More likely Microsoft is looking forward to cloud-everything, and local mail clients are not part of that dream. Data collection is somewhat more difficult when you've got your own mail server.
Somewhat.
You could be very much right. Regardless of their purpose, the screw up that is MS Mail says to me that it, and by extension, Windows, is not that important to Microsoft. But I could be wrong - nothing new there.
That Windows 10 Mail is so disappointing is more evidence Microsoft is putting Windows on the back burner, while it chases the cloud.
Windows ME, Vista, Version 8 - Microsoft has been having problems here and there with Windows for some time. In 2015, Nadella combined their hardware efforts with the Windows Universal Platform, allowing for cross platform applications [1].
Things didn't go as hoped. While Windows 10 is popular, overtaking Win 7 by February 2018, overall PC sales has been declining. In fact, they have been losing ground for the last 6 years, with a 2.8% drop in 2017 [2].
Consumer Reports stopped recommending the entire line of Surface PCs in 2017 due to hardware concerns. These days CR rates the Surface Pro 4 positively, but they still claim Microsoft is less reliable than most brands, and Apple is the most reliable laptop brand [3]. BTW, if you're interested, Windows can be installed on a Mac with OS X's dual booting Boot Camp. Best of both worlds.
Now, Terry Myerson, the leader of the Windows and Devices Group, is leaving Microsoft. With his departure, Microsoft is creating 2 new teams that will prioritize Microsoft's cloud and artificial intelligence products. Perhaps this is an effort to appease investors [4]. With Myerson's departure and this re-prioritization, it's no surprise Windows applications like Mail are having problems. I expect more trouble across the Windows spectrum. Microsoft's head is in the clouds, and their application platform is in the sunset, rear window.
I'm looking at documents right now that specifically say state law requires disclosure of confidential medical information or records to certain people upon demand. Law enforcement is included in the term 'certain people'.
There is a lot more. Considering this and my limited abilities, perhaps an attorney is the way to go.
Under HIPAA, this generally requires a warrant or specific exigent circumstances. "Open line to data" is illegal.
I am outraged at this as much as I am awestruck by these practices. If I'm reading this wrong, and this line to hospital records is illegal, someone please let me know. I am pro-privacy, in spite of the times we live in. None the less, this is how I read the law:
Under HIPAA, medical information can be disclosed without an individual's permission to "any government official at any level of government authorized to either investigate or prosecute a violation of the law." This applies to doctors, health plans, pharmacies, health care clearinghouses, medical research labs, hospitals and other health facilities.
HIPAA requires no court involvement, as long as there is a written statement of relevancy.
But HIPAA does not preempt state law when it comes to privacy. For example, California requires court approval, but that can be had with a search warrant, showing of probable cause, a showing of cause, or even just an administrative subpoena. [1]
No court authorization is required in my state. When coming under the care of my city's hospital, you sign a notice of privacy practices that includes law enforcement access to medical records.
HIPAA like most laws is around to be wield like whip towards the peons. Monied interests like Feciesbook have little to worry about.
You are so right, it's scary.
In my city, the cops have a one way data flow from the hospital's computers. The idea that it is of some benefit, some 'special care or treatment' for the patient is absurd. And it's more than just data mining to match patients with crimes.
It involves identity processing and crime prevention via predictive analytics, doing things like estimating emergent crime trends and matching them with pools of potential suspects. Hospital records aren't the only thing they vacuum up, it's far more intrusive and invasive. They got all of city hall's stuff for starters.
Knew the guy who developed this crime prediction software. Really impressive. He said the cops could use it to do things like run potential perpetrators out of town. But it's the other things they can do with such a tool that worry me.
What can be done to society and the individual with big data is Kafkaesque.
They get a search warrant. Their system shows that there's a few million test tubes storing DNA samples. That's more than the budget for all the police departments in the US.
The issue addressed wasn't how expensive it is to properly analyze DNA, but whether companies like 23andMe and Ancestry will turn over your DNA to the government. Yes, they will and have.
They obtain the SNP values... They use an archaeology DNA lab to sequence the crime scene sample because improper storage means it has broken down.... DNA lasts upwards of a million years and there's a lot of cross-contamination...
They're not methodical, they use DNA to try and rig conviction rates...
Your average American would prefer fake trials to paying for a decent service.
'Criminal Justice' is a double entendre. For some reason, this brings to mind the Nietzschean allegory about a murder. The sheriff discovered the blacksmith did it. The village had only one blacksmith, though, so they convicted one of the bakers instead.
Do you **REALLY** think these companies are going to put up a legal fight for you when your DNA is requested by the government?
A.C.#2
They don't have to. The multiple layers of anonymizing means nobody can provide anything useful. Besides which, there's nothing in there the government can use.
Paranoia is a psychiatric disorders, not a political stance.
If you cared to Google it, you would find that,
with a search warrant, law enforcement can obtain genetic information and material from places like 23andMe and Ancestry. In fact, the link below confirms they already have at least once.
You can use a pseudonym. Maybe it and the corporate anonymity maze will be enough to slip through the sophisticated clutches of the Law's big data algorithms. GLWT.
Depends. Offensive how? I once skyped, 'Now that Steve Job is dead, where will Microsoft get their killer ideas? Xerox PARC?' Had problems with them ever since.
"The fact that power is concentrated among so few companies has made it possible to weaponize the web at scale."
This, coming from Tim Berners-Lee, who, against the principle of an open web, signed off on a DRMed HTML5, which puts control of the users' browsers the hands of media companies and content owners, distributors, and inevitably, governments and other hackers [1]. Talk about weaponizing the web.
But I digress.
Right now, the home office of Cambridge Analytica is being scoured by authorities in London, ostensibly looking for criminal activity, but actually they are trying to find out how CA did it. This sort of weapon they can use.
Social control through social media is a door of opportunity opening wide.
If you're wondering where the big buck computer jobs will be, look no further.
It won't just be politicians hiring either.
Advertisers make big bucks for target marketing right now, and this takes it to a whole new level.
The prospects look great, unless you're concerned with niggling things like privacy.
In that case, remember the immortal words of Sun cofounder and CEO Scott McNealy, "You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it."
Microsoft and the Party Pooper Proprietary just want a Mulligan: no court, no fine - just let them off, and they'll not get caught next time.
If they really wanted "a more balanced approach", they would give a Mulligan to anyone caught using their code. And just to be fair and balanced, they would need to make all of their code available for everyone's perusal. Yeah, right. That's going to happen.
The term 'replication crisis' has been around since 2010, when more and more scientists found they could not reproduce the results of experiments of others [1].
In 2016, The Journal Nature published a story by Monya Baker, where more than 70% of 1,576 researchers tried and failed to reproduce other scientist's experiments [2].
Even worse, many did claim to have reproduced the Pons and Fleischmann Cold Fusion experiment shortly after their press release in 1989 [3]. So many in fact, Nathan Lewis of Cal Tech quipped "Cold fusion has been verified by no university without a good football team" [4].
The problem has been around for decades. I'm thinking there might be reasons, like patents, contracts, grants, money, and prestige. It could be that science, or at least a bunch of scientists, ain't what they're cracked up to be. Or maybe football appendages and their cozens just aren't that important.
I'm not familiar with Will Boisvert, but will take note that he thinks we will survive the coming climate apocalypse.
Steven Pinker I am somewhat familiar with. He is an intellectual not to be taken lightly. He points out the innovations of science and ideas that the Enlightenment spawned have progressively given us longer, better lives in less hostile environments. I have to admit that even I get giddy at the thought that technology can save us from the upcoming ravages.
I have my doubts about Pinker's beliefs that controlling the negative human traits won't have adverse consequences, and that the current socioeconomic stratification is a good thing. I recall a neoliberal teacher saying it's OK for the rich to torture the poor. Economics and its discontents.
These days, the effect of politics and capitalism on science can be perverse.
Even if it is scientifically indisputable that carbon buildup in the atmosphere is affecting the climate, belief in climate change has become a sociopolitical marker. It can be used as an indicator for other things, like one's stance on abortion, who to vote for, what shows to watch and which news sources to (and not to) believe.
Denying climate change has become an entrenched bias of a branch of the social construction of knowledge I call the 'Nunes Sphere', named after the House Intelligence Committee's chairman, Devin Nunes.
Philip Mirowski says that the very effective campaign publicly denying climate change is the work of vested interests blowing smoke. As long as there is doubt, they can continue making money off their carbon emitting products, while at the same time work on a variety of climate change solutions, far away from public scrutiny.
Some of their solutions to the atmospheric carbon buildup have problems of their own. Obviously, seeding the atmosphere with the cost effective sulfuric acid can be detrimental. Using the skin abrasive neurotoxin aluminum oxide, or the radioactive thorium oxide could have a negative impact as well. I suppose after taxpayer dollars fund various climate change fixes, they will have to fund solutions caused by those fixes, and then fund the fix for those fixes, and so forth and so on.
I'm becoming anxious at the thought of what technology might do to 'save' us.
Using the same methodology as truffle-sniffing pigs.
Truffle-sniffing pigs issue search warrants to Google for user data in an effort to target criminals? I had no idea.
I must say, I've always been impressed with Anonymous Coward. An odd fellow, yes, but a real eclectic pedagogue, with eccentric wit and extraordinary vision. If I didn't know any better, I would say a good bit of A.C.'s invaluable post is froth with subterfuge. But what could possibly be the point?
A better question is how someone can mess up a paper ballot. Really, even North Korea has a better paper ballot system than the fragmented system all over the US.
The United States is adjacent to a country that does things correctly - voters receive a paper ballot, they mark the entry on the paper, and drop it into the box. Of all the ballots cast, none of them were spoiled, rejected, had hanging chads, or had any other funny business. Plus there were scrutineers from the major parties making sure that there's no funny business going on either.
The only election that used a machine was the local election, and it's purpose was only to scan the ballot as they were completed.
It is baffling how we can mess up paper ballots so badly. I didn't know about North Korea, that surprises me. But Canada, yes, it does have a far better paper ballot system than anything in the US. I still think we should "Blockchain the vote", but you are right.
Now, tell us how this is supposed to be better than a paper ballot.... idiots
I'll tell you, Chad. First, paper ballots can have questionable disputes as to whether they were filled out correctly, have "hanging chads" and other controversial issues. Are you old enough to remember the Gore-Bush Florida fiasco?
Blockchaining anonymized ballots, then making them publicly available for everyone to count, validate, etc. should stop officials destroying ballots before a recount, as in the primary involving Debbie Wasserman Schultz in 2017.
BTW, Even digital ballots can be destroyed, as they were in the special election for the seat Jeff Session vacated.
Finally, restricted ballot access, paper or digital, may hide other things potentially more devastating to the electoral process. Did state so-in-so lie when they said that although the Russians did break in, they didn't compromise their election? And Whether or not the Russians (or whoever) compromised the Presidential election this last time, have there been even more egregious problems in the past? What could all this portend for the future?
We should follow Sierra Leone's lead, "Blockchain the vote", and draw open the curtain on a supposedly fair and free, but definitely a suspiciously concealed electoral process.
Is it possible that our exploration of space could inadvertently be leaving a trail of life
That's why NASA has gone to great lengths to sterilize spacecraft headed to places like Mars. There's even a planetary protection officer.
I've heard the US signed an international treaty to that effect. Alcohol sterilization, course correction to avoid the rocket's third stage hitting Mars, and spacecraft are not allowed to carry more than 300,000 bacterial spores. I'm sure NASA is doing a fine job, but they ain't the only ones sending stuff to space.
The microbes on the surface of the ISS may or may not come from the atmosphere, but that they stay alive while in space suggests that life could 'go forth and multiply' by those not as concerned about sterilizing as is NASA. Here, there are plenty of candidates. Venture capitalists are launching hundreds of satellites now. Elon Musk launched a potentially un-sterilized car into space the other day, and promises Martian colonies with people, food and microbial-laden poop. China, Japan and India are talking space tourism; still others plan on mining asteroids. At some point in the future that international treaty will be a thing of the past. And life will go on.
Getting some of Earth's microbes living on Enceladus would be exciting, but not surprising.
Wow! Invasive species . . . Solar System Enterprise Edition!
Yes, we should definitely take a few test tubes of some Earth microbes when we go there, and plant them. Then we can return in a few thousand years, and see how they are doing . . .
. . . or . . . maybe they will have evolved in that time, and they will come looking to see how we are doing . . . and how we taste.
Maybe something sent there by us will have some unintentional "stowaways" . . . microbes picked up in the Earth atmosphere and sticking to the outside of the spacecraft . . . and we will get the same effect.
Point taken. The scientists' think life is possible there - they are not intentionally sending life there. I was off.
The bit of the story that said, "This mixing of hot and cold material... might support life," allowed my mind to wander, and wonder: if life ain't already there, we might be the ones bringing life to suitable extraterrestrial habitats like Encleadus. And yes, it might be done by means of, as you say, "unintentional stowaways".
...Earthworms can grow in simulated Martian soil...
Unless the medium contains simulated organic material, no; no, they can't (fauna - including earthworms - require more than water, minerals and energy).
Believe it or not, I actually read the article, particularly this part:
Democrats face a tougher task in the House, where Republicans have a 238-193 majority. President Trump could veto the resolution if it passes both chambers.
It's DOA and they know it. It may not even make it past the Senate..
Showing where each representative stands on Net Neutrality just before midterms sounds like a tactical maneuver.
Getting some of Earth's microbes living on Enceladus would be exciting, but not surprising. Earthworms can grow in simulated Martian soil, and 4.5 billion years old meteorites have been found that have the building blocks of life. All this suggests life is at least possible elsewhere in the solar system.
What is really surprising is bacteria has been found growing in space, on the outside of the International Space Station. Is it possible that our exploration of space could inadvertently be leaving a trail of life in its entirety, or at least highly developed constituent parts? If it doesn't yet exist, Earth might become the origin of extraterrestrial life.
Never manually wound.... but has stopped working many times.
It runs off of temperature variations that drive an air cylinder to move, lifting the weights. If there isn't enough energy from these fluctuations, they just let it stop.
So a nice stunt. But not a terribly remarkable clock otherwise.
Actually, my stunt is trying to insert pithy idioms about time into the conversation, like 'time will tell', or 'from time to time'.
Although the 'Clock_of_the_Long_Now' is designed to be accurate for at least 10,000 years, it is also designed to be up-gradable, and will need continued care and maintenance. This is why I expect it will stop from time to time, much like the Beverly Clock. BTW, when not hand-wound, the 'Long Now', like the Beverly Clock, will run off of temperature variations, and thus be subject to similar problems. Shouldn't be an issue on Mt. Washington, but you never know.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_of_the_Long_Now
Don't get me wrong, this is one of the most admirable things I've ever heard coming from Jeff Bezos, right up there with Blue Origin. He would be the greatest person of all time if he could beat the clock and solve the Anthropocene problem (the 6th Extinction) before our time's up. Frankly, if this big time problem is not dealt with, he's just killing time.
Don't know if it will last 10,000 years, but there is the famous Beverly Clock, that has never been manually wound since it was made in 1864. That's only 154 years, so maybe time will tell.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverly_Clock
You are right - It depends on how bent they've made reality. Aliens are famous for their Sadomasochistic, 50 shades of sexual experiments, but the #MeToo Movement has made dating so complicated these days.
Slashdot Mirror
More likely Microsoft is looking forward to cloud-everything, and local mail clients are not part of that dream. Data collection is somewhat more difficult when you've got your own mail server.
Somewhat.
You could be very much right. Regardless of their purpose, the screw up that is MS Mail says to me that it, and by extension, Windows, is not that important to Microsoft. But I could be wrong - nothing new there.
Windows ME, Vista, Version 8 - Microsoft has been having problems here and there with Windows for some time. In 2015, Nadella combined their hardware efforts with the Windows Universal Platform, allowing for cross platform applications [1]. Things didn't go as hoped. While Windows 10 is popular, overtaking Win 7 by February 2018, overall PC sales has been declining. In fact, they have been losing ground for the last 6 years, with a 2.8% drop in 2017 [2].
Consumer Reports stopped recommending the entire line of Surface PCs in 2017 due to hardware concerns. These days CR rates the Surface Pro 4 positively, but they still claim Microsoft is less reliable than most brands, and Apple is the most reliable laptop brand [3]. BTW, if you're interested, Windows can be installed on a Mac with OS X's dual booting Boot Camp. Best of both worlds.
Now, Terry Myerson, the leader of the Windows and Devices Group, is leaving Microsoft. With his departure, Microsoft is creating 2 new teams that will prioritize Microsoft's cloud and artificial intelligence products. Perhaps this is an effort to appease investors [4]. With Myerson's departure and this re-prioritization, it's no surprise Windows applications like Mail are having problems. I expect more trouble across the Windows spectrum. Microsoft's head is in the clouds, and their application platform is in the sunset, rear window.
[1] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-microsoft-ceo-satya-nadella-182823659.html
[2] https://www.zdnet.com/article/windows-10-vs-windows-7-has-microsofts-newest-os-just-reached-a-turning-point/
https://www.arnnet.com.au/article/632157/2017-saw-pc-shipments-decline-six-years-straight/
[3] {May be Paywalled} https://www.consumerreports.org/products/laptop/microsoft-surface-pro-4-384902/overview/
[4] http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/29/news/companies/microsoft-restructuring-windows/index.html
There is a lot more. Considering this and my limited abilities, perhaps an attorney is the way to go.
Under HIPAA, this generally requires a warrant or specific exigent circumstances. "Open line to data" is illegal.
I am outraged at this as much as I am awestruck by these practices. If I'm reading this wrong, and this line to hospital records is illegal, someone please let me know. I am pro-privacy, in spite of the times we live in. None the less, this is how I read the law:
Under HIPAA, medical information can be disclosed without an individual's permission to "any government official at any level of government authorized to either investigate or prosecute a violation of the law." This applies to doctors, health plans, pharmacies, health care clearinghouses, medical research labs, hospitals and other health facilities. HIPAA requires no court involvement, as long as there is a written statement of relevancy. But HIPAA does not preempt state law when it comes to privacy. For example, California requires court approval, but that can be had with a search warrant, showing of probable cause, a showing of cause, or even just an administrative subpoena. [1]
No court authorization is required in my state. When coming under the care of my city's hospital, you sign a notice of privacy practices that includes law enforcement access to medical records.
[1] https://www.eff.org/issues/law-enforcement-access
HIPAA like most laws is around to be wield like whip towards the peons. Monied interests like Feciesbook have little to worry about.
You are so right, it's scary.
In my city, the cops have a one way data flow from the hospital's computers. The idea that it is of some benefit, some 'special care or treatment' for the patient is absurd. And it's more than just data mining to match patients with crimes. It involves identity processing and crime prevention via predictive analytics, doing things like estimating emergent crime trends and matching them with pools of potential suspects. Hospital records aren't the only thing they vacuum up, it's far more intrusive and invasive. They got all of city hall's stuff for starters.
Knew the guy who developed this crime prediction software. Really impressive. He said the cops could use it to do things like run potential perpetrators out of town. But it's the other things they can do with such a tool that worry me.
What can be done to society and the individual with big data is Kafkaesque.
They get a search warrant. Their system shows that there's a few million test tubes storing DNA samples. That's more than the budget for all the police departments in the US.
The issue addressed wasn't how expensive it is to properly analyze DNA, but whether companies like 23andMe and Ancestry will turn over your DNA to the government. Yes, they will and have.
They obtain the SNP values... They use an archaeology DNA lab to sequence the crime scene sample because improper storage means it has broken down.... DNA lasts upwards of a million years and there's a lot of cross-contamination... They're not methodical, they use DNA to try and rig conviction rates...
Archaeology, archaeogenetics, what do I know? I'm not going to put forensics on trial. PBS's Nova already did that: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/forensics-on-trial.html
Your average American would prefer fake trials to paying for a decent service.
'Criminal Justice' is a double entendre. For some reason, this brings to mind the Nietzschean allegory about a murder. The sheriff discovered the blacksmith did it. The village had only one blacksmith, though, so they convicted one of the bakers instead.
Do you **REALLY** think these companies are going to put up a legal fight for you when your DNA is requested by the government?
A.C.#2
They don't have to. The multiple layers of anonymizing means nobody can provide anything useful. Besides which, there's nothing in there the government can use. Paranoia is a psychiatric disorders, not a political stance.
If you cared to Google it, you would find that, with a search warrant, law enforcement can obtain genetic information and material from places like 23andMe and Ancestry. In fact, the link below confirms they already have at least once. You can use a pseudonym. Maybe it and the corporate anonymity maze will be enough to slip through the sophisticated clutches of the Law's big data algorithms. GLWT.
https://www.ajc.com/news/national/can-police-legally-obtain-your-dna-from-23andme-ancestry/8eZ24WN7VisoQiHAFbcmjP/
BTW, Paranoia is a political stance. It's so obvious, you don't really need a link, but even so:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/20...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35382599
Really, who uses offensive language on Skype?
Depends. Offensive how? I once skyped, 'Now that Steve Job is dead, where will Microsoft get their killer ideas? Xerox PARC?' Had problems with them ever since.
This, coming from Tim Berners-Lee, who, against the principle of an open web, signed off on a DRMed HTML5, which puts control of the users' browsers the hands of media companies and content owners, distributors, and inevitably, governments and other hackers [1]. Talk about weaponizing the web.
But I digress.
Right now, the home office of Cambridge Analytica is being scoured by authorities in London, ostensibly looking for criminal activity, but actually they are trying to find out how CA did it. This sort of weapon they can use.
Social control through social media is a door of opportunity opening wide. If you're wondering where the big buck computer jobs will be, look no further. It won't just be politicians hiring either. Advertisers make big bucks for target marketing right now, and this takes it to a whole new level. The prospects look great, unless you're concerned with niggling things like privacy. In that case, remember the immortal words of Sun cofounder and CEO Scott McNealy, "You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it."
[1] https://www.theregister.co.uk/...
If they really wanted "a more balanced approach", they would give a Mulligan to anyone caught using their code. And just to be fair and balanced, they would need to make all of their code available for everyone's perusal. Yeah, right. That's going to happen.
In 2016, The Journal Nature published a story by Monya Baker, where more than 70% of 1,576 researchers tried and failed to reproduce other scientist's experiments [2].
Even worse, many did claim to have reproduced the Pons and Fleischmann Cold Fusion experiment shortly after their press release in 1989 [3]. So many in fact, Nathan Lewis of Cal Tech quipped "Cold fusion has been verified by no university without a good football team" [4].
The problem has been around for decades. I'm thinking there might be reasons, like patents, contracts, grants, money, and prestige. It could be that science, or at least a bunch of scientists, ain't what they're cracked up to be. Or maybe football appendages and their cozens just aren't that important.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
[2]https://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-reproducibility-1.19970
[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleischmann%E2%80%93Pons_experiment
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/scientists-fleischmann-and-pons-cold-fusion-or-cold-illusion-25-years-later.10260/
Steven Pinker I am somewhat familiar with. He is an intellectual not to be taken lightly. He points out the innovations of science and ideas that the Enlightenment spawned have progressively given us longer, better lives in less hostile environments. I have to admit that even I get giddy at the thought that technology can save us from the upcoming ravages.
I have my doubts about Pinker's beliefs that controlling the negative human traits won't have adverse consequences, and that the current socioeconomic stratification is a good thing. I recall a neoliberal teacher saying it's OK for the rich to torture the poor. Economics and its discontents.
These days, the effect of politics and capitalism on science can be perverse.
Even if it is scientifically indisputable that carbon buildup in the atmosphere is affecting the climate, belief in climate change has become a sociopolitical marker. It can be used as an indicator for other things, like one's stance on abortion, who to vote for, what shows to watch and which news sources to (and not to) believe. Denying climate change has become an entrenched bias of a branch of the social construction of knowledge I call the 'Nunes Sphere', named after the House Intelligence Committee's chairman, Devin Nunes.
Philip Mirowski says that the very effective campaign publicly denying climate change is the work of vested interests blowing smoke. As long as there is doubt, they can continue making money off their carbon emitting products, while at the same time work on a variety of climate change solutions, far away from public scrutiny.
Some of their solutions to the atmospheric carbon buildup have problems of their own. Obviously, seeding the atmosphere with the cost effective sulfuric acid can be detrimental. Using the skin abrasive neurotoxin aluminum oxide, or the radioactive thorium oxide could have a negative impact as well. I suppose after taxpayer dollars fund various climate change fixes, they will have to fund solutions caused by those fixes, and then fund the fix for those fixes, and so forth and so on.
I'm becoming anxious at the thought of what technology might do to 'save' us.
Using the same methodology as truffle-sniffing pigs.
Truffle-sniffing pigs issue search warrants to Google for user data in an effort to target criminals? I had no idea.
I must say, I've always been impressed with Anonymous Coward. An odd fellow, yes, but a real eclectic pedagogue, with eccentric wit and extraordinary vision. If I didn't know any better, I would say a good bit of A.C.'s invaluable post is froth with subterfuge. But what could possibly be the point?
A better question is how someone can mess up a paper ballot. Really, even North Korea has a better paper ballot system than the fragmented system all over the US.
The United States is adjacent to a country that does things correctly - voters receive a paper ballot, they mark the entry on the paper, and drop it into the box. Of all the ballots cast, none of them were spoiled, rejected, had hanging chads, or had any other funny business. Plus there were scrutineers from the major parties making sure that there's no funny business going on either.
The only election that used a machine was the local election, and it's purpose was only to scan the ballot as they were completed.
It is baffling how we can mess up paper ballots so badly. I didn't know about North Korea, that surprises me. But Canada, yes, it does have a far better paper ballot system than anything in the US. I still think we should "Blockchain the vote", but you are right.
Now, tell us how this is supposed to be better than a paper ballot.... idiots
I'll tell you, Chad. First, paper ballots can have questionable disputes as to whether they were filled out correctly, have "hanging chads" and other controversial issues. Are you old enough to remember the Gore-Bush Florida fiasco?
Blockchaining anonymized ballots, then making them publicly available for everyone to count, validate, etc. should stop officials destroying ballots before a recount, as in the primary involving Debbie Wasserman Schultz in 2017. BTW, Even digital ballots can be destroyed, as they were in the special election for the seat Jeff Session vacated.
Finally, restricted ballot access, paper or digital, may hide other things potentially more devastating to the electoral process. Did state so-in-so lie when they said that although the Russians did break in, they didn't compromise their election? And Whether or not the Russians (or whoever) compromised the Presidential election this last time, have there been even more egregious problems in the past? What could all this portend for the future?
We should follow Sierra Leone's lead, "Blockchain the vote", and draw open the curtain on a supposedly fair and free, but definitely a suspiciously concealed electoral process.
https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2008/01/17/the-legacy-of-hanging-chads
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_United_States_presidential_election_recount_in_Florida
https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2017/12/15/experts-browards-elections-chief-broke-law-in-destroying-ballots-150258
https://gizmodo.com/alabama-supreme-court-okays-destruction-of-digital-voti-1821223685
"There's class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that's making war, and we're winning." Warren Buffett
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo
Oh, yeah. That's right
https://consumerist.com/2011/06/10/9-confessions-of-a-former-geek-squad-geek/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geek_Squad#Controversy
https://geek-squad.pissedconsumer.com/review.html
https://www.bbb.org/washington-dc-eastern-pa/business-reviews/computer-repair/geek-squad-in-quakertown-pa-160210889/reviews-and-complaints
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/retail/best_buy_geek_squad.html
Is it possible that our exploration of space could inadvertently be leaving a trail of life
That's why NASA has gone to great lengths to sterilize spacecraft headed to places like Mars. There's even a planetary protection officer.
I've heard the US signed an international treaty to that effect. Alcohol sterilization, course correction to avoid the rocket's third stage hitting Mars, and spacecraft are not allowed to carry more than 300,000 bacterial spores. I'm sure NASA is doing a fine job, but they ain't the only ones sending stuff to space.
The microbes on the surface of the ISS may or may not come from the atmosphere, but that they stay alive while in space suggests that life could 'go forth and multiply' by those not as concerned about sterilizing as is NASA. Here, there are plenty of candidates. Venture capitalists are launching hundreds of satellites now. Elon Musk launched a potentially un-sterilized car into space the other day, and promises Martian colonies with people, food and microbial-laden poop. China, Japan and India are talking space tourism; still others plan on mining asteroids. At some point in the future that international treaty will be a thing of the past. And life will go on.
https://mars.nasa.gov/mer/technology/is_planetary_protection.html
https://www.salon.com/2018/02/12/why-sending-a-tesla-into-orbit-is-a-slap-in-the-face-to-science/
http://www.businessinsider.com/starman-elon-musk-car-orbit-collision-risk-calculations-2018-2
Getting some of Earth's microbes living on Enceladus would be exciting, but not surprising.
Wow! Invasive species . . . Solar System Enterprise Edition!
Yes, we should definitely take a few test tubes of some Earth microbes when we go there, and plant them. Then we can return in a few thousand years, and see how they are doing . . .
. . . or . . . maybe they will have evolved in that time, and they will come looking to see how we are doing . . . and how we taste.
Maybe something sent there by us will have some unintentional "stowaways" . . . microbes picked up in the Earth atmosphere and sticking to the outside of the spacecraft . . . and we will get the same effect.
Point taken. The scientists' think life is possible there - they are not intentionally sending life there. I was off. The bit of the story that said, "This mixing of hot and cold material... might support life," allowed my mind to wander, and wonder: if life ain't already there, we might be the ones bringing life to suitable extraterrestrial habitats like Encleadus. And yes, it might be done by means of, as you say, "unintentional stowaways".
...Earthworms can grow in simulated Martian soil...
Unless the medium contains simulated organic material, no; no, they can't (fauna - including earthworms - require more than water, minerals and energy).
You are right - Wieger Wamelink adds pig manure. The experiment slightly raises the chance of life already existing on Mars, and the greater possibility of colony sustainability. The point being that, either way, life is possible there. https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/888415/life-on-mars-nasa-space-red-planet-humans-to-mars-elon-musk-earthworm
Believe it or not, I actually read the article, particularly this part:
Democrats face a tougher task in the House, where Republicans have a 238-193 majority. President Trump could veto the resolution if it passes both chambers.
It's DOA and they know it. It may not even make it past the Senate..
Showing where each representative stands on Net Neutrality just before midterms sounds like a tactical maneuver.
What is really surprising is bacteria has been found growing in space, on the outside of the International Space Station. Is it possible that our exploration of space could inadvertently be leaving a trail of life in its entirety, or at least highly developed constituent parts? If it doesn't yet exist, Earth might become the origin of extraterrestrial life.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/11/mars-soil-earthworm-agriculture-science-spd/
http://www.iflscience.com/space/cosmonauts-find-live-bacteria-on-the-hull-of-the-iss/
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/12/1219_TVsugarmeteors.html
Never manually wound.... but has stopped working many times.
It runs off of temperature variations that drive an air cylinder to move, lifting the weights. If there isn't enough energy from these fluctuations, they just let it stop.
So a nice stunt. But not a terribly remarkable clock otherwise.
Actually, my stunt is trying to insert pithy idioms about time into the conversation, like 'time will tell', or 'from time to time'.
Although the 'Clock_of_the_Long_Now' is designed to be accurate for at least 10,000 years, it is also designed to be up-gradable, and will need continued care and maintenance. This is why I expect it will stop from time to time, much like the Beverly Clock. BTW, when not hand-wound, the 'Long Now', like the Beverly Clock, will run off of temperature variations, and thus be subject to similar problems. Shouldn't be an issue on Mt. Washington, but you never know. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clock_of_the_Long_Now
Don't get me wrong, this is one of the most admirable things I've ever heard coming from Jeff Bezos, right up there with Blue Origin. He would be the greatest person of all time if he could beat the clock and solve the Anthropocene problem (the 6th Extinction) before our time's up. Frankly, if this big time problem is not dealt with, he's just killing time.
Don't know if it will last 10,000 years, but there is the famous Beverly Clock, that has never been manually wound since it was made in 1864. That's only 154 years, so maybe time will tell. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverly_Clock
You are right - It depends on how bent they've made reality. Aliens are famous for their Sadomasochistic, 50 shades of sexual experiments, but the #MeToo Movement has made dating so complicated these days.