Although I didn't agree with you 2 years ago, having read many articles and/. opinions, I have since changed my opinion on this topic. The fact that many of these procedures haven't shown an actual usefulness is a sign that they may be overkill. I'm not suggesting that no security is the answer but rather that careful planning of procedures is probably far more rewarding.
Do we need border control? I say yes. Do we need the ability to monitor data? I say yes. Do we need to keep tabs on everybody? I say no. Keep tabs on those that are suspect, that should be enough.
he other edge of the sword is that when police conveniently 'lose' their footage, it can now be proven otherwise, if it's kept secret, not so much.
Which is why the storage should be handled by a 3rd party with no direct ties to the police. There's plenty of private businesses that would be more than happy to offer these services.
The police already keeps it (obviously) so your privacy is already lost. I'd rather have it be open to the public what exactly is being stored than kept secret forever
What do we gain from doing that? All it does it provide an opportunity for poor interpretation which results in a need to explain which equals more paperwork which equals more tax dollars wasted. The fact is that if a complaint arises you can obtain proof through the body cam. If there's no complaint there's no need to access anything. Let the tax dollars be used towards education instead which will reduce crime.
Contrary to the popular belief these days not all data needs to be made public. Make people accountable and that's usually more than enough. My boss doesn't have to monitor my whole day of work to know I'm working. He just needs results and that's how we should run our government. Assign people, make them accountable to the role and apply metrics to ensure efficiency is maintained or improved.
This is another case of people wanting to make police so accountable they are willing to compromise their own privacy and spend millions of dollars country wide doing it.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it enough to be able to get specific recordings on demand? I mean, if a cop kills someone the video of the incident is required, not the other 5 TB recorded that day.
This data should only need to be pulled out where abuse is suspected or complaints are made about an officer's behavior (because they know it can be proved via the body cam).
There's another user that responded with a similar opinion than mine. Touch screens are already known as bad typing inputs. Voice recognition is getting closer but it lacks the privacy which also translates into annoyance (Imagine 10 people in a restaurant voicing emails).
Hand writing is not only useful because it's not fully replaced with tech but it's also important for future generations to be able to recover from loss of technology. Imagine if we said the same thing about reading. Why should I learn to read, the computer can read to me.
This is my opinion: Reading > Hand Writing > Typing > Cursive
You're correct, they didn't. And the Wright brothers didn't invent planes either but they made it work. It's the same for Henry Ford. Do you really believe he was the first to think of it? At the end of the day it's irrelevant who first touched it. It's the ability to turn it into reality that matters. Apple made smart phones a reality for everybody, not just he geek in the IT office with a palm pilot.
The hardware has been available and/or in development since the early 1990's at least, and the software has been right with it
That would be like saying electric cars could be done 40 years ago. Maybe in concept but not in practicality. What would have been the point of having an electric car with a battery life of 10kms? Same goes for the eye tech.
I don't know where the "20 years" figure you quote comes from. The hardware is here. The software is here. The applications are available to anyone that can think of one.
"Within" is the key word in my 20 year statement. Yes and Yes for the tech but it needs to become main stream before we can call it a complete success. After all, if you recall the integration of UPnP (something much simpler than hololens), it only took about 10 years for most manufacturers to get it right. Virtualization is another domain that took time to become main stream. Today you wouldn't run a server without it.
So I think we both believe in the tech. We just have different opinions on how quickly it will be available.
Maybe the statement wasn't well written but considering how connected we continue to try and be it's pretty obvious we want to make tech work with the real world. Work for an engineering firm for a few months and you'll know what I mean. 3D printing is a prime example of us taking virtual "something" and making it real
Your statement about hololens is also very empty but then again I'm not the only one that things that since you got a great score of 0.
Maybe he used the wrong words. I understand what he meant because I've worked on both sides. In many organizations what the sales person sells versus what the customer needs is different. That is why is more specialized fields a sales person is accompanied with a technical expert. This is common because the technical person can break the gap between offerings and needs.
I'd say it's more important for kids today to type fast than it is to learn cursive.
writing with a pen/pencil is still part of our daily life, it's just not part of the life of students so it appears to be a waste. I use a pen many times over the course of a week. Engineers use pens and markers more than anybody else I've seen. There are plenty of places where being able to write is still important and I doubt technology is about to render it obsolete.
Learning what is today's standard is fine even if 5 years from now it won't be. It plants basic principles that will assist students in learning the newer things. JS language and structure allows you to quickly jump into C, C++, C# because the base is the same.
HTML in the 90's is still valid today. The basic concept remains with added enhancements in the form of CSS, JS, Flash...
The most important thing in school is to learn how to learn. They do this by forcing students to be creative and resourceful.
I think that within 20 years the Hololens concepts presented by MS will be reality (http://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-hololens/en-us).
Initially it won't be a fashion statement but as the tech gets better it will become a standard in society (who knows how long that could take). After all the ability to connect your virtual world with the real world has been the focus of technology for a long time.
I have the same reaction to music. When people come and address me I mute the music. I'll start working again and realize I'm not focused. I then unmute the music and everything goes to normal again.
A lot of it depends on your environment when you were growing up. If you always focused without music around there is a chance the music will have the adverse effect. Because my parents always listened to music I figure I must have gotten use to that.
There was two studies that I found interesting which I tried to find but with no luck: One was about how humans react to environments with no sound. The conclusion was that humans don't deal with lack of sound very well. Second was about the influence of music on learning and focus. There are many studies on this but I could not find the one I though was most relevant to my above comments.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe this is tailored specifically for the BIO industry which makes me wonder why the title speaks of atoms since it doesn't appear to be the main focus of the technology.
Obviously this is a big deal if it makes it more affordable and available for bio researcher. It's like saying that going from computers taking whole floors of a building to them fitting in the palm of you hand isn't advancement or a big deal. I realize my comparison isn't fitting but you get what I'm speaking of.
Yes, I agree. There are bits and pieces that are already happening but a fully emerged experience is still no here. We aren't far which is very satisfying. I know some will say you can't compete with the power of a workstation and they would be right. After all the engineers at my company get to work with i7 4770 with 16gb of ram, 500gb SSD and $2000 NVidia Quadro video cards. Yes, $2000!!!
So obviously there are many exceptions but when talking about non specialized requirements it makes perfect sense especially that the processing power will continue to increase.
I think you nailed it. It should probably be used as external storage but there is value in having the H/W be used. Right now the processing power is not comparable to an i5 4570 but most users don't need that kind of processing power and as it moves forward it will improve as well. At the end of the day being able to replace one device to upgrade your whole world is kinda of neat and less wasteful. Currently in my household there are 10 separate processing units used regularly (2 tablets, 4 phones and 4 pcs). We could cut that down to 5 and possibly make better use of our existing equipment such as sound system and televisions.
Virtualization is making all kind of H/W compatibility issues an issue of the past so I figure it's just a matter of time before we see a merger between PCs and mobile devices
What if you could just dock your smart device and it's now a workstation? To some extend the docking station could act as a feature/performance extension of a smaller device. It wouldn't ruin the flow and would allow you to carry your same configuration/environment everywhere. I know some will counter with "Why not use the cloud?" but the fact is that the cloud doesn't give you the nice smooth response of client side access and you never know if you will have a decent internet access where you go.
Keep in mind that I'm aware our smart devices are not there yet but 10 years from now it will be a lot closer. The future of having one device do it all is in view. Any company that refuses to get on board with this will possibly miss the boat the same way MS did with the smart phones.
It requires a lot of courage, and an equal amount of stupidity to insult an officer. It's like poking the bear with a stick.
I didn't need a law to know it's a bad idea to be disrespectful to an officer outside a courtroom. They already have enough power to cause you grief if you do.
I didn't suggest it was an ideal solution but it does solve the input issue. The fact that it isn't ideal makes it that it won't happen. Fact is the technology is not useless but it's miss placed. Time will sort this out.
I'm not one of those/. users that will trash Windows because I'm a Linux or Apple fanboy, if anything I'm much closer to being a MS fanboy than any other.
windows has much more robust and mature sudden failure disk recovery and consistency
The fact is that there's a lot more going on with the OS than says Linux. Half written registry keys can spell lots of trouble something Linux doesn't have to worry about.
As for disk recovery and consistency I'd like to get facts on that matter. Last I checked Linux is the preferred platform used in data centers as well as data devices.
Shutting down the computer even in the middle of writing is the least of your concerns when you are trying to hide information from the authorities or someone else. What you want is to avoid the system being left in a logged in state.
Last I checked you can also reconfigured what your power button does. You can have it so it shutdowns. In some BIOS you can set it so it turns off "AT PSU" style which is an instant power off.
Slashdot Mirror
Although I didn't agree with you 2 years ago, having read many articles and /. opinions, I have since changed my opinion on this topic. The fact that many of these procedures haven't shown an actual usefulness is a sign that they may be overkill. I'm not suggesting that no security is the answer but rather that careful planning of procedures is probably far more rewarding.
Do we need border control? I say yes.
Do we need the ability to monitor data? I say yes.
Do we need to keep tabs on everybody? I say no. Keep tabs on those that are suspect, that should be enough.
Correct. Using a hammer to put a screw in isn't it's intended purpose even it may appear to work.
I second that motion. PASSED!!!
he other edge of the sword is that when police conveniently 'lose' their footage, it can now be proven otherwise, if it's kept secret, not so much.
Which is why the storage should be handled by a 3rd party with no direct ties to the police. There's plenty of private businesses that would be more than happy to offer these services.
The police already keeps it (obviously) so your privacy is already lost. I'd rather have it be open to the public what exactly is being stored than kept secret forever
What do we gain from doing that? All it does it provide an opportunity for poor interpretation which results in a need to explain which equals more paperwork which equals more tax dollars wasted. The fact is that if a complaint arises you can obtain proof through the body cam. If there's no complaint there's no need to access anything. Let the tax dollars be used towards education instead which will reduce crime.
Contrary to the popular belief these days not all data needs to be made public. Make people accountable and that's usually more than enough. My boss doesn't have to monitor my whole day of work to know I'm working. He just needs results and that's how we should run our government. Assign people, make them accountable to the role and apply metrics to ensure efficiency is maintained or improved.
This is another case of people wanting to make police so accountable they are willing to compromise their own privacy and spend millions of dollars country wide doing it.
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it enough to be able to get specific recordings on demand? I mean, if a cop kills someone the video of the incident is required, not the other 5 TB recorded that day.
This data should only need to be pulled out where abuse is suspected or complaints are made about an officer's behavior (because they know it can be proved via the body cam).
There's another user that responded with a similar opinion than mine. Touch screens are already known as bad typing inputs. Voice recognition is getting closer but it lacks the privacy which also translates into annoyance (Imagine 10 people in a restaurant voicing emails).
Hand writing is not only useful because it's not fully replaced with tech but it's also important for future generations to be able to recover from loss of technology. Imagine if we said the same thing about reading. Why should I learn to read, the computer can read to me.
This is my opinion: Reading > Hand Writing > Typing > Cursive
Microsoft didn't invent this idea
You're correct, they didn't. And the Wright brothers didn't invent planes either but they made it work. It's the same for Henry Ford. Do you really believe he was the first to think of it?
At the end of the day it's irrelevant who first touched it. It's the ability to turn it into reality that matters. Apple made smart phones a reality for everybody, not just he geek in the IT office with a palm pilot.
The hardware has been available and/or in development since the early 1990's at least, and the software has been right with it
That would be like saying electric cars could be done 40 years ago. Maybe in concept but not in practicality. What would have been the point of having an electric car with a battery life of 10kms? Same goes for the eye tech.
I don't know where the "20 years" figure you quote comes from. The hardware is here. The software is here. The applications are available to anyone that can think of one.
"Within" is the key word in my 20 year statement. Yes and Yes for the tech but it needs to become main stream before we can call it a complete success. After all, if you recall the integration of UPnP (something much simpler than hololens), it only took about 10 years for most manufacturers to get it right. Virtualization is another domain that took time to become main stream. Today you wouldn't run a server without it.
So I think we both believe in the tech. We just have different opinions on how quickly it will be available.
Maybe the statement wasn't well written but considering how connected we continue to try and be it's pretty obvious we want to make tech work with the real world. Work for an engineering firm for a few months and you'll know what I mean. 3D printing is a prime example of us taking virtual "something" and making it real
Your statement about hololens is also very empty but then again I'm not the only one that things that since you got a great score of 0.
Maybe he used the wrong words. I understand what he meant because I've worked on both sides. In many organizations what the sales person sells versus what the customer needs is different. That is why is more specialized fields a sales person is accompanied with a technical expert. This is common because the technical person can break the gap between offerings and needs.
I'd say it's more important for kids today to type fast than it is to learn cursive.
writing with a pen/pencil is still part of our daily life, it's just not part of the life of students so it appears to be a waste. I use a pen many times over the course of a week. Engineers use pens and markers more than anybody else I've seen. There are plenty of places where being able to write is still important and I doubt technology is about to render it obsolete.
Skype is available on all platforms last I checked. Maybe that's what he meant by Skype.
Learning what is today's standard is fine even if 5 years from now it won't be. It plants basic principles that will assist students in learning the newer things. JS language and structure allows you to quickly jump into C, C++, C# because the base is the same.
HTML in the 90's is still valid today. The basic concept remains with added enhancements in the form of CSS, JS, Flash...
The most important thing in school is to learn how to learn. They do this by forcing students to be creative and resourceful.
I think that within 20 years the Hololens concepts presented by MS will be reality (http://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-hololens/en-us).
Initially it won't be a fashion statement but as the tech gets better it will become a standard in society (who knows how long that could take). After all the ability to connect your virtual world with the real world has been the focus of technology for a long time.
I have the same reaction to music. When people come and address me I mute the music. I'll start working again and realize I'm not focused. I then unmute the music and everything goes to normal again.
A lot of it depends on your environment when you were growing up. If you always focused without music around there is a chance the music will have the adverse effect. Because my parents always listened to music I figure I must have gotten use to that.
There was two studies that I found interesting which I tried to find but with no luck:
One was about how humans react to environments with no sound. The conclusion was that humans don't deal with lack of sound very well.
Second was about the influence of music on learning and focus. There are many studies on this but I could not find the one I though was most relevant to my above comments.
So did this make the news because another company finally made it?
LOL. Link saved.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe this is tailored specifically for the BIO industry which makes me wonder why the title speaks of atoms since it doesn't appear to be the main focus of the technology.
Obviously this is a big deal if it makes it more affordable and available for bio researcher. It's like saying that going from computers taking whole floors of a building to them fitting in the palm of you hand isn't advancement or a big deal. I realize my comparison isn't fitting but you get what I'm speaking of.
Yes, I agree. There are bits and pieces that are already happening but a fully emerged experience is still no here. We aren't far which is very satisfying. I know some will say you can't compete with the power of a workstation and they would be right. After all the engineers at my company get to work with i7 4770 with 16gb of ram, 500gb SSD and $2000 NVidia Quadro video cards. Yes, $2000!!!
So obviously there are many exceptions but when talking about non specialized requirements it makes perfect sense especially that the processing power will continue to increase.
I think you nailed it. It should probably be used as external storage but there is value in having the H/W be used. Right now the processing power is not comparable to an i5 4570 but most users don't need that kind of processing power and as it moves forward it will improve as well. At the end of the day being able to replace one device to upgrade your whole world is kinda of neat and less wasteful. Currently in my household there are 10 separate processing units used regularly (2 tablets, 4 phones and 4 pcs). We could cut that down to 5 and possibly make better use of our existing equipment such as sound system and televisions.
Virtualization is making all kind of H/W compatibility issues an issue of the past so I figure it's just a matter of time before we see a merger between PCs and mobile devices
What if you could just dock your smart device and it's now a workstation? To some extend the docking station could act as a feature/performance extension of a smaller device. It wouldn't ruin the flow and would allow you to carry your same configuration/environment everywhere. I know some will counter with "Why not use the cloud?" but the fact is that the cloud doesn't give you the nice smooth response of client side access and you never know if you will have a decent internet access where you go.
Keep in mind that I'm aware our smart devices are not there yet but 10 years from now it will be a lot closer. The future of having one device do it all is in view. Any company that refuses to get on board with this will possibly miss the boat the same way MS did with the smart phones.
It requires a lot of courage, and an equal amount of stupidity to insult an officer. It's like poking the bear with a stick.
I didn't need a law to know it's a bad idea to be disrespectful to an officer outside a courtroom. They already have enough power to cause you grief if you do.
I didn't suggest it was an ideal solution but it does solve the input issue. The fact that it isn't ideal makes it that it won't happen. Fact is the technology is not useless but it's miss placed. Time will sort this out.
I'm not one of those /. users that will trash Windows because I'm a Linux or Apple fanboy, if anything I'm much closer to being a MS fanboy than any other.
windows has much more robust and mature sudden failure disk recovery and consistency
The fact is that there's a lot more going on with the OS than says Linux. Half written registry keys can spell lots of trouble something Linux doesn't have to worry about.
As for disk recovery and consistency I'd like to get facts on that matter. Last I checked Linux is the preferred platform used in data centers as well as data devices.
Anytime you are writing you can corrupt data. Windows is easier to corrupt because it's bloated.
Shutting down the computer even in the middle of writing is the least of your concerns when you are trying to hide information from the authorities or someone else. What you want is to avoid the system being left in a logged in state.
Last I checked you can also reconfigured what your power button does. You can have it so it shutdowns. In some BIOS you can set it so it turns off "AT PSU" style which is an instant power off.