I read the links from the Slashdot story, including an autotranslation of the Swedish report, but I saw nothing describing the person who reported the ugly post. Nothing to indicate they're a "leftist" (whatever that means). Who says it was a "leftist", other than mpawlo, who submitted the story to Slashdot?
How can you tell the difference between an unacceptable post that was missed by a less-than-perfect process for removing it, from one that was left by an admin who wants to post it, so "missed it" on purpose?
Government ministers have so much power, the public takes so much risk giving it to them, that they have to avoid even the appearance of wrongdoing. Because it's often so hard to tell the difference, and the difference often doesn't matter to the results
Pick one that looks worth completing, with people who look worth working with/for, and just contribute some code. Or test something and contribute your bug reports - or patches.
If you don't like what happens, then pick another. You'll find one you like, maybe on the first try.
There's no penalty for picking the wrong one. But there is a penalty for not picking any: missing the experience.
The biggest boost to these brain/machine interfaces will come when we can pipe feedback directly from the machine into the brain (or any neural input). The brain works as a feedback manager. Without feedback, the brain doesn't learn to change its output. With crude feedback, the lessons are learned crudely. Visual or any other feedback through a sense organ is crude, losing in translation from machine to organ and then organ to brain.
Neural input is harder than neural output (eg. through MRI monitoring). But even a little direct neural input will be used by the brain to vastly improve the brain's control of the machines.
Which chemical is the gambling addict addicted to? Do you know any acute compulsive gamblers? Real ones? Or even garden variety heroin junkies? Or even a genuine recovering alcoholic?
And where is your evidence that "a good boot up the arse" fixes addicts? The evidence says that boot often got them there, especially when used to "fix" people with little self-control.
You can't learn what you're talking about by watching TV. And no, that doesn't necessarily mean that you're a TV addict. And in fact, the gamblers, tech consumers and TV watchers who can be "fixed" with "a good boot up the arse" aren't addicts. But addicts to that uncontrolled behavior do exist, and the boot just makes them worse.
Addiction is not just some extra degree of "lust". It's a compulsion that one cannot resist. Not just that one dislikes to resist. And not just a compulsion to do something bad.
Alcohol addiction is the classic: alcoholism. It's not just that one "drinks too much". Or too often, or the wrong stuff. Those are ways to tell someone is an alcohol addict. The alcoholic does not have self control over their drinking. Perhaps they need a drink to destroy their limits, or perhaps there is no initial barrier. Even recovering alcoholics cannot take a single drink, because the effect of that drink on their self control leaves them with no resistance - or is so likely to that they cannot take the chance. But even those not taking any drinks are still alcoholics, because they lack self control over taking it. They are behaving like they have some self control, but it's really gained by a huge, constant effort plugged into social structures, including regular meetings, and lots of conscious training, like 12 step programs.
Techno addiction is rarer, but still happens. There are compulsive shoppers to whom technology, especially media devices, have a stronger appeal than their own best interest. You can tell when people are addicts because they miss rent or meals, but have every new game.
These are all consumption disorders. Americans have them in epidemic proportions. Partly because we consume alcohol, drugs, toys, clothing, food and everything else to feed a desire really created by something else. Usually "spiritual", but most often caused by a family problem, especially early in life. And, as a buddhist will tell you, feeding the desire just makes it stronger. The resulting attachment to the material forces us further from the spiritual, which increases the desire, more consumption - the Wheel of Living.
What makes you say eliminating the baggage hold won't (approximately) double passenger space, when people typically bring at least 150% their own space in baggage on average, especially longer flights?
Airlines can charge more for humans than for baggage.
I don't know where you're getting your reasons for denying the savings for them.
You've got the kind of argument that only Rush Limbo can make effectively.
So let me help you out: you could say "why didn't Congress just override the veto?" if you want to talk meaningfully (without strawmen like whether presidents have a veto right) about the political mechanics.
The answer is that Bush has Congress stymied with his nominal minority of one chamber, Senate Republicans. It takes 60 senators, therefore 11 Republicans (counting fake independent Lieberman), which is 22% of them, to undo Bush's vetoes. Which are the obstructionist remainder of his 6 years of lockstep Republican party monopoly, including the previous stemcell veto.
"Middle of the road" is what Republicans operating the Overton Window system game like to call the extremes gained by bargaining from insanely hyperextreme positions with an opposition that starts out in the middle of the road. It's more like a "gutter" deal, in terms of where in the road it falls.
Just to tag you with what you are, a Bush apologist, those signing statements didn't just "push the envelope a bit". They have been directives to Federal agencies to break the laws he signed, which is not in our Constitution at all. Thereby violating it, as only Constitutional powers may be used by the government.
You've had the kind of government you're defending for most of a decade now. Are you satisfied with its progress? You sure seem so. Which makes you an essential part of it. You should reconsider posing as an authority on Constitutional democratic/republican political practice.
You might not enter any data at all. But there's lots of TV geeks out there who will. I feel the same way about my CDs, but I still entered a fair amount of data into the CDDB - maybe a few hours work over a couple of years. But there's such a large consumer:content ratio that a little by a few goes a long way to many.
The P2P world has lots of incentives, including up/down ratios that can be boosted with metadata entry, wieghted by how much their quality agrees with the redundant averaging. Just because your motivations are (legitimately) selfish and (relatively) lazy doesn't mean you won't get to pay to consume data produced P2P that good producers get for free.
The US government has steadily discarded many of the fundamental protections specified by the Constitution, really going downhill starting with Johnson's undelcared Vietnam War, accelerating with Nixon, kicked into turbo with Reagan/Bush's Iran/Contra, and into hyperspace with Bush/Cheney.
But the people in the government should be expected to abuse the Constitution - it's in their interest. The people and the media have the power to do something about it. The corporate mass media is nearing its peak, if it hasn't already passed it, in favor of decentralized (and mobile) network media. That puts the power right in the hands of the people, where it belongs.
Now we'll have a chance to see whether the people, no longer strictly dependent on the government and the corporate media to administer society, use that power to either reform the government or to make it more irrelevant.
If you give up, then the politicos have won. If you don't, but rather seize on your rights as the Constitution specifies the people's government must protect them, then you have won. Regardless of the paper Constitution, your rights are inalienable - unless you let them alienate you from them.
To the contrary. Information property already has a basis in the Constitution, as I described, and as abused on that basis. If we don't make property rights protected in both directions, not just of the producer but of the consumer, then producers will continue to get all the rights, and deny the consumers ours. We've been skating too long pretending it's not treated as property.
Unless you can propose some other basis for the rights in a different Amendment. I'm interested, as long as all our rights are protected.
We need to amend the US Constitution to protect people's intellectual property rights. The Constitution currently says
Congress shall have power [...] to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries
on which all US copyright law is based. But "limited times" has been extended well beyond any justifiable "to promote the progress of science and useful arts".
The amendment should state that "Congress shall ensure that the people's right to use their information property for any lawful purpose shall not be infringed". And we need copyright law to respect that protection, and its Constitutional "limited times" basis, by specifying that copyrights expire promptly. The government can analyze the economics to generate backing data, but the copyright should expire after an average human generation (probably the original 17 years), or after audited investment costs registered with the copyright office are recouped with profit, probably income double the investment. Then they can compete without the benefit of a government monopoly.
If you think we shouldn't amend the Constitution because the original language is sufficient, consider that it's now demonstrated to be absolutely insufficient to protect our rights. The entire Bill of Rights is redundant to the rest of the Constitution, which creates only the powers explicitly stated, so the "shall nots" are redundant to the implicit lack of them in the main document. But without those Amendments, we'd have been a lot more screwed by bad application of the "inherently limited government" principles. Just as we've been screwed by the lack of protection from copyright abuse in legislation and licenses.
Until we get high-level protection, we'll get screwed. But with high-level protection, licenses and contracts like this new "DVD copy monopoly" will be illegal and unenforceable.
they get the procedure perfected, then they would probably get approval from the white house. [...] I believe that life begins at conception, and that destroying embryos and abortion are both murder, but at the same time, I know that stem cells have more potential to fight diseases than and pharmaceuticals can ever promise.
Bush won't approve any stemcells, because he's pandering to superstitious people like you. Really to the superstitious people like you who are still Republicans, and don't know words like "amniocentesis". He doesn't care about science, as is obvious. And he sure as hell doesn't care about any "sanctity of life", as his laughing in the face of Texas execution prisoners, to say nothing of Katrina and Iraq.
I believe that life begins at the first date, and is aborted when people don't knock each other up, but I don't expect my unproveable superstition to rule the country and interfere with public health.
How much murder is being done every day to those expired fertility treatment embryos we dispose when couples don't take them? How many children have you adopted, or unplanned parents have you supported, to keep that murder rate down?
Your concept of how this country works is almost interesting, just because it's so popular. Bush knew all along Congress would write a stemcell bill, so why did he waste so much time and money by vetoing it? Of course it's his fault, like vetoing the Iraq Withdrawal Schedule bills. The rest of the world does indeed like democracy, but our bad example is based on our citizens' desire to call a democracy what is really the autocracy we've created by reelecting Bush. I've been around this world, and they're starting to catch on that Bush isn't just some fluke. When 50M Republicans deny evolution by 2:1, our stupidocracy is clearly representing our people. Scary, and not just abroad.
I'd do away with parties in a second. I've been registered independent since I turned 18, decades ago. But until people understand that Congress represents them, and the Executive represents themself, we'll still be easily led.
Collections of facts are not copyrightable. Publishers for centuries have pulled the trick of publishing deliberate "mistakes" that aren't "facts", which can be copyrighted. But I bet that a good P2P redundancy QA algorithm from multiple sources would eliminate those booby traps.
You're right. The "delays" are also a scam to coverup the airlines' overbooking not just flights with seats, but also gates with planes. So another "fuel efficiency" play is laws that prohibit that overbooking. Even just applying the "truth in advertising" laws would fix it.
There is also a tech fix to make the de/boarding process faster. Airports should all have moving sidewalks to every gate from the security gate, with their exact transit times reported every time the passenger gets a notice. Some slackers will still arrive late, thinking they can run on the belts to catch up, but that would minimize the straggler delay. I'm sure the airlines have some scam related to baggage that's why they force us to walk miles with dozens of pounds of carryon, but that should get sacrificed for fuel efficiency, too.
In fact, we should ship all baggage separately from passengers, anyway. We should ship baggage ahead of time, on cargo flight circuits, picked up by FedEx/etc or their own carrier. Those bags could also get shipped by rail or water for extra efficiency. When we get a receipt that our bags have arrived ahead, we'll lose much less luggage, or at least have the airlines send another bag at their expense ahead of time, so we're not left without their contents. The cargo planes can be much more efficient, more async in scheduling, combined into a route for efficiency, not heated/pressurized/fed. And the security benefits of examination without the urgency of a waiting passenger, plus the much lower target risk of a cargo plane, means that the passengers can breeze through security. All of which combines for much less fuel consumed, both in the distribution and security processes, per passenger. While clearing possibly double the passenger capacity per plane. And, since the baggage portion is async, spreads the load around the daily schedule more. All of which means more profit for airlines, including lower fuel per passenger costs.
Another big step would be literally pre-boarding passengers. The gates should seat people in actual "cartridges" that fit the fuselage of the plane. When a plane arrives, passengers are already seated, the plane releases its incoming seating section cartridges into one side of the gate, while cycling the outgoing cartridges into the outgoing plane. The entire passenger cycling could take 10 minutes, with cleaning at the airport among extra cartridges offline rather than in realtime in the cramped plane. Empty planes just traveling to another airport without passengers could fly lighter with no cartridges.
And better routing IT could tighten all that complexity. There's no way airlines are matching the ideal routing, because they're so generally incompetent, especially when interconnecting between different people, controlled by different personnel. Every time passengers wait around is inefficiency, and there's surely a lot of that.
If they just improved their flight scheduling infosystems to eliminate wasteful delays and wasteful rushing to catch up, they'd burn a lot less fuel per mile traveled.
How many times have we arrived above an airport, just to fly in circles until the terminal is ready to let us get to the gate? How long have we spent burning fuel on the runway, waiting for our turn to take off? All that extra fuel burned to go extra miles between our points.
And then the pilot tells us they'll pour on the speed to catch up to schedule, or get us ahead of schedule - so we have to wait longer for a gate to open when we arrive. That extra airspeed might improve their ontime arrivals/departures stats, but once out of the maximum efficiency range, that 4th power of wind resistance per area drag really multiplies the inefficiency out of the engine's peak efficiency RPM.
But if their logistics just mapped the arrivals/departures to the capacity of the airports, most of that waste would be unnecessary. I wouldn't be surprised to see >10% fuel efficiency gained right there, plus the extra efficiency from less refueling infrastructure.
Who said anything about entering large amounts of data? I said enter just a little data, just like everyone else. More P2P users than data to enter means everyone shares the task.
And P2P metadata, when the redundancy is used to confirm good data, is more reliable than just centrally produced data without quality control.
TV listings seems like a great P2P app for MythTV. Listings for future broadcasts can be read by users from their local media.
In small entries (enforced by the GUI) that don't trip the copyright of the original publisher. Or, like most P2P users, they'll ignore the copyrights.
It's like a Napster index that doesn't point to copyright violated media, but to fair use of one's own media subscriptions.
Pirates will just serve pirated content from behind proxy IP#s they switch to keep ahead of any filtering on IP# by AT&T. They will just see their operating costs increase negligibly, while creating a new market for proxy services.
Regular users will be spied on by AT&T, and their content selection determined by AT&T. An AT&T that is now practically a monopoly again (one of a duopoly with Verizon), and gearing up to duopolize all multimedia delivery including "Internet", phone and video.
This is the AT&T that monopolized telecom for decades until forced apart by the Federal government (which, under Bush, has encouraged it to reunite). That even monopolized Unix for decades. Slowing down all innovation, greedily soaking up all the profits it could by extortion, reducing service levels to the minimum.
They still need the Federal government OK to do these things. If you think you're on the right side when you support AT&T's Net Doublecharge attacks on Net Neutrality, just look at how this beast will abuse us with it. Get together with the government to force AT&T to leave our content alone. And to stop killing the competition that we need for the Internet to remain worth getting excited about.
Slashdot Mirror
I read the links from the Slashdot story, including an autotranslation of the Swedish report, but I saw nothing describing the person who reported the ugly post. Nothing to indicate they're a "leftist" (whatever that means). Who says it was a "leftist", other than mpawlo, who submitted the story to Slashdot?
How can you tell the difference between an unacceptable post that was missed by a less-than-perfect process for removing it, from one that was left by an admin who wants to post it, so "missed it" on purpose?
Government ministers have so much power, the public takes so much risk giving it to them, that they have to avoid even the appearance of wrongdoing. Because it's often so hard to tell the difference, and the difference often doesn't matter to the results
This kind of "watching the watchers" project has been the work of the WITNESS project for several years.
Pick one that looks worth completing, with people who look worth working with/for, and just contribute some code. Or test something and contribute your bug reports - or patches.
If you don't like what happens, then pick another. You'll find one you like, maybe on the first try.
There's no penalty for picking the wrong one. But there is a penalty for not picking any: missing the experience.
The biggest boost to these brain/machine interfaces will come when we can pipe feedback directly from the machine into the brain (or any neural input). The brain works as a feedback manager. Without feedback, the brain doesn't learn to change its output. With crude feedback, the lessons are learned crudely. Visual or any other feedback through a sense organ is crude, losing in translation from machine to organ and then organ to brain.
Neural input is harder than neural output (eg. through MRI monitoring). But even a little direct neural input will be used by the brain to vastly improve the brain's control of the machines.
Which chemical is the gambling addict addicted to? Do you know any acute compulsive gamblers? Real ones? Or even garden variety heroin junkies? Or even a genuine recovering alcoholic?
And where is your evidence that "a good boot up the arse" fixes addicts? The evidence says that boot often got them there, especially when used to "fix" people with little self-control.
You can't learn what you're talking about by watching TV. And no, that doesn't necessarily mean that you're a TV addict. And in fact, the gamblers, tech consumers and TV watchers who can be "fixed" with "a good boot up the arse" aren't addicts. But addicts to that uncontrolled behavior do exist, and the boot just makes them worse.
Just because a girl more beautiful than any who ever talked to you is bearing my children doesn't make me a Scientologist.
I'm an Invitologist.
You should learn something about where psych disorders come from before you die and they force you to become "spiritual" when it's too late.
Addiction is not just some extra degree of "lust". It's a compulsion that one cannot resist. Not just that one dislikes to resist. And not just a compulsion to do something bad.
Alcohol addiction is the classic: alcoholism. It's not just that one "drinks too much". Or too often, or the wrong stuff. Those are ways to tell someone is an alcohol addict. The alcoholic does not have self control over their drinking. Perhaps they need a drink to destroy their limits, or perhaps there is no initial barrier. Even recovering alcoholics cannot take a single drink, because the effect of that drink on their self control leaves them with no resistance - or is so likely to that they cannot take the chance. But even those not taking any drinks are still alcoholics, because they lack self control over taking it. They are behaving like they have some self control, but it's really gained by a huge, constant effort plugged into social structures, including regular meetings, and lots of conscious training, like 12 step programs.
Techno addiction is rarer, but still happens. There are compulsive shoppers to whom technology, especially media devices, have a stronger appeal than their own best interest. You can tell when people are addicts because they miss rent or meals, but have every new game.
These are all consumption disorders. Americans have them in epidemic proportions. Partly because we consume alcohol, drugs, toys, clothing, food and everything else to feed a desire really created by something else. Usually "spiritual", but most often caused by a family problem, especially early in life. And, as a buddhist will tell you, feeding the desire just makes it stronger. The resulting attachment to the material forces us further from the spiritual, which increases the desire, more consumption - the Wheel of Living.
What makes you say eliminating the baggage hold won't (approximately) double passenger space, when people typically bring at least 150% their own space in baggage on average, especially longer flights?
Airlines can charge more for humans than for baggage.
I don't know where you're getting your reasons for denying the savings for them.
Moderation -1
100% Redundant
TrollMods imagine they thought of Trusted GNU/Solaris, and posted it, first.
You've got the kind of argument that only Rush Limbo can make effectively.
So let me help you out: you could say "why didn't Congress just override the veto?" if you want to talk meaningfully (without strawmen like whether presidents have a veto right) about the political mechanics.
The answer is that Bush has Congress stymied with his nominal minority of one chamber, Senate Republicans. It takes 60 senators, therefore 11 Republicans (counting fake independent Lieberman), which is 22% of them, to undo Bush's vetoes. Which are the obstructionist remainder of his 6 years of lockstep Republican party monopoly, including the previous stemcell veto.
"Middle of the road" is what Republicans operating the Overton Window system game like to call the extremes gained by bargaining from insanely hyperextreme positions with an opposition that starts out in the middle of the road. It's more like a "gutter" deal, in terms of where in the road it falls.
Just to tag you with what you are, a Bush apologist, those signing statements didn't just "push the envelope a bit". They have been directives to Federal agencies to break the laws he signed, which is not in our Constitution at all. Thereby violating it, as only Constitutional powers may be used by the government.
You've had the kind of government you're defending for most of a decade now. Are you satisfied with its progress? You sure seem so. Which makes you an essential part of it. You should reconsider posing as an authority on Constitutional democratic/republican political practice.
You might not enter any data at all. But there's lots of TV geeks out there who will. I feel the same way about my CDs, but I still entered a fair amount of data into the CDDB - maybe a few hours work over a couple of years. But there's such a large consumer:content ratio that a little by a few goes a long way to many.
The P2P world has lots of incentives, including up/down ratios that can be boosted with metadata entry, wieghted by how much their quality agrees with the redundant averaging. Just because your motivations are (legitimately) selfish and (relatively) lazy doesn't mean you won't get to pay to consume data produced P2P that good producers get for free.
The US government has steadily discarded many of the fundamental protections specified by the Constitution, really going downhill starting with Johnson's undelcared Vietnam War, accelerating with Nixon, kicked into turbo with Reagan/Bush's Iran/Contra, and into hyperspace with Bush/Cheney.
But the people in the government should be expected to abuse the Constitution - it's in their interest. The people and the media have the power to do something about it. The corporate mass media is nearing its peak, if it hasn't already passed it, in favor of decentralized (and mobile) network media. That puts the power right in the hands of the people, where it belongs.
Now we'll have a chance to see whether the people, no longer strictly dependent on the government and the corporate media to administer society, use that power to either reform the government or to make it more irrelevant.
If you give up, then the politicos have won. If you don't, but rather seize on your rights as the Constitution specifies the people's government must protect them, then you have won. Regardless of the paper Constitution, your rights are inalienable - unless you let them alienate you from them.
To the contrary. Information property already has a basis in the Constitution, as I described, and as abused on that basis. If we don't make property rights protected in both directions, not just of the producer but of the consumer, then producers will continue to get all the rights, and deny the consumers ours. We've been skating too long pretending it's not treated as property.
Unless you can propose some other basis for the rights in a different Amendment. I'm interested, as long as all our rights are protected.
on which all US copyright law is based. But "limited times" has been extended well beyond any justifiable "to promote the progress of science and useful arts".
The amendment should state that "Congress shall ensure that the people's right to use their information property for any lawful purpose shall not be infringed". And we need copyright law to respect that protection, and its Constitutional "limited times" basis, by specifying that copyrights expire promptly. The government can analyze the economics to generate backing data, but the copyright should expire after an average human generation (probably the original 17 years), or after audited investment costs registered with the copyright office are recouped with profit, probably income double the investment. Then they can compete without the benefit of a government monopoly.
If you think we shouldn't amend the Constitution because the original language is sufficient, consider that it's now demonstrated to be absolutely insufficient to protect our rights. The entire Bill of Rights is redundant to the rest of the Constitution, which creates only the powers explicitly stated, so the "shall nots" are redundant to the implicit lack of them in the main document. But without those Amendments, we'd have been a lot more screwed by bad application of the "inherently limited government" principles. Just as we've been screwed by the lack of protection from copyright abuse in legislation and licenses.
Until we get high-level protection, we'll get screwed. But with high-level protection, licenses and contracts like this new "DVD copy monopoly" will be illegal and unenforceable.
Bush won't approve any stemcells, because he's pandering to superstitious people like you. Really to the superstitious people like you who are still Republicans, and don't know words like "amniocentesis". He doesn't care about science, as is obvious. And he sure as hell doesn't care about any "sanctity of life", as his laughing in the face of Texas execution prisoners, to say nothing of Katrina and Iraq.
I believe that life begins at the first date, and is aborted when people don't knock each other up, but I don't expect my unproveable superstition to rule the country and interfere with public health.
How much murder is being done every day to those expired fertility treatment embryos we dispose when couples don't take them? How many children have you adopted, or unplanned parents have you supported, to keep that murder rate down?
Your concept of how this country works is almost interesting, just because it's so popular. Bush knew all along Congress would write a stemcell bill, so why did he waste so much time and money by vetoing it? Of course it's his fault, like vetoing the Iraq Withdrawal Schedule bills. The rest of the world does indeed like democracy, but our bad example is based on our citizens' desire to call a democracy what is really the autocracy we've created by reelecting Bush. I've been around this world, and they're starting to catch on that Bush isn't just some fluke. When 50M Republicans deny evolution by 2:1, our stupidocracy is clearly representing our people. Scary, and not just abroad.
I'd do away with parties in a second. I've been registered independent since I turned 18, decades ago. But until people understand that Congress represents them, and the Executive represents themself, we'll still be easily led.
I smell a Greenhouse law or carbon tax right in there.
Collections of facts are not copyrightable. Publishers for centuries have pulled the trick of publishing deliberate "mistakes" that aren't "facts", which can be copyrighted. But I bet that a good P2P redundancy QA algorithm from multiple sources would eliminate those booby traps.
You're right. The "delays" are also a scam to coverup the airlines' overbooking not just flights with seats, but also gates with planes. So another "fuel efficiency" play is laws that prohibit that overbooking. Even just applying the "truth in advertising" laws would fix it.
There is also a tech fix to make the de/boarding process faster. Airports should all have moving sidewalks to every gate from the security gate, with their exact transit times reported every time the passenger gets a notice. Some slackers will still arrive late, thinking they can run on the belts to catch up, but that would minimize the straggler delay. I'm sure the airlines have some scam related to baggage that's why they force us to walk miles with dozens of pounds of carryon, but that should get sacrificed for fuel efficiency, too.
In fact, we should ship all baggage separately from passengers, anyway. We should ship baggage ahead of time, on cargo flight circuits, picked up by FedEx/etc or their own carrier. Those bags could also get shipped by rail or water for extra efficiency. When we get a receipt that our bags have arrived ahead, we'll lose much less luggage, or at least have the airlines send another bag at their expense ahead of time, so we're not left without their contents. The cargo planes can be much more efficient, more async in scheduling, combined into a route for efficiency, not heated/pressurized/fed. And the security benefits of examination without the urgency of a waiting passenger, plus the much lower target risk of a cargo plane, means that the passengers can breeze through security. All of which combines for much less fuel consumed, both in the distribution and security processes, per passenger. While clearing possibly double the passenger capacity per plane. And, since the baggage portion is async, spreads the load around the daily schedule more. All of which means more profit for airlines, including lower fuel per passenger costs.
Another big step would be literally pre-boarding passengers. The gates should seat people in actual "cartridges" that fit the fuselage of the plane. When a plane arrives, passengers are already seated, the plane releases its incoming seating section cartridges into one side of the gate, while cycling the outgoing cartridges into the outgoing plane. The entire passenger cycling could take 10 minutes, with cleaning at the airport among extra cartridges offline rather than in realtime in the cramped plane. Empty planes just traveling to another airport without passengers could fly lighter with no cartridges.
And better routing IT could tighten all that complexity. There's no way airlines are matching the ideal routing, because they're so generally incompetent, especially when interconnecting between different people, controlled by different personnel. Every time passengers wait around is inefficiency, and there's surely a lot of that.
If they just improved their flight scheduling infosystems to eliminate wasteful delays and wasteful rushing to catch up, they'd burn a lot less fuel per mile traveled.
How many times have we arrived above an airport, just to fly in circles until the terminal is ready to let us get to the gate? How long have we spent burning fuel on the runway, waiting for our turn to take off? All that extra fuel burned to go extra miles between our points.
And then the pilot tells us they'll pour on the speed to catch up to schedule, or get us ahead of schedule - so we have to wait longer for a gate to open when we arrive. That extra airspeed might improve their ontime arrivals/departures stats, but once out of the maximum efficiency range, that 4th power of wind resistance per area drag really multiplies the inefficiency out of the engine's peak efficiency RPM.
But if their logistics just mapped the arrivals/departures to the capacity of the airports, most of that waste would be unnecessary. I wouldn't be surprised to see >10% fuel efficiency gained right there, plus the extra efficiency from less refueling infrastructure.
Who said anything about entering large amounts of data? I said enter just a little data, just like everyone else. More P2P users than data to enter means everyone shares the task.
And P2P metadata, when the redundancy is used to confirm good data, is more reliable than just centrally produced data without quality control.
Bush wants you and your people to die without stemcell therapy.
Of course, he'll get any he wants, from some other country if that's necessary.
TV listings seems like a great P2P app for MythTV. Listings for future broadcasts can be read by users from their local media.
In small entries (enforced by the GUI) that don't trip the copyright of the original publisher. Or, like most P2P users, they'll ignore the copyrights.
It's like a Napster index that doesn't point to copyright violated media, but to fair use of one's own media subscriptions.
Pirates will just serve pirated content from behind proxy IP#s they switch to keep ahead of any filtering on IP# by AT&T. They will just see their operating costs increase negligibly, while creating a new market for proxy services.
Regular users will be spied on by AT&T, and their content selection determined by AT&T. An AT&T that is now practically a monopoly again (one of a duopoly with Verizon), and gearing up to duopolize all multimedia delivery including "Internet", phone and video.
This is the AT&T that monopolized telecom for decades until forced apart by the Federal government (which, under Bush, has encouraged it to reunite). That even monopolized Unix for decades. Slowing down all innovation, greedily soaking up all the profits it could by extortion, reducing service levels to the minimum.
They still need the Federal government OK to do these things. If you think you're on the right side when you support AT&T's Net Doublecharge attacks on Net Neutrality, just look at how this beast will abuse us with it. Get together with the government to force AT&T to leave our content alone. And to stop killing the competition that we need for the Internet to remain worth getting excited about.