at scan computers as the "scan scorpio" case. I have one and it's the best case I've ever had, except mine had a faulty psu originally, but they are a joy to work on. The removable drive bays are great!
Nope sorry, you can't use XPortals, Bill's lawyers will be down on you like a ton of bricks. You can't put a capial P to the immediate right of a capital X otherwise, you'd be confusing the poor people who buy and use Windows XP -
This really is vaporware!!!
on
Stopping Light
·
· Score: 5, Funny
From the article Walsworth and Hau used vapors (rubidium and sodium) to pause light. Will the insides of quantum computers be vaporous as well?
So it truly is vaporware!
I was mainly thinking of the very young children, as they get older, and more aware of risk and how to assess it, then yes, the situation does need to be reviewed. One thing I do not see is how this device can be "opressive". WHo is being the opressor? The parents? Well, In our case, we already insist on knowing where our children are at all times, and if they deviate from the plan they have to call us. We beleive that to be responible parenting. Perhaps to some, we are being overprotective, but our children seem to be developing just fine and we do get an awful lot of comments on how well behaved and polite our children are. -
I agreee, we all take calculated risks, but a 3 year old isn't even aware of risks, let alone able to calculate it, and as parents, we have to do that for them.
I don't think I would buy this device at it's current price, but in principle, I believe it to be a good idea for those tha can afford it. If it even saves one life, then it's a worthwhile device.
no, our kids are actually very happy. We just beleive in keeping them as safe as we can. I believe it's called "Responsible parenting"
If you chose to let your kids do stupid things like play with sharp knives or fall downstairs or poke things into electricity sockets or damage themselves in some other by failing to use basic home safety equipment while they're young, then that's your choice (well, actually it wouldn't be in the uk, for example, not using fireguards is illegal with children under 4 in the home) but when the kid spends half their life at the emergency room, or end up dead, you'll know who to blame.
We teach our children to cross the roads responsibly - to always uses a proper light controlled crossing point, even if it means walking a few yards down the road - and usually, they'll have an adult with them anyway.
I agree that it's primary use is to track children who actually have gone missing, and not just wandered off to the toy section and if that brings peace of mind to parents who chose to buy the device then I think it's a good thing.
and if that one kid had been YOUR kid? Would you still feel the same way?
I fail to see how this device, used as intended is denying rights. It's a protection, it could maybe save their lives one day, it probably won't but if it brings extra peace of mind to worried parents, how can that be bad?
If you obect to the device, don't buy it, but don't criticise people who may welcome it.
would say that if you feel your child has to wear one of these awful devices, then you've probably failed as a parent already
You're either not a parent or forgotton how easy it is for a 2 or 3 year old to get lost. I have not yet met a parent who has NEVER lost sight of a child for a few seconds, even on reins they can wriggle out, or remove it when your attention is elsewhere - shopping is a classic example.
If you're in the UK, you'll remember Jamie Bulger? Do you suppose his parents would have had this device if they could?
Perhaps if you do have kids, and do momentarily lose sight of him/her and they tyhen go missing, you might change your mind. I sincerely hope it never happens to you.
We had a child wander off, took us 5 minutes to find him, i have never been so panic-struck in my life. It happens, even to the very best parents.
There are so many things wrong with this that I don't even know where to begin.
Why????
As a parent of young kids, I think this is an excellent idea. Here in the UK, we had the horrific case of 3 year old Jamie Bulger a few years ago who was snatched from a shopping centre by a couple of bored fourteen year olds and tied to a railway track "for fun".
It looks like it might just identify "key" points of the face, and produce some sort of 3d "hashcode" The images on the article seem to suggest it might compure some sort of wireframe model of the face, which would be small and quick to send back to the database. -
why not? This is nothing to do with using face recognition for access to the phone, though I imagine that would be a feature. This story is about using a phone as a portable surveilance camera with automatic recognition of "suspects" -
I think I'm going ot have to start wearing one of those cell disabling systems on my person to disable any cellphones in a radius that can take my mugshot or whatever other stupid things they put in cellphones!
And what happens when you or someone near you needs urgent medical assistance and there's no landline near by?
imho phone blockers are antisocial, and a bad, bad idea for lots of reasons
Slashdot Mirror
From teh article: "The vehicle was successfully launched on April 19, 2001"
-
As others have said, OS/2 is very much alive in big business - banks (ATMs), airlines, retailers, even McDonalds apparently!
Huh? I'm using an RS6000 right now. They are still very much alive and well.
-
I think it should be .ThisIsAnImageStoredInTheJointPhotographicExper tsGroupTwoThousandADFormat
There, that shouldn't take more than 10 seconds to type...
If you read the comments on the site, you'll find that it his is wife's desk, it's her handcream :)
-
Nope sorry, you can't use XPortals, Bill's lawyers will be down on you like a ton of bricks. You can't put a capial P to the immediate right of a capital X otherwise, you'd be confusing the poor people who buy and use Windows XP
-
So it truly is vaporware!
Embedded systems?
-
I was mainly thinking of the very young children, as they get older, and more aware of risk and how to assess it, then yes, the situation does need to be reviewed. One thing I do not see is how this device can be "opressive". WHo is being the opressor? The parents? Well, In our case, we already insist on knowing where our children are at all times, and if they deviate from the plan they have to call us. We beleive that to be responible parenting. Perhaps to some, we are being overprotective, but our children seem to be developing just fine and we do get an awful lot of comments on how well behaved and polite our children are.
-
$400 is a lot to shell out, so I can't imagine a lot of parents taking this up, but in principle, I believe it to be a good idea.
Parenting is HARD, I hope it goes well for you!
I don't think I would buy this device at it's current price, but in principle, I believe it to be a good idea for those tha can afford it. If it even saves one life, then it's a worthwhile device.
I agree that it's primary use is to track children who actually have gone missing, and not just wandered off to the toy section and if that brings peace of mind to parents who chose to buy the device then I think it's a good thing.
I fail to see how this device, used as intended is denying rights. It's a protection, it could maybe save their lives one day, it probably won't but if it brings extra peace of mind to worried parents, how can that be bad?
If you obect to the device, don't buy it, but don't criticise people who may welcome it.
It might have made the abductors think twice. The parents were on the scene, the kid wandered off for a few seconds and got picked up.
-
ANYTHING that can reduce the risk of injury and death to a child has to be a good thing imho
You're clearly not a parent, otherwise you wouldn't even THINK that.
-
You're either not a parent or forgotton how easy it is for a 2 or 3 year old to get lost. I have not yet met a parent who has NEVER lost sight of a child for a few seconds, even on reins they can wriggle out, or remove it when your attention is elsewhere - shopping is a classic example.
If you're in the UK, you'll remember Jamie Bulger? Do you suppose his parents would have had this device if they could?
Perhaps if you do have kids, and do momentarily lose sight of him/her and they tyhen go missing, you might change your mind. I sincerely hope it never happens to you.
We had a child wander off, took us 5 minutes to find him, i have never been so panic-struck in my life. It happens, even to the very best parents.
As a parent of young kids, I think this is an excellent idea. Here in the UK, we had the horrific case of 3 year old Jamie Bulger a few years ago who was snatched from a shopping centre by a couple of bored fourteen year olds and tied to a railway track "for fun".
This device could well have prevented that.
It's a bit expensive, but a brilliant idea
It looks like it might just identify "key" points of the face, and produce some sort of 3d "hashcode" The images on the article seem to suggest it might compure some sort of wireframe model of the face, which would be small and quick to send back to the database.
-
why not? This is nothing to do with using face recognition for access to the phone, though I imagine that would be a feature. This story is about using a phone as a portable surveilance camera with automatic recognition of "suspects"
-
And what happens when you or someone near you needs urgent medical assistance and there's no landline near by?
imho phone blockers are antisocial, and a bad, bad idea for lots of reasons
Th earticle says that it's for use by law enforcement agencies, not for private phones.
-
Is it an Office XP Killer? I'll address this issue right off the bat. This is great software, but it isn't an Office killer, nor is it designed to be.
Even the makers admit it isn't an office killer.