ah, but there's the rub. If face recognition software is used in a public place, such as an airport, it is highly unlikely that the FBI will have gone to a judge and presented envidence about each individual whose face they are going to analyse: that would be everyone in the airport.
Judges wouldn't grant search warrants if the FBI said "We want to invade the privacy of... well, of every one." (Hopefully!)
REgretably, you have your facts wrong.
The Constitution was a response to the realization that the articles of confederation created a government with no ability to protect the common good. Shay's rebellion, an uprising of farmers in western Massachusetts, made it clear to most people that the "country" embodied in the articles of confederation would not survive, and the individual states would be easy pickin's for the British and French.
And I say, Let JEfferson spin in his grave. Despite writing endlessly about how bad slavery was, he freed no slaves during his lifetime, and the only slaves he freed when he died were his own children.
I admire his way with words, but I would not look to him for moral guidance.
The difference: As the article said these are mostly bugs caught BEFORE a user ever saw them. If this were Microsoft, it would be the number of bugs found by end users who had paid money for the privalege.
I think you're factually challenged;-)
I don't think it is true that the majority of programming jobs are c or c++; Java is a VERY large share if not an actual majority, and the percentage is growing. And, regretably, VB/ASP work is pretty plentiful too.
I tried for months to get DSL service through COVAD. There were a number of problems, both with Covad, and with Verizon. Each time they cancelled the order, I tried again. Three times.
Finally I decided to take the middle man out and go directly with Verizon (despite the low upload speed limit). Unbelievably, the problems got worse. Eventually they offered that there was interferance in the line, and that I wouldn't be able to get DSL at all. Apparently this had been the problem all along, but they were not efficient enough to provide that information any of the previous times.
So I got a cable modem despite the problems with those, and when ATT offers cable phone service I'll ditch Verizon all together.
This is the most intelligent comment in this page. (not THIS comment; the one I'm responding to...)
GM will happilly sell the data gathered from your GPS to insurance companies ("No, we won't sell you insurance: you visit your parents in a state with a high accident rate"), Restaurants ("We heard that you drive past our fast-food joint every day at 5:45; here's some coupons to get you to stop in."), and pharmacies ("We already sold your prescription history. Now we're selling this too."). Many reasonable people will choose to use Onstar, or what ever GPS system you can get in your car for it's very real safety benefits, but they won't even know the price they are paying if corporations continue to define the debate over privacy. The fact is, GM offers OnStar to make money, not save lives (yes, I know that's why corporations exist...). They can NOT be trusted to manage our privacy better than we can.
Many rational people would
>>CAN BE RUN WITHOUT IT.
Well, yes, the program can run, but it can't perofrm the functions it is intended to perform, so it can't do the things it advertises, and the things users obtain it for, so practically, and legaly, it can NOT ber run with out it.
-------------------------
When the cat's away, the mice will play
on
Agenda, Not Hidden
·
· Score: 1
Funny, weren't we just reading the obituary of Linux on the desktop?
Figures that when Taco's out of town, timothy starts crackin wise!!
but I have the strange feeling I'm only getting 1/2 the story here
You missed half the story. The article says the judge refused to allow the context to be introduced as evidence. The lawyer was powerless to discuss the other usenet posts. Though it doesn't say so in the article, the judge would also, probably, have forbidden the jury to do their own research, such as going to google to look for themselves. (assuming the either the judge or the members of the jury have heard of google;-(
Did any one read any of the other garbage on that site, newsmax.com? It was a bunch of whiny, self-important liberal-hating garbage. I mean really, in the article about Robert Redford "insulting" the Interior Secretary, there was not the slitest evidence of an insult, and what is the journalistic value of refering to him as "the wrinkled 63 year old."? Of course he hasn't had a hit in years: he hasn't made a movie in years.
What a bunch of assholes.
I hate to sink to your level, but that book has been pretty effectively debunked. There "process" was completely unscientific. For example, citing a study that showed that Head Start programs (which are more often used by the poor), did not provide long term IQ benefit. They completely skipped the actual result of the same study, which was that Head Start programs had a significant positive affect on Drop-out rates, arrest rates, and other important social measures. That is the fact my friend: your source has no credibility. It was a fundamentally dishonest, factually challenged piece of non-science.
I can still remember falling on the floor laughing (literally sliding out of my chair because I was laughing so hard) when I read, in one of the hitch hiker books, about how Zaphod, quite drunk, walked across the hotel lobby : (paraphrase) Though it was completely empty, Zaphod weaved his way through the room.
This is a follow up question, not an answer;-)
I just found (at www.gnu.org/manual/emacs-lisp-intro) an introduction to Emacs Lisp, which the document describes as simpler than Common Lisp. Can anybody explain what that means (not literally what it means...). Is this still a worthwhile introduction to Lisp (and a particularly convenient one if you have Emacs handy)?
> they are all worth a fraction of earlier values...
Of course, so are M$, Oracle, Sun, etc.
>...based on communist principles of shared ownership...
Perhaps you're not clear on the notion of licensing as it applies to Linux. You certainly are not clear on ownership as it relates to Communism. There is no meaningful comparison between a license that allows limited use of software under strict licensing controls (such as those imposed by the GPL), and a system of centralized government decision-making and capital ownership (as Communism is implemented).
You may well be correct that there will be few, if any profitable companies based soley on open source software, but it has nothing to do with communism.
from the article: Instead of the test, actual spacecraft operations began...
doesn't sound like a really tightly managed operation!!
Can't you see them testing their nuclear missiles? Oops! Actual missile operations began...
It was the purchaser's choice to purchase the product (including the
software bundle that accompanied it).
Well, actually, no, that's not true. For a number of years, if you wanted a PC, most dealers would only give it to you with Windows (and the other related crap) installed, because of an illegal license arrangement in which the resellers paid M$ a much lower rate, but paid for every machine they sold regardless of what os was installed (as opposed to paying just for the machines with Windows installed). They had no incentive to offer other os'; infact they had an incentive to NOT offer other os'. Microsoft agreed to end this fraudulent practice as part of their first settlement with the DOJ.
Slashdot Mirror
if a jusdge(sic) grants a search warrant.
ah, but there's the rub. If face recognition software is used in a public place, such as an airport, it is highly unlikely that the FBI will have gone to a judge and presented envidence about each individual whose face they are going to analyse: that would be everyone in the airport.
Judges wouldn't grant search warrants if the FBI said "We want to invade the privacy of... well, of every one." (Hopefully!)
REgretably, you have your facts wrong.
The Constitution was a response to the realization that the articles of confederation created a government with no ability to protect the common good. Shay's rebellion, an uprising of farmers in western Massachusetts, made it clear to most people that the "country" embodied in the articles of confederation would not survive, and the individual states would be easy pickin's for the British and French.
And I say, Let JEfferson spin in his grave. Despite writing endlessly about how bad slavery was, he freed no slaves during his lifetime, and the only slaves he freed when he died were his own children.
I admire his way with words, but I would not look to him for moral guidance.
The difference: As the article said these are mostly bugs caught BEFORE a user ever saw them. If this were Microsoft, it would be the number of bugs found by end users who had paid money for the privalege.
I think you're factually challenged ;-)
I don't think it is true that the majority of programming jobs are c or c++; Java is a VERY large share if not an actual majority, and the percentage is growing. And, regretably, VB/ASP work is pretty plentiful too.
-------------------------
I tried for months to get DSL service through COVAD. There were a number of problems, both with Covad, and with Verizon. Each time they cancelled the order, I tried again. Three times. Finally I decided to take the middle man out and go directly with Verizon (despite the low upload speed limit). Unbelievably, the problems got worse. Eventually they offered that there was interferance in the line, and that I wouldn't be able to get DSL at all. Apparently this had been the problem all along, but they were not efficient enough to provide that information any of the previous times. So I got a cable modem despite the problems with those, and when ATT offers cable phone service I'll ditch Verizon all together.
-------------------------
It's different becuase gnome was not altering the presentation of the KDE website to insert gnome-approved links.
-------------------------
no. The links are added by the browser.
-------------------------
This is the most intelligent comment in this page. (not THIS comment; the one I'm responding to...)
GM will happilly sell the data gathered from your GPS to insurance companies ("No, we won't sell you insurance: you visit your parents in a state with a high accident rate"), Restaurants ("We heard that you drive past our fast-food joint every day at 5:45; here's some coupons to get you to stop in."), and pharmacies ("We already sold your prescription history. Now we're selling this too.").
Many reasonable people will choose to use Onstar, or what ever GPS system you can get in your car for it's very real safety benefits, but they won't even know the price they are paying if corporations continue to define the debate over privacy.
The fact is, GM offers OnStar to make money, not save lives (yes, I know that's why corporations exist...). They can NOT be trusted to manage our privacy better than we can. Many rational people would
-------------------------
>>CAN BE RUN WITHOUT IT. Well, yes, the program can run, but it can't perofrm the functions it is intended to perform, so it can't do the things it advertises, and the things users obtain it for, so practically, and legaly, it can NOT ber run with out it.
-------------------------
Figures that when Taco's out of town, timothy starts crackin wise!!
-------------------------
but I have the strange feeling I'm only getting 1/2 the story here ;-(
You missed half the story. The article says the judge refused to allow the context to be introduced as evidence. The lawyer was powerless to discuss the other usenet posts. Though it doesn't say so in the article, the judge would also, probably, have forbidden the jury to do their own research, such as going to google to look for themselves. (assuming the either the judge or the members of the jury have heard of google
-------------------------
Did any one read any of the other garbage on that site, newsmax.com? It was a bunch of whiny, self-important liberal-hating garbage. I mean really, in the article about Robert Redford "insulting" the Interior Secretary, there was not the slitest evidence of an insult, and what is the journalistic value of refering to him as "the wrinkled 63 year old."? Of course he hasn't had a hit in years: he hasn't made a movie in years.
What a bunch of assholes.
-------------------------
I hate to sink to your level, but that book has been pretty effectively debunked. There "process" was completely unscientific. For example, citing a study that showed that Head Start programs (which are more often used by the poor), did not provide long term IQ benefit. They completely skipped the actual result of the same study, which was that Head Start programs had a significant positive affect on Drop-out rates, arrest rates, and other important social measures.
That is the fact my friend: your source has no credibility. It was a fundamentally dishonest, factually challenged piece of non-science.
-------------------------
(paraphrase)
Though it was completely empty, Zaphod weaved his way through the room.
I completely lost it lost it.
-------------------------
At least what will make it work in my lifetime?
Given that the article talked about it happening by the end of the century, probably nothing.
-------------------------
And when a multibillion-dollar project is at stake, what engineer would work on the ragged edge?
-------------------------
uh oh... you better write to all the PhDs who make a livining researching this stuff and point that out to them. I bet they'll be embarassed!!
-------------------------
what article were you reading?
-------------------------
This is a follow up question, not an answer ;-)
I just found (at www.gnu.org/manual/emacs-lisp-intro) an introduction to Emacs Lisp, which the document describes as simpler than Common Lisp. Can anybody explain what that means (not literally what it means...).
Is this still a worthwhile introduction to Lisp (and a particularly convenient one if you have Emacs handy)?
-------------------------
Of course, so are M$, Oracle, Sun, etc.
> ...based on communist principles of shared ownership...
Perhaps you're not clear on the notion of licensing as it applies to Linux. You certainly are not clear on ownership as it relates to Communism. There is no meaningful comparison between a license that allows limited use of software under strict licensing controls (such as those imposed by the GPL), and a system of centralized government decision-making and capital ownership (as Communism is implemented).
You may well be correct that there will be few, if any profitable companies based soley on open source software, but it has nothing to do with communism.
-------------------------
Dude!! That is REALLY funny!! I haven't laughed this hard in ages. Thanks for the chuckle. You've got a great, if slightly adolecent, imagination!
-------------------------
from the article:
Instead of the test, actual spacecraft operations began...
doesn't sound like a really tightly managed operation!!
Can't you see them testing their nuclear missiles? Oops! Actual missile operations began...
-------------------------
yeah... what he said.
-------------------------
It was the purchaser's choice to purchase the product (including the software bundle that accompanied it). Well, actually, no, that's not true. For a number of years, if you wanted a PC, most dealers would only give it to you with Windows (and the other related crap) installed, because of an illegal license arrangement in which the resellers paid M$ a much lower rate, but paid for every machine they sold regardless of what os was installed (as opposed to paying just for the machines with Windows installed). They had no incentive to offer other os'; infact they had an incentive to NOT offer other os'. Microsoft agreed to end this fraudulent practice as part of their first settlement with the DOJ.
-------------------------
Dude, that IS what modems used to be.
-------------------------