted to the BiPod. The "flights" are accomplished by driving the aircraft down the runway using the rear wheels for propulsion, lifting off and gliding back to the ground. At this point it is not a flying car; at best it is a gliding car. Talk to me when you can fly further than the Wright Flier