Great... and with bluetooth technology, how long before we see some geek walking around tapping his "federation logo pin" on his "Picard's Capt. Jacket" to activate his "speaker phone". Yet another thing to annoy me at the local electronics store check-out line.
Sigh. What ever happened to just wearing a tee-shirt to demonstration ones devotion to a "show"?
The precedent I'd be worried about would be if such a decision would be both ways. This is what I fear:
Joe Webmaster from Anytown, USA hosts a site critical of Islam, or Kim Jung-Il, Castro and are found in countries X, Y and Z to violate some law regarding incitement, or subversion -- wouldn't an extrapolation of a decision favorable for extradition mean that the US would need to send Joe Webmaster packing to Uzbekistan, North Korea or Cuba?
IMO, let the US and AU work on their treaties regarding the honoring of copyrights and let AU prosucute violators in-house.
It's less that the LABOR is cheap and more that they have less restrictive environmental and safety laws.
If you force companies producing goods or services for the US to comply with the same OSHA, minimum wage standards, environmental standards, etc, then you'll see that "cheap" part disappear.
The way I see it, we have two options: (1) force all importers of goods and services to comply with all US standards or (2) remove all US requirements for minimum wage, health, safety, enviornmental standards. Otherwise, we are basically shooting ourselves in the foot economically. Personally, I'm for option (1).
Is AT&T a very nice provider? How hard is it to use a bluetooth phone as a modem (you know, connect to the internet through it)? Where can I find directions on that?
I've been using ATT for over a year. While I'm not 100% pleased as punch with them, they offer one feature I've come to rely on: unlimited free incoming text messages. I've got scripts and alerts set up at my work that lets me know useful and immediate information. Further, it allows the personnel I support to "page" me without them ever knowing my cell number. The service as proven to be quite reliable (no lost messages as I have messages forwarded both to my phone and an email account JUST in case).
My monthly cell phone cost is cheaper than was my alpha pager. The only downside is the maximum message size (~160 characters vs. ~450 characters). I live in the LA area -- and reception hasn't been terrible for me at all. I think part of that is related to the phone as well as coverage as I get decent reception in our basement while others at my work (including other ATT customers) get "no service".
While thats true, there's no doubt that some cities and states are in such a financial hole (such as my home state of CA) that such an initial investment is simply out of the question right now. We're already multiples of billions of dollars behind and are running the real risk of state bankruptcy (although I think we're going to narrowly avert it).
It doesn't matter WHAT the benefits are "down the line" if putting out the expense NOW risks financial collapse. If we need it (and we will), we'll pay (more) for it later.
"free fiber"? No such thing. If the city/state is doing it, the citizens are paying for it. Depending on the city/state, I'm sure tax payers would have a say as to where that money should be spent. In CA, we're in such a hole that to even consider this right now would be silly.
It seems like you are suggesting that this new technological ability to detect NEO's and possible impacts as being similar to the "Boy who cried wolf" fable.
The problem is, as we all know, the wolf finally did arrive one day...
A miniwage employee loses 1/3 of their income to taxes, social security, and medicare.
They also get "free" money in the form of an EIC. For a single parent, that's basically an additional 10%-15% on top of their pre-tax wages. The 1/3rd you state is very misleading -- Federal taxes would run around 10%-15% (income and payroll taxes) -- hardly 1/3rd. Unless you also include state income and sales tax -- and those swing WIDELY from state to state -- from a big ZERO to an additional 30% or more.
He sure went on, and 9/11 were just too good an opportunity not to take advantage off. As the former US minister of finance (or what you call that position in USA) wrote : Getting rid of Saddam was top of the agenda right just after the election of Bush. But according to you he's just a leftist loonie?
O'NEILL: "Terry, this is a guess on my part, but I believe that this document had its roots in the Clinton administration. There was no way that a new administration could create this kind of document in the short period of time before this meeting."
SUSKIND: "Well, but to be fair, let's make sure we're clear here. This is a document that's dated March 1 or 2 [2001]. So there probably was enough time, just based on the dating of the document. But..."
O'NEILL: "Knowing how government works, I've got to tell you, I don't believe it was done in six weeks. I just don't believe that."
O'Neill was used by a very biased writer with an axe to grind (Suskind). Suskind did a poor job of checking his facts.
Erh, it showed that Bush & administration was lying quite heaviliy. Not wrong : Lying.
From your statements, I can only determine that you never saw Kay sit before congress or read a transcript of that testomony. If you had, you would have heard Kay tell Kennedy flat out that he had access to all the intellegence AND in fact had several of those who WROTE those reports working on his team in Iraq. Further, Kay said that down to the man, they ALL said they were never pressured to "cook the books" nor was their intellegence reports mis-used in any way. Kay also made statements that Iraq, in many ways, was a greater threat than we had ever thought.
You, sir, don't know what you are talking about and like to make little comments attacking people to make you feel better about YOUR world view. Left of Atilla indeed.
386 computers are still useful, but you won't find anybody selling new 386 chips anymore.
Except they are still being produced and sold.It depends on your application and needs. You need something reliable to run a metal lathe (which is what the linked part does at my in-law's shop) in harsh industrial conditions? Or do you need something cutting edge to play the latest games?
You need to look over those statistics more carefully. Whats the case load of the 4th, 5th and 8th circuits? And how many were reveiwed/overturned? One review and one overturn? 2? Maybe 3 max? Yeah... that's 100%, but HARDLY a representative sample and gives no indication of cases heard vs. cases reviewed.
The 9th overall has a higher likelyhood of being reveiwed and overturned. The PDF you cite is from an article which ALSO points this out. Go back and check your facts.
So. That's not a problem. The goal isn't to "bounce" questionable email. 21 out of the last 30 flagged files (that weren't ID'd as viruses) were legitimate files (updates, mostly resumes, etc). 3 of the 9 remaining were brand new zero-day viruses that weren't in our defs yet (mimail-k and mydoom-a). The last 6 were programs users sent to themselves to install on their workstations (dummies -- they should know by now).
We accept the "questionable" stuff because following a "better safe than sorry" philosphy regarding flagging has worked and it reduces turnaround time on potentially important transactions. The traffic generated has been historically minimal and the benefits have far outweighed them.
30 auto-replies in the last 3 months barely more than 1k each. Hardly a traffic jam. Only 3 went to "forged" email addresses. And that's for over 100 email users.
While I *MOSTLY* agree with this, I have a few exceptions.
Our email scanner will ONLY send out alert auto-replies to files it flags but can't identify as specific viruses.
That way, it lets the schmendrick know that his resume called "myresume.version2.doc" was flagged and not delivered. Or that some lab equipment update file called "ags.20040128.exe" was flagged and not delievered.
It allows them to alert me and make sure the file goes where it belongs.
If the scanner ID's a virus, it just drops the load in to a quarentine dir and makes a log entry for my review.
I don't know why you ended up posting at "0", unless your post is a kernel of corn in a pile of shit... I hope at least you get moderated up. You are quite right!
As soon as the passengers of Flight 93 found out what was going on (thank god for cell phones), they jumped the terrorists and undoubtedly prevented more death and destruction.
As soon passangers on Flight 63 noticed Richard Reid trying to light his shoe on fire, he was jumped, pinned, and prevented an explosion which most likely would have killed everyone on board.
The terrorists got their free shot. It's not going to be so easy next time.
If you have a lousy user interface, you can't sit back and blame it on the user because they can't figure out how you want them to use the system.
"IF" you have a lousy interface, you would be correct.
Regarding the old system, the instructions were quite clear. There were also people available at the polls to assist the voter if they had any additional questions. This was also true with the electronic voting system. It doesn't sound like a "lousy user interface" to me.
That said, a paper trail is an absolute MUST for ANY voting system. Electronic, Hands, Stones, straws or otherwise.
My point was that there will ALWAYS be people who wont vote correctly. Regardless of any efforts you make to minimize this, it will happen. Minimizing the problem is a good thing. But in my opinion, ELIMINATING the problem is impossible. This particular instance, your talking about 150 or so votes. Out of how many? Several thousands? Tens of thousands?
No matter how much you spend on design, hand-holders, personally voting assistance etc, you can not eliminate carelessness, stupidity or apathy entirely.
Actually, I do agree with your point "(1)" -- and say so in my original post. At least partially. The way the old system handled voter "fuck ups" was to provide instructions on WHAT to look for.
2.- If a user (voter) does not follow the instructions that means the instructions are not clear enough for that person.
I don't agree with this. There are people AT THE POLLS who are ALSO available to help. Where to you draw the line? How much effort and cost must the state provide (read TAX PAYERS) to ensure voters don't make mistakes? I have real problems taking personal responsibility away from individuals -- especially when it means I need to pay more as a taxpayer. The old machines were not complicated nor were the instructions inadequate. In otherwords, I disagree with your claim that the system was broken.
The Electronic voting system absolutely needs to have an audit trail. I've said as much in the past. I'd personally like to see two levels of voting: One at the screen (where the voter verifies all his votes before printing out a ballot receipt) and a second where the receipt is ALSO verified by the voter as being accurate and then dropped in a ballot receipt box. That way, random audits could verify the accuracy of the machines as well as provide detailed re-counts on close elections.
You are guilty of common problem amongst computer types - blame the user when the machine is at fault.
The user IS at fault when multiple votes are cast for the same candidate. The user IS at fault when they don't follow instructions and check for hanging chads.
You can't count a double vote for Gore and Buchanan as a vote for Gore. The intent of the voter is UNKNOWN.
In the black areas the exact same voting machines were programmed to silently eat up the ballot and ignore the vote.
I find it interesting and very telling that you supply no support material to this claim. It also defies logic in that those machines would have to have been approved by a democratic election committee. Are you suggesting that the Democrats in Democratic districts PURPOSELY programmed machines that would HURT the democratic candidate?
Some people just will NOT vote correctly. They will NOT follow instructions. They just won't.
While a paper trail is absolutely necessary to see WHERE the problem lies, it certainly doesn't address that some people are either careless, lazy or just plain dumb.
Actually in one of the sources I cite they mention that -- and list a number of the problems that go with it:
cost
End of Life replacements
disposal of dead/damaged cells (which contain toxic materials)
I've read a number of reports which suggest the usage of non-productive land (i.e. desert). The moment something like that is even a remote possibility of being realized, the greens/environmentalists hop up to protect the desert hare or cactus beatle or something.
IMHO, the cost and effiency of solar is such that it's not worth the fight. Maybe in 10-50 years...
Manufacturing some types of PV cells, particularly gallium arsenide cells, may involve the production of some potentially toxic substances. These substances are generated in a centralized facility, and proper control of the manufacturing process, and proper disposal of any toxic wastes, should reduce the risks of any environmental contamination. Disposal of PV cells after their useful life is finished, generally 30 years, could present some waste disposal problems, but most of the toxic materials in any cells can probably be recycled.
However, during module production substances are used which may be harmful for workers, the public or the environment.
You'll not only produce toxins that must be disposed of -- you'll also need to dispose of the solar cells at the end of their life cycle. The cost to do this on any large scale makes this solution impractical at this time.
Then there's land use... The amount of land necessary to produce around one megawatt, iirc is like 4 or 5 acres. That could be a pretty significant envornmental impact -- as in killing off fields for miles around (no sun for plants, no plants for insects, no insects for birds, etc) just to power a small suburb.
I was refering to weight. Any idea how much chicken wire that would require to cover one turbine. Those blades are not small. Standard chicken wire wouldn't be able to support it's own weight. The wire would either need to be thicker/higher gage, or be laticed with support rods -- all which would increase drag.
Energy generation - indeed any use of natural resources - must be sustainable indefinately. Otherwise...well, you end up running out of stuff, killing species off, making food production harder/impossible etc.
I'm not sure I fully agree with that. It's quite possible to move from one source to another as technology permits. We went from wood burning, to coal, to oil... It is possible to run on non-renewable resources for quite some time. Is this ideal? Hardly, but I would suggest it contradicts your "must be sustainable indefinately" statement.
How about suggesting a solution? How about nuclear? Potential hazzard. Wind? Kill birds. Oceanic Turbines? Kill fish. Oil? Pollute. Solar? Far too inefficent and produces too many toxins.
How about this: We use ALL the above solutions so that we (A) don't keep all our eggs in one basket) (B) buy us time to increase solar/wind efficency. Who knows... maybe we'll devolop "energy farms" where we "grow" energy producing plants (chemical energy, say).
A big old grate will create additional wind drag which would in turn decrease the wind energy transfered to the turbines.
So fine companies who needlessly damage the environment so it becomes more expensive to not take appropriate action
Sounds like a good argument, huh? Unless the cost to generate power increases beyond the ability to make it a viable solution. This brings us to the key word in your statement "needlessly". Perhaps it is NECESSARY to "damage" the environment sometimes. You think that when the house/apartment you live in was build, they didn't dig up some animal/plants home and destroy it?
What animal (man included) doesn't effect his environment when acting within it's nature? That's a valid question. A few birds be damned -- lets look at the bigger picture.
The answer is NOT to drop all our gizmo's and live in stone and thatch huts. At least if we don't want to see 3+ billion people die off of starvation and exposure.
Slashdot Mirror
There hasn't been much "original" talent ANYWHERE, let alone hollywood. Most of the plots now-a-days are re-hashed Shakespeare.
Great... and with bluetooth technology, how long before we see some geek walking around tapping his "federation logo pin" on his "Picard's Capt. Jacket" to activate his "speaker phone". Yet another thing to annoy me at the local electronics store check-out line.
Sigh. What ever happened to just wearing a tee-shirt to demonstration ones devotion to a "show"?
-jhon
The precedent I'd be worried about would be if such a decision would be both ways. This is what I fear:
Joe Webmaster from Anytown, USA hosts a site critical of Islam, or Kim Jung-Il, Castro and are found in countries X, Y and Z to violate some law regarding incitement, or subversion -- wouldn't an extrapolation of a decision favorable for extradition mean that the US would need to send Joe Webmaster packing to Uzbekistan, North Korea or Cuba?
IMO, let the US and AU work on their treaties regarding the honoring of copyrights and let AU prosucute violators in-house.
It's less that the LABOR is cheap and more that they have less restrictive environmental and safety laws.
If you force companies producing goods or services for the US to comply with the same OSHA, minimum wage standards, environmental standards, etc, then you'll see that "cheap" part disappear.
The way I see it, we have two options: (1) force all importers of goods and services to comply with all US standards or (2) remove all US requirements for minimum wage, health, safety, enviornmental standards. Otherwise, we are basically shooting ourselves in the foot economically. Personally, I'm for option (1).
My monthly cell phone cost is cheaper than was my alpha pager. The only downside is the maximum message size (~160 characters vs. ~450 characters). I live in the LA area -- and reception hasn't been terrible for me at all. I think part of that is related to the phone as well as coverage as I get decent reception in our basement while others at my work (including other ATT customers) get "no service".
It doesn't matter WHAT the benefits are "down the line" if putting out the expense NOW risks financial collapse. If we need it (and we will), we'll pay (more) for it later.
"free fiber"? No such thing. If the city/state is doing it, the citizens are paying for it. Depending on the city/state, I'm sure tax payers would have a say as to where that money should be spent. In CA, we're in such a hole that to even consider this right now would be silly.
For other states, it may be the "right" time.
It seems like you are suggesting that this new technological ability to detect NEO's and possible impacts as being similar to the "Boy who cried wolf" fable.
The problem is, as we all know, the wolf finally did arrive one day...
You, sir, don't know what you are talking about and like to make little comments attacking people to make you feel better about YOUR world view. Left of Atilla indeed.
You need to look over those statistics more carefully. Whats the case load of the 4th, 5th and 8th circuits? And how many were reveiwed/overturned? One review and one overturn? 2? Maybe 3 max? Yeah... that's 100%, but HARDLY a representative sample and gives no indication of cases heard vs. cases reviewed.
The 9th overall has a higher likelyhood of being reveiwed and overturned. The PDF you cite is from an article which ALSO points this out. Go back and check your facts.
This is Echelon. And yes, they do fall in the tin foil hat catagory.
So. That's not a problem. The goal isn't to "bounce" questionable email. 21 out of the last 30 flagged files (that weren't ID'd as viruses) were legitimate files (updates, mostly resumes, etc). 3 of the 9 remaining were brand new zero-day viruses that weren't in our defs yet (mimail-k and mydoom-a). The last 6 were programs users sent to themselves to install on their workstations (dummies -- they should know by now).
We accept the "questionable" stuff because following a "better safe than sorry" philosphy regarding flagging has worked and it reduces turnaround time on potentially important transactions. The traffic generated has been historically minimal and the benefits have far outweighed them.
30 auto-replies in the last 3 months barely more than 1k each. Hardly a traffic jam. Only 3 went to "forged" email addresses. And that's for over 100 email users.
While I *MOSTLY* agree with this, I have a few exceptions.
Our email scanner will ONLY send out alert auto-replies to files it flags but can't identify as specific viruses.
That way, it lets the schmendrick know that his resume called "myresume.version2.doc" was flagged and not delivered. Or that some lab equipment update file called "ags.20040128.exe" was flagged and not delievered.
It allows them to alert me and make sure the file goes where it belongs.
If the scanner ID's a virus, it just drops the load in to a quarentine dir and makes a log entry for my review.
I don't know why you ended up posting at "0", unless your post is a kernel of corn in a pile of shit... I hope at least you get moderated up. You are quite right!
As soon as the passengers of Flight 93 found out what was going on (thank god for cell phones), they jumped the terrorists and undoubtedly prevented more death and destruction.
As soon passangers on Flight 63 noticed Richard Reid trying to light his shoe on fire, he was jumped, pinned, and prevented an explosion which most likely would have killed everyone on board.
The terrorists got their free shot. It's not going to be so easy next time.
Regarding the old system, the instructions were quite clear. There were also people available at the polls to assist the voter if they had any additional questions. This was also true with the electronic voting system. It doesn't sound like a "lousy user interface" to me.
That said, a paper trail is an absolute MUST for ANY voting system. Electronic, Hands, Stones, straws or otherwise.
My point was that there will ALWAYS be people who wont vote correctly. Regardless of any efforts you make to minimize this, it will happen. Minimizing the problem is a good thing. But in my opinion, ELIMINATING the problem is impossible. This particular instance, your talking about 150 or so votes. Out of how many? Several thousands? Tens of thousands?
No matter how much you spend on design, hand-holders, personally voting assistance etc, you can not eliminate carelessness, stupidity or apathy entirely.
The Electronic voting system absolutely needs to have an audit trail. I've said as much in the past. I'd personally like to see two levels of voting: One at the screen (where the voter verifies all his votes before printing out a ballot receipt) and a second where the receipt is ALSO verified by the voter as being accurate and then dropped in a ballot receipt box. That way, random audits could verify the accuracy of the machines as well as provide detailed re-counts on close elections.
You can't count a double vote for Gore and Buchanan as a vote for Gore. The intent of the voter is UNKNOWN.I find it interesting and very telling that you supply no support material to this claim. It also defies logic in that those machines would have to have been approved by a democratic election committee. Are you suggesting that the Democrats in Democratic districts PURPOSELY programmed machines that would HURT the democratic candidate?
I think we need to face some facts.
Some people just will NOT vote correctly. They will NOT follow instructions. They just won't.
While a paper trail is absolutely necessary to see WHERE the problem lies, it certainly doesn't address that some people are either careless, lazy or just plain dumb.
cost
End of Life replacements
disposal of dead/damaged cells (which contain toxic materials)
I've read a number of reports which suggest the usage of non-productive land (i.e. desert). The moment something like that is even a remote possibility of being realized, the greens/environmentalists hop up to protect the desert hare or cactus beatle or something.
IMHO, the cost and effiency of solar is such that it's not worth the fight. Maybe in 10-50 years...
Then there's land use... The amount of land necessary to produce around one megawatt, iirc is like 4 or 5 acres. That could be a pretty significant envornmental impact -- as in killing off fields for miles around (no sun for plants, no plants for insects, no insects for birds, etc) just to power a small suburb.
How about suggesting a solution? How about nuclear? Potential hazzard. Wind? Kill birds. Oceanic Turbines? Kill fish. Oil? Pollute. Solar? Far too inefficent and produces too many toxins.
How about this: We use ALL the above solutions so that we (A) don't keep all our eggs in one basket) (B) buy us time to increase solar/wind efficency. Who knows... maybe we'll devolop "energy farms" where we "grow" energy producing plants (chemical energy, say).
increase cost
decrease efficiency
increase need for maintainance (more cost)
What animal (man included) doesn't effect his environment when acting within it's nature? That's a valid question. A few birds be damned -- lets look at the bigger picture.
The answer is NOT to drop all our gizmo's and live in stone and thatch huts. At least if we don't want to see 3+ billion people die off of starvation and exposure.