Considering the relatively high odds against this ever happening, I would chance it. False arrest can just as easily happen in other situations - not just airports...
If I have not paid my traffic tickets, I deserve to get into trouble.
If I have a joint in my shaving tackle, I deserve to get carted away - because that is illegal. Spare me the rhetoric.
If my child support is not paid up - I also deserve the due penalty of the law. Deadbeats should receive no quarter - be a man and take care of your responsibilities.
Since when is liberty an excuse for avoiding the law?
but what if it was used in a controlled environment, say at the metal detector?
I could see where scanning a crowd would not be effective at this point in time, but if it has a dead-on shot as you pass through the detector, I bet it is fairly accurate...
In my experience, one of the facial recognition products I have seen (could use for login) was pretty darn good under those "controlled" conditions...
... the objective of a facial recognition system is not to be 100% accurate - or anywhere near for that matter.
The objective is to provide a tool that gives law enforcement the ability to *better* determine someone's true identity - and keep a terrorist off your flight.
How on earth does that interfere with my civil liberties? Even if there was a false alarm, the truth would be discovered soon. Do you think that if the system makes a match to a suspected bad person it shoots you on sight?
Personally, I have nothing to hide. If my facial scan was a false match and I had to spend a couple hours (or a day for that matter) in the airport getting cleared, I'll be happy knowing that something better than minimum wage security workers is keeping me and my family safer.
Um, I actually am surprised to see the level of hostility levied towards a service that is provided free of charge to the general public.
One thing that is also interesting is the number of posts (I knew it was inevitable) touting Linux. I love Linux. I think it's great. You want to know why there are no real virus threats against Linux? It's because no one has targeted it. Maybe all the virus writers are 15 years old and using Linux?
It seems to me that *no* OS is safe if people really want to target it, and laughing at the misfortune of another smacks of immaturity and a certain foolishness.
From a developer point of view, they have made some nice changes in the area of MSMQ 3.0(broadcasting, MSMQ no longer needs domain controller, etc.)
Other than that, all I know is that Beta 2 is stable and has a pretty interface...
Anyone else?
Oh, please... Don't you think that if MS blocked access to non-MS sites an uproar would ensue? Even people that adore MS would find that offensive...
(I'll ignore discussions of other economies. We are a capitalistic country now, so anything else is irrelevant)
... even posting a comment on a site whose users are, for the majority, supporters of a certain OS (which I also use), but my irritation compels me to do so.
MS is competing in an open market. So is everyone else.
If the removal of the Java VM makes your software break - do not install XP. If you do not like Passport, do not use it. If the licensing scheme for Office XP torks you (as it does me) - don't buy Office XP. Don't you think MS would drop their licensing practice if the software sat on shelves?
Personally, I want the market to decide - not the federal government.
I am sorry to hear that you work in a company like that - but I do agree with you that is often the case... However, there is a fine line. CIO's and their ilk make decisions regarding real money, and sometimes their decisions are not agreed with by the technical people who often view products based on the "cool" factor... If Linux was always the best solution, and it is free (or basically free) for the taking, why is MS not long gone? It is because there are factors other than price and popularity that fit into the equation...:o)
Sigh. In the real world, business concerns are more important than pseudo-religious, ill-informed idealogies. Microsoft has its share of problems - but so does the Linux camp. Pick the solution that solves the problem!
Oh, please:o) Like *any* software vendor is responsible for a loss of productivity. We live in a capitalistic nation - buy something else if your product crashes too much.
If there truly was something better then some MS products, why didn't the free market crush MS? (I don't want to hear any paranoid delusions about MS stifling innovation either)
I like Linux. I like some MS products. A true IT professional selects solutions based on technical merit and its application to the *business* problem at hand...:o)
Believe it or not: MS developers really exist
on
Microsoft's DNS Down
·
· Score: 1
Many software developers use the MSDN portion of the MS web site on a daily basis for samples and information. So yes, some people actually do care when the DNS is down.
Slashdot Mirror
Why on earth is this flamebait?
Well, let's see ...
...
Considering the relatively high odds against this ever happening, I would chance it. False arrest can just as easily happen in other situations - not just airports
If I have not paid my traffic tickets, I deserve to get into trouble.
If I have a joint in my shaving tackle, I deserve to get carted away - because that is illegal. Spare me the rhetoric.
If my child support is not paid up - I also deserve the due penalty of the law. Deadbeats should receive no quarter - be a man and take care of your responsibilities.
Since when is liberty an excuse for avoiding the law?
I'm not sure I agree in this situation - but you raise a very good point in general ...
but what if it was used in a controlled environment, say at the metal detector?
...
...
I could see where scanning a crowd would not be effective at this point in time, but if it has a dead-on shot as you pass through the detector, I bet it is fairly accurate
In my experience, one of the facial recognition products I have seen (could use for login) was pretty darn good under those "controlled" conditions
... the objective of a facial recognition system is not to be 100% accurate - or anywhere near for that matter.
The objective is to provide a tool that gives law enforcement the ability to *better* determine someone's true identity - and keep a terrorist off your flight.
How on earth does that interfere with my civil liberties? Even if there was a false alarm, the truth would be discovered soon. Do you think that if the system makes a match to a suspected bad person it shoots you on sight?
Personally, I have nothing to hide. If my facial scan was a false match and I had to spend a couple hours (or a day for that matter) in the airport getting cleared, I'll be happy knowing that something better than minimum wage security workers is keeping me and my family safer.
... or does anyone else find it is funny that the article discusses software aesthetics using Visual Basic code examples ...
Um, I actually am surprised to see the level of hostility levied towards a service that is provided free of charge to the general public. One thing that is also interesting is the number of posts (I knew it was inevitable) touting Linux. I love Linux. I think it's great. You want to know why there are no real virus threats against Linux? It's because no one has targeted it. Maybe all the virus writers are 15 years old and using Linux? It seems to me that *no* OS is safe if people really want to target it, and laughing at the misfortune of another smacks of immaturity and a certain foolishness.
From a developer point of view, they have made some nice changes in the area of MSMQ 3.0(broadcasting, MSMQ no longer needs domain controller, etc.) Other than that, all I know is that Beta 2 is stable and has a pretty interface ...
Anyone else?
Oh, please ... Don't you think that if MS blocked access to non-MS sites an uproar would ensue? Even people that adore MS would find that offensive ...
(I'll ignore discussions of other economies. We are a capitalistic country now, so anything else is irrelevant)
... even posting a comment on a site whose users are, for the majority, supporters of a certain OS (which I also use), but my irritation compels me to do so. MS is competing in an open market. So is everyone else. If the removal of the Java VM makes your software break - do not install XP. If you do not like Passport, do not use it. If the licensing scheme for Office XP torks you (as it does me) - don't buy Office XP. Don't you think MS would drop their licensing practice if the software sat on shelves? Personally, I want the market to decide - not the federal government.
Surely you cannot be serious? Last I checked, the USA was a capitalistic, market-driven economy ...
I am sorry to hear that you work in a company like that - but I do agree with you that is often the case ... However, there is a fine line. CIO's and their ilk make decisions regarding real money, and sometimes their decisions are not agreed with by the technical people who often view products based on the "cool" factor ... If Linux was always the best solution, and it is free (or basically free) for the taking, why is MS not long gone? It is because there are factors other than price and popularity that fit into the equation ... :o)
Sigh. In the real world, business concerns are more important than pseudo-religious, ill-informed idealogies. Microsoft has its share of problems - but so does the Linux camp. Pick the solution that solves the problem!
Oh, please :o) Like *any* software vendor is responsible for a loss of productivity. We live in a capitalistic nation - buy something else if your product crashes too much.
If there truly was something better then some MS products, why didn't the free market crush MS? (I don't want to hear any paranoid delusions about MS stifling innovation either)
I like Linux. I like some MS products. A true IT professional selects solutions based on technical merit and its application to the *business* problem at hand ... :o)
Many software developers use the MSDN portion of the MS web site on a daily basis for samples and information. So yes, some people actually do care when the DNS is down.