Also, what do you want to bet the rental agency will kindly add their own "toll processing fee?" Say you racked up $10 of tolls while driving their car. Would you be at all surprised if they added a 5-10% processing fee to back-charge you once they get the bill?
On top of all that, is the monthly bill itemized? I'm guessing not, since that would make it easier to dispute items. And if it's not, how can the rental agency possibly differentiate between you accruing a fee and the next person who rents that car accruing a fee? Most people don't rent cars for an entire month, and even if they did, it almost certainly wouldn't coincide with the billing cycle.
And even if the bill is itemized, do you really think the rental agency is capable of reliably sorting through a bill with thousands (or more) charges and correctly assigning them to the appropriate customer?
This is just one teeny-tiny aspect of the whole thing. It seems pretty clear that for any system like this to work in a reasonable manner on a large scale it would require such a perfect storm of driver-cooperation, implementation details, and government/corporation integration that it just can't happen.
On the other hand, take out that pesky keyword "reasonable," and sure, they can probably cobble together something that works often enough that the majority of the populace won't feel compelled to get up in arms. Mild discontentment generally isn't enough to cause change, so as long as they can jerk us around without going over that line, they'll do it.
But now you have to deal with that you went to make tea, and your document now has your cat walking on the keyboard saved in it. You can't simply choose not to save, you have to figure out how many changes to undo to get the document to its pre-cat state.
So, what you're saying is, it'd be like writing documents with cat?
What about the other guy claiming varying voltage has the same effect? That doesn't strike me as true, but what do I know? Maybe you should go weigh in on that one, as well.:)
The only thing I question about LEDs is... will they give us headaches from the flicker? It's my current annoyance with LED christmas lights - they can flicker quite horribly.
I think this is due to the 60hz you're getting off the AC. It's easy enough to overcome: simple AC-DC converter, like the wall-wart for your laptop (but no need for one capable of 70 watts or whatever your laptop draws, so it can be itty-bitty), but as always, it adds cost.
My comments were based on the article itself. What more do you expect? The article claims the disclosure occured during the inauguration. Regardless, waiting for inauguration day is "interesting" enough.
Also, just a little heads up: "nothing to do with reality" and "incorrect on the point of exact timing" are not synonymous. It will help lend credence to your position in the future if you learn the difference.
Heartland called U.S. Secret Service and hired two breach forensics teams to investigate. But Baldwin said it wasn't until last week that investigators uncovered the source of the breach...
Meaning they knew about it long enough to hire some forensics teams, do the research, figure out where the breach came from, etc. and they finished all that up last week...and then decided to wait until NOON today to release the news to the public? Sorry, but that's plain bullshit, no cynicism involved. If they were interested in disclosure, they would've released the news sooner. At the very latest, they would've released it as soon as they found out how it happened (so they could say they had already closed the breach.)
Instead, they wait until noon (they're a New Jersey company) when the inauguration is happening? Why not sooner in the day? Why wait until what would arguably be lunch time usually? Who discloses breaches at lunch? Answer: nobody. On the other hand, who discloses breaches during a HUGE national (and arguably international) event? Answer: someone trying to hide something.
Again, I say inclined toward reality, not cynicism.
All of those other incidents (MLK day, super bowl, etc.) are in passing. They are temporary, at best. The inauguration is going to echo through the media for a loooong time to come. Even if someone publicly calls them out on this (more than just on/.) and there is an attempt to generate an uproar over this, in the end, the inauguration will far outweigh the breach when it comes to face-time in the news.
I'm the cynical type, and I reckon they succeeded at hiding this one in plain sight.
Fuck that, I was so doped up on rad-x and my tesla armor was blocking it...I stood around for about five minutes inside the chamber, popping rad-away once in a while. Finally I decide to punch in the numbers, and THEN I die.
I tried it again and did it fast, and amazingly, as soon as I hit that last button, boom, I die.
Seriously, I could have gone in, hit the numbers, had a nice little picnic lunch, and then wandered out at my leisure, but no, as always, the scripted death. Lame.
You were the first to ask for my voucher, so if you want it, it's yours. I ordered it early- to mid-december, so it still has a couple months on it. Anyhow, I tried to catch you on jabber (via the jabber address on your profile) but have yet to see a response. I'm on there all the time, so turn it on and we'll work out the details.:)
So...is there a way I can *return* my voucher? I ordered one, thinking I was going to use it for my old tv, but then I went out and actually bought a nice new tv for which I don't need the converter box. I'm sure only a precious few people would actually bother to return the voucher once they discover they aren't going to use it, but it seems there ought to be a mechanism in place. I don't want to tie up this money indefinitely, even if it is just a drop in the bucket.
...the displacement of unfiltered commercial alternatives...
I'm sorry, but where the heck did that come from? A government-supplied free option in no way precludes the private industry from offering premium service. They just have to make it worthwhile, and if the free version is censored/filtered/monitored/whatevered, that's not a very difficult thing.
And before you say, "Why would anyone pay for it if there's a free option?" consider premium channels such as HBO. People pay for those all the time, when they could be watching the local FOX broadcast for free. It's because there's content that is unavailable elsewhere, and people want it.
But again, where did you get the idea that this would displace unfiltered commercial alternatives?
The same people that buy premium channels like HBO, perhaps? Except you bolded "perceive," so you're clearly trying to say something along the lines of, "What vegetarian will buy meat?" Well, clearly no vegetarian will buy meat. Meat's not for them. They see no value in buying that meat, so they won't. However, those of us that *do* eat things with faces will pay a premium for that meat, and that's who it's being sold to.
But isn't that going to happen no matter what? I guess the question is: would you rather have nothing but rocky shoals, or would you rather have rocky shoals with a lighthouse, even if some ships choose to ignore it?
-G
P.S. The ships are the customers in this analogy. Just so you know.:P
Right, so Lego can offer a certification process. Not only do your pieces have to physically interconnect, but they also have to meet some standards, such as flammability, rigidity, durability, age-appropriateness, etc. And going through this certification process may very well be expensive. But in the end, your pieces are endorsed by Lego--THE Lego.
This would offer the same benefits as any other product-certification. I'm guessing companies don't certify products from other companies just because they get a big kick out of it. There's a business model here, and Lego is in a position to exploit it.
And as for the end-user, the parent, I imagine that would come down to marketing. Convince the market that non-lego-certified is shit (i.e. old-skool megabloks) and people will buy the certified ones instead. Why do you think store shelves are lined with Lego products instead of the cheap knock-offs? There are perfectly legal Lego-like products out there, and they're cheaper, but they just don't have the acceptance f Lego. This would potentially allow Lego to sell that product acceptance to those willing to pay the price.
Or even better, forget the end-users entirely. Contract with the distributors (i.e. Wal-Mart, et. al.) to only sell the Lego-certified product lines. For the right price, I bet they'd be willing to, and that gives the Lego-certified lines total market dominance.
That may run afoul of anti-competitive behavior laws, though, but hey, that's why you have lawyers, to figure those piddling details out.;)
Wow, you're kind of a prick when you disagree with someone.:)
So what you're saying is that, even though as time progresses, it looks more and more like they can't win this, they should just keep sinking money into it, even after it's long-since dead? At some point, they're going to lose the exclusive right to make these things, I absolutely guarantee it. I would *hope* that anyone with an actual business degree (rather than a degree from the aforementioned slashdot school of naive blather) would have the foresight to realize this and start pursuing alternative venues before they are actually needed. If you wait until you can't survive without it, you're too late. All I did was suggest one possible option, but thanks for chiming in.
Are you one of these actual-business-degree-holders? If so, you don't happen to work for Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, do you? That might explain something.
So, what Lego needs to do now is publish the OLS, or Open Lego Standard. Seriously, when it becomes obvious you're going to lose the battle, maybe it's time to embrace the alternative? Instead of fighting to keep your ideas out of the hands of others, fight to make sure that *everyone* uses your idea. It makes your assets valuable in a different way. This way, they'll still have control over the standard, and if products meet the standard, they get branded with "OLS Compliant!" and consumers know that if they buy "OLS Compliant!" parts, they'll work with their other "OLS Compliant!" parts, which makes consumers very happy, which makes the standard valuable.
You know, the fire departments weren't always the way they are. They used to be businesses, that would compete against each other, and charge you directly for their services. If you couldn't pay, they would pack up and go home, while your house burnt. Also, they would have honest-to-goodness turf wars, very similar to the gangs you find today.
That sounds way fuckin' better than what we have, you're right.
If you think that's creepy, don't worry. It's way easier to get duplicates than taking a photo. My father in law is training to be a locksmith as a retirement hobby, and I'd recently purchased a motorcycle. It was used, and when I got it, it only had the one key. I'm a lazy kind of guy, so I never got around to getting a replacement. I *talked* about getting copies made all the time, but never actually did. Anyhow, my wife sent him the VIN, and a couple weeks later, I got two keys in the mail. Apparently, that's all you needed. And the VIN is a rather public record that anyone can obtain.
Long story short, anybody could have a key to my motorcycle without even ever having seen it, and with the same information they used to get the key, I have little doubt they could look up the owner and address, where the bike is usually parked. Yay, security!
And I suspect that find(1) and ImageMagick will solve most such needs.
Ohhhhh, I get what you're saying: those tools are used by child pornography consumers and producers in order to circumvent law enforcement agencies' efforts. All right, fair enough. New legislation outlawing those tools in 3, 2, 1...
Wait, are you implying there's some sort of difference between a black-box voting machine and a black-box gambling machine? I thought the latter was a synonym for the former. I learned something on Slashdot today! Woo!
Slashdot Mirror
traffic ticket != usage toll
Also, what do you want to bet the rental agency will kindly add their own "toll processing fee?" Say you racked up $10 of tolls while driving their car. Would you be at all surprised if they added a 5-10% processing fee to back-charge you once they get the bill?
On top of all that, is the monthly bill itemized? I'm guessing not, since that would make it easier to dispute items. And if it's not, how can the rental agency possibly differentiate between you accruing a fee and the next person who rents that car accruing a fee? Most people don't rent cars for an entire month, and even if they did, it almost certainly wouldn't coincide with the billing cycle.
And even if the bill is itemized, do you really think the rental agency is capable of reliably sorting through a bill with thousands (or more) charges and correctly assigning them to the appropriate customer?
This is just one teeny-tiny aspect of the whole thing. It seems pretty clear that for any system like this to work in a reasonable manner on a large scale it would require such a perfect storm of driver-cooperation, implementation details, and government/corporation integration that it just can't happen.
On the other hand, take out that pesky keyword "reasonable," and sure, they can probably cobble together something that works often enough that the majority of the populace won't feel compelled to get up in arms. Mild discontentment generally isn't enough to cause change, so as long as they can jerk us around without going over that line, they'll do it.
Because people who don't share your attitude exist.
But now you have to deal with that you went to make tea, and your document now has your cat walking on the keyboard saved in it. You can't simply choose not to save, you have to figure out how many changes to undo to get the document to its pre-cat state.
So, what you're saying is, it'd be like writing documents with cat?
*rimshot*
Points, shmoints...my hair is a bird, etc.
What about the other guy claiming varying voltage has the same effect? That doesn't strike me as true, but what do I know? Maybe you should go weigh in on that one, as well. :)
The only thing I question about LEDs is... will they give us headaches from the flicker? It's my current annoyance with LED christmas lights - they can flicker quite horribly.
I think this is due to the 60hz you're getting off the AC. It's easy enough to overcome: simple AC-DC converter, like the wall-wart for your laptop (but no need for one capable of 70 watts or whatever your laptop draws, so it can be itty-bitty), but as always, it adds cost.
PWM.
Basic EE: http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=PWM&l=1
My comments were based on the article itself. What more do you expect? The article claims the disclosure occured during the inauguration. Regardless, waiting for inauguration day is "interesting" enough.
Also, just a little heads up: "nothing to do with reality" and "incorrect on the point of exact timing" are not synonymous. It will help lend credence to your position in the future if you learn the difference.
Well, somebody who is inclined toward reality
No need to thank me.
Also, FTFA:
Heartland called U.S. Secret Service and hired two breach forensics teams to investigate. But Baldwin said it wasn't until last week that investigators uncovered the source of the breach...
Meaning they knew about it long enough to hire some forensics teams, do the research, figure out where the breach came from, etc. and they finished all that up last week...and then decided to wait until NOON today to release the news to the public? Sorry, but that's plain bullshit, no cynicism involved. If they were interested in disclosure, they would've released the news sooner. At the very latest, they would've released it as soon as they found out how it happened (so they could say they had already closed the breach.)
Instead, they wait until noon (they're a New Jersey company) when the inauguration is happening? Why not sooner in the day? Why wait until what would arguably be lunch time usually? Who discloses breaches at lunch? Answer: nobody. On the other hand, who discloses breaches during a HUGE national (and arguably international) event? Answer: someone trying to hide something.
Again, I say inclined toward reality, not cynicism.
All of those other incidents (MLK day, super bowl, etc.) are in passing. They are temporary, at best. The inauguration is going to echo through the media for a loooong time to come. Even if someone publicly calls them out on this (more than just on /.) and there is an attempt to generate an uproar over this, in the end, the inauguration will far outweigh the breach when it comes to face-time in the news.
I'm the cynical type, and I reckon they succeeded at hiding this one in plain sight.
I'm puzzled as to how one gets from "the universe may have a finite resolution" to "omfg it's prolly a hologram!!!"
That's a big whiskey-tango-foxtrot, over.
Fuck that, I was so doped up on rad-x and my tesla armor was blocking it...I stood around for about five minutes inside the chamber, popping rad-away once in a while. Finally I decide to punch in the numbers, and THEN I die.
I tried it again and did it fast, and amazingly, as soon as I hit that last button, boom, I die.
Seriously, I could have gone in, hit the numbers, had a nice little picnic lunch, and then wandered out at my leisure, but no, as always, the scripted death. Lame.
You were the first to ask for my voucher, so if you want it, it's yours. I ordered it early- to mid-december, so it still has a couple months on it. Anyhow, I tried to catch you on jabber (via the jabber address on your profile) but have yet to see a response. I'm on there all the time, so turn it on and we'll work out the details. :)
So...is there a way I can *return* my voucher? I ordered one, thinking I was going to use it for my old tv, but then I went out and actually bought a nice new tv for which I don't need the converter box. I'm sure only a precious few people would actually bother to return the voucher once they discover they aren't going to use it, but it seems there ought to be a mechanism in place. I don't want to tie up this money indefinitely, even if it is just a drop in the bucket.
-G
In the hands of AT&T, from the sound of it.
...the displacement of unfiltered commercial alternatives...
I'm sorry, but where the heck did that come from? A government-supplied free option in no way precludes the private industry from offering premium service. They just have to make it worthwhile, and if the free version is censored/filtered/monitored/whatevered, that's not a very difficult thing.
And before you say, "Why would anyone pay for it if there's a free option?" consider premium channels such as HBO. People pay for those all the time, when they could be watching the local FOX broadcast for free. It's because there's content that is unavailable elsewhere, and people want it.
But again, where did you get the idea that this would displace unfiltered commercial alternatives?
The same people that buy premium channels like HBO, perhaps? Except you bolded "perceive," so you're clearly trying to say something along the lines of, "What vegetarian will buy meat?" Well, clearly no vegetarian will buy meat. Meat's not for them. They see no value in buying that meat, so they won't. However, those of us that *do* eat things with faces will pay a premium for that meat, and that's who it's being sold to.
-G
But isn't that going to happen no matter what? I guess the question is: would you rather have nothing but rocky shoals, or would you rather have rocky shoals with a lighthouse, even if some ships choose to ignore it?
-G
P.S. The ships are the customers in this analogy. Just so you know. :P
Right, so Lego can offer a certification process. Not only do your pieces have to physically interconnect, but they also have to meet some standards, such as flammability, rigidity, durability, age-appropriateness, etc. And going through this certification process may very well be expensive. But in the end, your pieces are endorsed by Lego--THE Lego.
This would offer the same benefits as any other product-certification. I'm guessing companies don't certify products from other companies just because they get a big kick out of it. There's a business model here, and Lego is in a position to exploit it.
And as for the end-user, the parent, I imagine that would come down to marketing. Convince the market that non-lego-certified is shit (i.e. old-skool megabloks) and people will buy the certified ones instead. Why do you think store shelves are lined with Lego products instead of the cheap knock-offs? There are perfectly legal Lego-like products out there, and they're cheaper, but they just don't have the acceptance f Lego. This would potentially allow Lego to sell that product acceptance to those willing to pay the price.
Or even better, forget the end-users entirely. Contract with the distributors (i.e. Wal-Mart, et. al.) to only sell the Lego-certified product lines. For the right price, I bet they'd be willing to, and that gives the Lego-certified lines total market dominance.
That may run afoul of anti-competitive behavior laws, though, but hey, that's why you have lawyers, to figure those piddling details out. ;)
-G
Wow, you're kind of a prick when you disagree with someone. :)
So what you're saying is that, even though as time progresses, it looks more and more like they can't win this, they should just keep sinking money into it, even after it's long-since dead? At some point, they're going to lose the exclusive right to make these things, I absolutely guarantee it. I would *hope* that anyone with an actual business degree (rather than a degree from the aforementioned slashdot school of naive blather) would have the foresight to realize this and start pursuing alternative venues before they are actually needed. If you wait until you can't survive without it, you're too late. All I did was suggest one possible option, but thanks for chiming in.
Are you one of these actual-business-degree-holders? If so, you don't happen to work for Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, do you? That might explain something.
-G
So, what Lego needs to do now is publish the OLS, or Open Lego Standard. Seriously, when it becomes obvious you're going to lose the battle, maybe it's time to embrace the alternative? Instead of fighting to keep your ideas out of the hands of others, fight to make sure that *everyone* uses your idea. It makes your assets valuable in a different way. This way, they'll still have control over the standard, and if products meet the standard, they get branded with "OLS Compliant!" and consumers know that if they buy "OLS Compliant!" parts, they'll work with their other "OLS Compliant!" parts, which makes consumers very happy, which makes the standard valuable.
-G
All the Silverlight griping aside, I am already watching Dr. Who season 1 on my macbook, and it makes me quite happy. :D
-G
You know, the fire departments weren't always the way they are. They used to be businesses, that would compete against each other, and charge you directly for their services. If you couldn't pay, they would pack up and go home, while your house burnt. Also, they would have honest-to-goodness turf wars, very similar to the gangs you find today.
That sounds way fuckin' better than what we have, you're right.
-G
If you think that's creepy, don't worry. It's way easier to get duplicates than taking a photo. My father in law is training to be a locksmith as a retirement hobby, and I'd recently purchased a motorcycle. It was used, and when I got it, it only had the one key. I'm a lazy kind of guy, so I never got around to getting a replacement. I *talked* about getting copies made all the time, but never actually did. Anyhow, my wife sent him the VIN, and a couple weeks later, I got two keys in the mail. Apparently, that's all you needed. And the VIN is a rather public record that anyone can obtain.
Long story short, anybody could have a key to my motorcycle without even ever having seen it, and with the same information they used to get the key, I have little doubt they could look up the owner and address, where the bike is usually parked. Yay, security!
-G
And I suspect that find(1) and ImageMagick will solve most such needs.
Ohhhhh, I get what you're saying: those tools are used by child pornography consumers and producers in order to circumvent law enforcement agencies' efforts. All right, fair enough. New legislation outlawing those tools in 3, 2, 1...
-G
Wait, are you implying there's some sort of difference between a black-box voting machine and a black-box gambling machine? I thought the latter was a synonym for the former. I learned something on Slashdot today! Woo!
-G