They like cameras on intersection lights, they put cameras outside their police stations, they allow cameras following them aroound for the show "COPS" and now they don't like cameras all of a sudden?
The police use cameras in the cars that they drive around in all day and use them to record pulling people over without their consent. What the hell is the justification of not being able to record an officer in the exact same situation? He pulls you over and never tells you that you are on camera. You tell him that your car has a built in camera provided by the insurance company: http://www.teensafedriver.com/our-system/faqs.asp. And that they are being recorded.
Then they arrest you? What the hell kind of protect and server stance is that? I pay the damn sallary and would love it if they had cameras on them at all times. ALL TIMES. What could a police officer do that would be hindered by having one of those cameras strapped around his neck snapping pictures %100 of the time? Clock in, start recording. Clock out, leave your gun, badge and authority with the camera and go home a normal person. If you wouldn't do it on camera as an officer on the clock I don't want to pay you to do it. You get no privacy when you work for the people since you should be accountable to those people every second you're on the clock. I'll excuse you for bathroom breaks since I'm such a nice guy, only in acknowledged gps located bathrooms. Now get back to work!
A void won't transmit any heat at all, unless you're pushing it out.
So you have an explination on why the "day" side of the moon is about 390 k and the "night" side is around 100 k then? You think it magically heats up and then cools down for no reason? By your reasoning wouldn't everything that gets any sunlight just keep heating up in space as long as it's in the light? That's ignoring the part about the sun actually being able to heat up things through a void in the first place though. Right?
The gravity would be canceled when the rift is created. During which time the "center of gravity" would be a multi-point plot map between the two vastly different gravity wells. By creating the rift it would also create a pull on the surrounding matter giving it a bit of a head start with momentum since the gravity well would effect the entire star not just the side it passes on. Being a sharp drop off, gravity/distance could completely destroy a star by even comming close (cosmic distances). It could pull enough matter off center so that the fusion reaction overcomes the lower gravity on the close side and has a blow out like a solar flare but one that doesn't close up after the erruption due to gravity. So the effect would have to be caused by the speed of the passing gravity well, the proximity and angle of incidence. But it would probably have a better than 50% chance of destroying it after a certain distance until it was moving too fast to overcome the matter stability (initial momentum) of the star.
It is thought that several beaver families joined forces to create the massive dam, containing thousands of trees, and took many months to complete it.
Point 1. News is not supposed to include only speculation of events to support the main title. Investigate. That's why you're supposed to be better than a blog.
Point 2. Really, FOX? Fox News. On slashdot, about a beaver dam. WTF?
Point 3. It took beavers only a matter of months to do this when we take years and they still break. Why aren't we seeing a story about remote controlled animals with tools working en mass to build projects like this. Now that's a story that should be on Slashdot.
The order came from Communications Minister Moshe Kahlon, who apparently hadn?t been appraised of the initial decision to ban the devices due to their wireless specifications.
" My PoC PDF requires some changes for Foxit Reader, because ultimately, the executable doesn't run. But that's probably due to some variation in the PDF language supported by Foxit Reader."
Not really a proof of concept since the proof doesn't actually run the code currently. Not that it couldn't but there's no proof that Foxit is less secure since it doesn't actually run the code.
I'm not an expert and not sure if I'm missing something obvious here but what is confusing me is the part about "swap everything out except the scanner". Wouldn't you then just be moving the malware too? Into a protected space that you then have to scan and know what to look for?
If it's a zero day infection then you don't know what to look for and you swapped it out of memory for nothing really. I do get that if it tries to protect itself it will look suspicious but what if it looks like a normal program? A service or scheduled task that could be normal. What if it takes on the guise of an adobe update program in size/hash and function until it is time do act? Say a slight change to your systems dns entries. Then goes dormant again.
This may not be possible but I haven't seen why not and it leaves a pretty big hole for zero day infections that this method claims to be able to catch 100%.
I have a relative in the business. They license the popular brand name like a franchise and make obscene amounts of profit. As their single store in a strip mall with no real traffic pulls in enough for two houses and twice as many cars for the husband and wife.
They have to manage stock of some units but the majority are ordered, the overhead is the employees and some testing equipment.
I hold every single person responsible if they turn a blind eye or stay silent when their principles are trampled. If possible, even more so, if it's their job to stand and be counted on issues they have been elected to represent.
Every side is entitled to try and promote their viewpoint. To let them get a vote like that by leaving is certainly an emotional statement but completely lacks the realization that; the vote was held, the tally counted, and voluntary absent to make a statement still means factual defeat.
If you think scientists don't know what "confounding factors" are, or don't try to account for them in their analyses, then you don't know enough about how science is done to have an informed opinion on the subject.
That's probably the most ignorant statement I've heard all week.
Try this on for size: "If you think a person in a any position doesn't do their job perfectly in all cases you don't know enough about their job to have an informed opinion on the subject."
Sound a bit crazy to you now?
I'll restate it so you can get the idea you missed in the first place:
I think that in the varied fields of study and research into the reasoning behind human decision making some scientists don't account for a wide enough field of contributing factors to possibly attribute to their conclusions of causality. Sometimes after arriving at their conclusions they may find that they have not been as thorough as another study in their methodology and have arrived at an erroneous deduction through faulty assumptions. This is the driving force behind the peer review process as a single study has very little weight unless it can be replicated in an opposing scientists control with the same, or with statistically insignificant variance from the original, outcome. How many studies have been refuted after publication due to improper methodology in the testing or because of a flaw in their sampling process that introduced a bias that wasn't accounted for. As a growing exploration of the unknown there must be some unexpected influences that cannot be foreseen, hence the need for the experiment in the first place. If all experiments were always done without error then there would not be the halting controversy and mistrust that exists in most every specialized field in human studies. And that's not even getting into the process of publishing the findings in a matter that factually states the reasoning behind the conclusions and the logic that necessitates the link between the supposed corollary. Which was the original issue I was taking with the article and the And the base implication that they weren't addressed by the audaciously false statement that "Both groups made their decisions based on the same information."
Scientists see results in their studies that they are looking for. Not accounting for, sometimes painfully obvious, faults in their conclusions, or reasoning.
Like the studies that link accidents and cellphones. Not accounting for the possibility that neglectful and distracted drivers that will get into accidents will probably now use cellphones as well as drink, eat, and read a book or put on makeup. It's outside their scope of the experiment so it isn't a possible contributing factor.
This study is pretty bad though. They don't even try and take into account the reason that people would describe themselves as one group or another. Seems to me that they would have had some exposure to different ideas and evidence growing up to convince them that that way of thinking is correct. All cultures justify their own beliefs. These scientists ignore this part and just think of them as having brown or green eyes as they go into the tests.
"Oracle is committed to creating accessible technologies and products that enhance the overall workplace environment and contribute to the productivity of our employees, our customers, and our customers' customers." --Safra Catz, President and CFO, Oracle
For many reasons--legal, business, and ethical--Oracle recognizes the need for our applications, and our customers' and partners' products built with our tools, to be usable by the disabled community.
So not really "bellyaching", more of a "holding a company to the claims they make."
A lot of people were worried what would happen to the support of these programs when the buyout was announced. Almost as if they were part of a community that used the products and hoped that the support they have given the company wasn't going to result in them being abandoned after the merger.
I'm Joanie. By day, I'm an assistive technology specialist working with individuals who are blind or visually impaired. By night, weekend, and holiday for almost four years now, I've been a GNOME community contributor working primarily on the Orca screen reader, a project led by Sun's Accessibility Program Office.
So why don't the other employes that are actually making the company better by designing products, manufacturing them, marketing them and selling them get anywhere near the salary that this guy gets? Compare the total salary of one person in product design that launched a family of products that nets the company millions. That's actual work. Even the guys manager that helped get the team together and "optomized workflow" had more of a hand in the company being productive and profitable than this yahoo so far from the actual company business processes that are necessary in a capatalist system. This guy was not necessary, just a leach on the company and withoout him the company would have more money and be a better supplier with better profit and productivity.
It was by the vision of Lynch that Dune acquired greatness, the fans acquire happieness, the fans have given warning. It is by will alone they set the movie in motion.
For those who had not read the books yet but like the genre it was awesome. My whole town full of geeks loved it, then we read the book and it was another completely different set of greatness. Like a double gift for sci-fi geeks. I didn't happen to like the series because of the horrible acting. The original book and the movie were seperate but both great.
Wrong. It's a design issue not an electronics issue. You do know that the ignition switch is electrical don't you. That when you put in your key and turn it, that's mechanical but to stop the car it cuts out an electrical signal that stops the car. The common knowledge just makes everybody know what to do with the key to have the car obey. Remove that standard and it doesn't matter what you replace it with, mechanical (key turn causes electrical disconnect) or electronics (mechanical buton press disconnects electrical) you still have to know how to use it. Ever accidently crank the engine while it's running? Mistakes with mechanical systems happen too even though they could have just as easily made it not able to crank while the engine is running. Design flaw. Same mentality. It's not the element of electricity and the methods (button or key) at which it is turned on and off. It's the user interface at which it is presented. Make it able to be broken or used incorrectly and it will be. Put that interface in between a car and person and you can kill people. Not specific to electrical. Specific to a more base misunderstanding of the goal. Same thing as when they replaced the plug and turn method of the mechanical key with a plug, push, and turn method in some cars. And then with the push in and turn to get the key out instead of a button. Confusing some people. Any progress that necessitates people changing what base muscle memory they have for habits like starting a car will have issues whenever it changes. No matter what the change. mechanical or electrical.
From the article that was obviously not read by most:
Electronic pedals are now common, and many vehicles also have electronic systems that assist in controlling the brakes to prevent skids, and aid steering to give the driver more precise control of the car. Braking and steering systems are still mostly controlled by mechanical components--the steering wheel is physically connected to the wheels, and a hydraulic system transmits power from the brake pedal to the brakes.
Toyota has said its latest problem happened because condensation from heaters caused increased friction in the gas pedal, making it stick in some cases, making the problem a mechanical one and not an issue of electronics.
Lets all say it together... "Not an issue of electronics."
Now lets remember all the other horrible failures and mechanical issues from car manufacturers over the years and try not to assign this to "highliting" the move to electronics. A design and manufacturing process that doesn't test it's product enough to keep this sort of thing from happening will cause things to fail. Period. Electrical, mechanical, and eventually spiritual. With this level of consequences the QC department should be paid for success and fired for failures at a minimum. The designers should have to face the same.
Correct. But because they're the CEO they can make the call.
And the price for not checking your work in this case is 400k. Much more costly than hiring a person to review these notices for the presence of "crazy".
Seems pretty easy math if you look at it that way.
Giant multi billion dollar company wants to keep all their rights and not let anybody use their stuff without paying, fine. Then the cost of having the DMCA backing of the government is that you have to check your work before filing notices. It's not that an indie artist would have to worry about sending hundreds of notices out to stop people from using their songs and making them more popular, they're more likely to love the attention. It's that once the song is worth enough to track them down and send out notices then you're saying they're worth the risk of getting slapped back with the fine if it was fair use. That's the basic cost / risk analysis. If it's a grey area, you contact the user and ask them to remove it first or let it stand as it's not worth the risk of a 400K legal bill if you're wrong.
Have you looked at your furnature? The cloth, nails, foam, and porbably all the shaped wood excluding the frame itself was probably made in China. Even the major brands get the majority of the raw parts from the cheapest distribution methods out there, and that's China. Mexico really for the local labor of assembly. Even La-Z-Boy relocated their assembly shops down there last year.
Cost wise, the computer parts and kitchen equipment components in your house all count as parts from over seas manufacturing plants.
Interesting how you couldn't even get an example that would be identifying of an individual. This is pretty much what we are all talking about here. Not statistics that are population based, but individual pieces of information that are linked to you as an individual.
The rebuttal is obviously still needed but the examples are telling of what people believe about data mining. Incorrectly.
Not even your "school you went to is providing a good education" is individually specific since the stats are recorded at the school level and then reported in order to get funds without the student IDs attached to a long "premenant record" detailing lunch choices in grade 9.
The "if you are owed veteran benefits if you were in the military and deployed" is kinda funny that you bring up since it's working for the government to protect freedoms but it still doesn't represent what we're talking about. That's not the same as gathered information dince it's first of all, a fact, on record, at the organization that is supposed to handle the processing of the checks and members recieving benifits. It's their data as much as it is yours.
This is about shifting data from the parties involved in the actions required to make it in the first place, to an organization that only wants the data for the sake of the data, not to give you another check, get it?
One particularly useful application of the invention is to interpret the meaning of shorthand terms. In one embodiment, a group of databases may be provided that each define one or more shorthand terms. These definitions may be structured in the database as shorthand terms paired with longhand terms. For example, one database may define the shorthand term "LOL" to mean "laughing out loud." Another database may instead define "LOL" to mean "lots of laughs." A database may also include multiple definitions for a given term. For example, a user's personal database may have two entries for the shorthand term "OMW" including "on my way" and "oh my word"
So you'd think that a business would research and develop a phone to give to it's employees to come up with great ways of using it, and then not sell that phone to comsumers, just the software?
Really?
We've seen what the other vensers think of an open system and room to play. They give it the "Misery" treatement. It's be better for Google to release the phone under an open source hardware license to get it out there for others to improve on, and use their software on! Best deal for them and for gaining market share.
Slashdot Mirror
No Silver Surfer references yet?
They like cameras on intersection lights, they put cameras outside their police stations, they allow cameras following them aroound for the show "COPS" and now they don't like cameras all of a sudden?
The police use cameras in the cars that they drive around in all day and use them to record pulling people over without their consent. What the hell is the justification of not being able to record an officer in the exact same situation? He pulls you over and never tells you that you are on camera. You tell him that your car has a built in camera provided by the insurance company: http://www.teensafedriver.com/our-system/faqs.asp. And that they are being recorded.
Then they arrest you? What the hell kind of protect and server stance is that? I pay the damn sallary and would love it if they had cameras on them at all times. ALL TIMES. What could a police officer do that would be hindered by having one of those cameras strapped around his neck snapping pictures %100 of the time? Clock in, start recording. Clock out, leave your gun, badge and authority with the camera and go home a normal person. If you wouldn't do it on camera as an officer on the clock I don't want to pay you to do it. You get no privacy when you work for the people since you should be accountable to those people every second you're on the clock. I'll excuse you for bathroom breaks since I'm such a nice guy, only in acknowledged gps located bathrooms. Now get back to work!
Microsoft ships a more secure product than most of it's competitors.
Name one.
Then back it up with more than a general feeling and you've got a point to make. Otherwise your comments are useless.
A void won't transmit any heat at all, unless you're pushing it out.
So you have an explination on why the "day" side of the moon is about 390 k and the "night" side is around 100 k then?
You think it magically heats up and then cools down for no reason? By your reasoning wouldn't everything that gets any sunlight just keep heating up in space as long as it's in the light? That's ignoring the part about the sun actually being able to heat up things through a void in the first place though. Right?
The gravity would be canceled when the rift is created. During which time the "center of gravity" would be a multi-point plot map between the two vastly different gravity wells. By creating the rift it would also create a pull on the surrounding matter giving it a bit of a head start with momentum since the gravity well would effect the entire star not just the side it passes on. Being a sharp drop off, gravity/distance could completely destroy a star by even comming close (cosmic distances). It could pull enough matter off center so that the fusion reaction overcomes the lower gravity on the close side and has a blow out like a solar flare but one that doesn't close up after the erruption due to gravity. So the effect would have to be caused by the speed of the passing gravity well, the proximity and angle of incidence. But it would probably have a better than 50% chance of destroying it after a certain distance until it was moving too fast to overcome the matter stability (initial momentum) of the star.
It is thought that several beaver families joined forces to create the massive dam, containing thousands of trees, and took many months to complete it.
Point 1. News is not supposed to include only speculation of events to support the main title. Investigate. That's why you're supposed to be better than a blog.
Point 2. Really, FOX? Fox News. On slashdot, about a beaver dam. WTF?
Point 3. It took beavers only a matter of months to do this when we take years and they still break. Why aren't we seeing a story about remote controlled animals with tools working en mass to build projects like this. Now that's a story that should be on Slashdot.
The order came from Communications Minister Moshe Kahlon, who apparently hadn?t been appraised of the initial decision to ban the devices due to their wireless specifications.
Make sense now?
They gave her an employee manual that stated the laptop could be used for occasional personal use. Chances are you didn't read the article.
From the author:
" My PoC PDF requires some changes for Foxit Reader, because ultimately, the executable doesn't run. But that's probably due to some variation in the PDF language supported by Foxit Reader."
Not really a proof of concept since the proof doesn't actually run the code currently. Not that it couldn't but there's no proof that Foxit is less secure since it doesn't actually run the code.
I'm not an expert and not sure if I'm missing something obvious here but what is confusing me is the part about "swap everything out except the scanner". Wouldn't you then just be moving the malware too? Into a protected space that you then have to scan and know what to look for?
If it's a zero day infection then you don't know what to look for and you swapped it out of memory for nothing really. I do get that if it tries to protect itself it will look suspicious but what if it looks like a normal program? A service or scheduled task that could be normal. What if it takes on the guise of an adobe update program in size/hash and function until it is time do act? Say a slight change to your systems dns entries. Then goes dormant again.
This may not be possible but I haven't seen why not and it leaves a pretty big hole for zero day infections that this method claims to be able to catch 100%.
I have a relative in the business. They license the popular brand name like a franchise and make obscene amounts of profit. As their single store in a strip mall with no real traffic pulls in enough for two houses and twice as many cars for the husband and wife.
They have to manage stock of some units but the majority are ordered, the overhead is the employees and some testing equipment.
The margin for profit is ridiculous.
Take a stand or shut up.
I hold every single person responsible if they turn a blind eye or stay silent when their principles are trampled.
If possible, even more so, if it's their job to stand and be counted on issues they have been elected to represent.
Every side is entitled to try and promote their viewpoint. To let them get a vote like that by leaving is certainly an emotional statement but completely lacks the realization that; the vote was held, the tally counted, and voluntary absent to make a statement still means factual defeat.
If you think scientists don't know what "confounding factors" are, or don't try to account for them in their analyses, then you don't know enough about how science is done to have an informed opinion on the subject.
That's probably the most ignorant statement I've heard all week.
Try this on for size:
"If you think a person in a any position doesn't do their job perfectly in all cases you don't know enough about their job to have an informed opinion on the subject."
Sound a bit crazy to you now?
I'll restate it so you can get the idea you missed in the first place:
I think that in the varied fields of study and research into the reasoning behind human decision making some scientists don't account for a wide enough field of contributing factors to possibly attribute to their conclusions of causality. Sometimes after arriving at their conclusions they may find that they have not been as thorough as another study in their methodology and have arrived at an erroneous deduction through faulty assumptions. This is the driving force behind the peer review process as a single study has very little weight unless it can be replicated in an opposing scientists control with the same, or with statistically insignificant variance from the original, outcome. How many studies have been refuted after publication due to improper methodology in the testing or because of a flaw in their sampling process that introduced a bias that wasn't accounted for. As a growing exploration of the unknown there must be some unexpected influences that cannot be foreseen, hence the need for the experiment in the first place. If all experiments were always done without error then there would not be the halting controversy and mistrust that exists in most every specialized field in human studies. And that's not even getting into the process of publishing the findings in a matter that factually states the reasoning behind the conclusions and the logic that necessitates the link between the supposed corollary. Which was the original issue I was taking with the article and the And the base implication that they weren't addressed by the audaciously false statement that "Both groups made their decisions based on the same information."
Here here.
Scientists see results in their studies that they are looking for. Not accounting for, sometimes painfully obvious, faults in their conclusions, or reasoning.
Like the studies that link accidents and cellphones. Not accounting for the possibility that neglectful and distracted drivers that will get into accidents will probably now use cellphones as well as drink, eat, and read a book or put on makeup. It's outside their scope of the experiment so it isn't a possible contributing factor.
This study is pretty bad though. They don't even try and take into account the reason that people would describe themselves as one group or another. Seems to me that they would have had some exposure to different ideas and evidence growing up to convince them that that way of thinking is correct. All cultures justify their own beliefs. These scientists ignore this part and just think of them as having brown or green eyes as they go into the tests.
"Oracle is committed to creating accessible technologies and products that enhance the overall workplace environment and contribute to the productivity of our employees, our customers, and our customers' customers."
--Safra Catz, President and CFO, Oracle
For many reasons--legal, business, and ethical--Oracle recognizes the need for our applications, and our customers' and partners' products built with our tools, to be usable by the disabled community.
So not really "bellyaching", more of a "holding a company to the claims they make."
A lot of people were worried what would happen to the support of these programs when the buyout was announced. Almost as if they were part of a community that used the products and hoped that the support they have given the company wasn't going to result in them being abandoned after the merger.
I'm Joanie. By day, I'm an assistive technology specialist working with individuals who are blind or visually impaired. By night, weekend, and holiday for almost four years now, I've been a GNOME community contributor working primarily on the Orca screen reader, a project led by Sun's Accessibility Program Office.
---The author of the article you didn't read.
So why don't the other employes that are actually making the company better by designing products, manufacturing them, marketing them and selling them get anywhere near the salary that this guy gets? Compare the total salary of one person in product design that launched a family of products that nets the company millions. That's actual work. Even the guys manager that helped get the team together and "optomized workflow" had more of a hand in the company being productive and profitable than this yahoo so far from the actual company business processes that are necessary in a capatalist system. This guy was not necessary, just a leach on the company and withoout him the company would have more money and be a better supplier with better profit and productivity.
For me...
It was by the vision of Lynch that Dune acquired greatness, the fans acquire happieness, the fans have given warning. It is by will alone they set the movie in motion.
For those who had not read the books yet but like the genre it was awesome. My whole town full of geeks loved it, then we read the book and it was another completely different set of greatness. Like a double gift for sci-fi geeks. I didn't happen to like the series because of the horrible acting. The original book and the movie were seperate but both great.
Wrong. It's a design issue not an electronics issue. You do know that the ignition switch is electrical don't you. That when you put in your key and turn it, that's mechanical but to stop the car it cuts out an electrical signal that stops the car. The common knowledge just makes everybody know what to do with the key to have the car obey. Remove that standard and it doesn't matter what you replace it with, mechanical (key turn causes electrical disconnect) or electronics (mechanical buton press disconnects electrical) you still have to know how to use it. Ever accidently crank the engine while it's running? Mistakes with mechanical systems happen too even though they could have just as easily made it not able to crank while the engine is running. Design flaw. Same mentality. It's not the element of electricity and the methods (button or key) at which it is turned on and off. It's the user interface at which it is presented. Make it able to be broken or used incorrectly and it will be. Put that interface in between a car and person and you can kill people. Not specific to electrical. Specific to a more base misunderstanding of the goal. Same thing as when they replaced the plug and turn method of the mechanical key with a plug, push, and turn method in some cars. And then with the push in and turn to get the key out instead of a button. Confusing some people. Any progress that necessitates people changing what base muscle memory they have for habits like starting a car will have issues whenever it changes. No matter what the change. mechanical or electrical.
From the article that was obviously not read by most:
Electronic pedals are now common, and many vehicles also have electronic systems that assist in controlling the brakes to prevent skids, and aid steering to give the driver more precise control of the car. Braking and steering systems are still mostly controlled by mechanical components--the steering wheel is physically connected to the wheels, and a hydraulic system transmits power from the brake pedal to the brakes.
Toyota has said its latest problem happened because condensation from heaters caused increased friction in the gas pedal, making it stick in some cases, making the problem a mechanical one and not an issue of electronics.
Lets all say it together...
"Not an issue of electronics."
Now lets remember all the other horrible failures and mechanical issues from car manufacturers over the years and try not to assign this to "highliting" the move to electronics.
A design and manufacturing process that doesn't test it's product enough to keep this sort of thing from happening will cause things to fail. Period. Electrical, mechanical, and eventually spiritual. With this level of consequences the QC department should be paid for success and fired for failures at a minimum. The designers should have to face the same.
Correct. But because they're the CEO they can make the call.
And the price for not checking your work in this case is 400k.
Much more costly than hiring a person to review these notices for the presence of "crazy".
Seems pretty easy math if you look at it that way.
Giant multi billion dollar company wants to keep all their rights and not let anybody use their stuff without paying, fine.
Then the cost of having the DMCA backing of the government is that you have to check your work before filing notices.
It's not that an indie artist would have to worry about sending hundreds of notices out to stop people from using their songs and making them more popular, they're more likely to love the attention. It's that once the song is worth enough to track them down and send out notices then you're saying they're worth the risk of getting slapped back with the fine if it was fair use. That's the basic cost / risk analysis. If it's a grey area, you contact the user and ask them to remove it first or let it stand as it's not worth the risk of a 400K legal bill if you're wrong.
Have you looked at your furnature? The cloth, nails, foam, and porbably all the shaped wood excluding the frame itself was probably made in China. Even the major brands get the majority of the raw parts from the cheapest distribution methods out there, and that's China. Mexico really for the local labor of assembly. Even La-Z-Boy relocated their assembly shops down there last year.
Cost wise, the computer parts and kitchen equipment components in your house all count as parts from over seas manufacturing plants.
Interesting how you couldn't even get an example that would be identifying of an individual. This is pretty much what we are all talking about here. Not statistics that are population based, but individual pieces of information that are linked to you as an individual.
The rebuttal is obviously still needed but the examples are telling of what people believe about data mining. Incorrectly.
Not even your "school you went to is providing a good education" is individually specific since the stats are recorded at the school level and then reported in order to get funds without the student IDs attached to a long "premenant record" detailing lunch choices in grade 9.
The "if you are owed veteran benefits if you were in the military and deployed" is kinda funny that you bring up since it's working for the government to protect freedoms but it still doesn't represent what we're talking about. That's not the same as gathered information dince it's first of all, a fact, on record, at the organization that is supposed to handle the processing of the checks and members recieving benifits. It's their data as much as it is yours.
This is about shifting data from the parties involved in the actions required to make it in the first place, to an organization that only wants the data for the sake of the data, not to give you another check, get it?
From the filed doc:
One particularly useful application of the invention is to interpret the meaning of shorthand terms. In one embodiment, a group of databases may be provided that each define one or more shorthand terms. These definitions may be structured in the database as shorthand terms paired with longhand terms. For example, one database may define the shorthand term "LOL" to mean "laughing out loud." Another database may instead define "LOL" to mean "lots of laughs." A database may also include multiple definitions for a given term. For example, a user's personal database may have two entries for the shorthand term "OMW" including "on my way" and "oh my word"
So you'd think that a business would research and develop a phone to give to it's employees to come up with great ways of using it, and then not sell that phone to comsumers, just the software?
Really?
We've seen what the other vensers think of an open system and room to play. They give it the "Misery" treatement. It's be better for Google to release the phone under an open source hardware license to get it out there for others to improve on, and use their software on! Best deal for them and for gaining market share.
I second the motion to call shenanigans.
This is not a gigapixel photo, this is a gigapixel collage.