Here is an additional link to the same story at cnn.com .
Perhaps this is partially a bid to counteract the suit against them to make the penalty weaker the second time around in the ongoing lawsuit or to help quite some of the PR criticism over smart tags or the forced registration for XP products?
I suppose this is a good thing. Microsoft seems to be listening to some of the harsher criticism that has been circling about. It is cool that OEMs will be able to make the Windows desktop more user friendly for their customers. I am fairly sure MS is doing this because of the bad PR lately. Even a company as huge as MS responds when its customers start getting mad. Its nice to see that no corporation is so huge that it can ignore the complaints of its clients. Use this as an opportunity to let your opinion is heard, rather then saying, "I can't make a difference."
Yeppers. Linus has a trademark on the name Linux, and that why he's the guy that gets to say what goes in the kernel that almost all distributions use.
First, I found it interesting the 35% of American's apparently believe global warming has a connection to forest fires. The more likely explanation is underbrush. It seems to me that our logging regulations have become so tight, that we can't thin out forests, even when failure to do so contributes to forest fires directly. Lots of close trees = very fast spreading fire. Logging regulations even prohibit logging companies from harvesting the trees that have burnt down due to these fires. The trees are dead and the wood can be used, but the environmentalists say "No way."
What we know for sure is that the earth is one degree warmer now then it was last century. What we don't know is why or if it matters. Man probably had played a role, but I don't think to the degree that it has been alleged.
I believe we should all do something to help the environment. I try to avoid getting a bag for my purchases wherever possible. One of the big problems is the amount of trash. Burning the trash would help, but people don't want to do that either. Burning would reduce the trash volume alot, and the ash could be used. They would rather bury it then smell the smoke. And people are unwilling to throw less away. People are environmentalist when it is a convenience. People protest about environmental action in other places, but never do it themselves.
We should have a minimum standard for gas efficiency for cars. Say 15 miles per gallon. Anything less then that in a non-commercial vehicle is either not allowed or taxed. That would help. Again, people are unwilling to give up their high gas consuming vehicles because it effects them. Environmentalist 'till it gets personal.
The Kyoto treaty is too restrictive, and I am glad we abandoned it, even though everyone is screaming at us. First, the rules would have really hurt the American economy. Rules that have minimal effect on a county like Andorra for example would have a more significant impact on a country a couple thousand miles wide. It would have disproportionately effected our ability to compete. We can be environmentally friendly and compete too. The two are not mutually exclusive. That is why I support America's decision to find our own environmental solutions.
I think the Bush energy plan is sound. We need more power plants. We need more oil. Americans demand power. But they want only clean power. Solar is ok, but can't supply our needs. Gas is great, but the environmentalists won't let us dig up the earth to lay the pipe. Nuclear is clean, but everyone screams because of the waste, even though there are ways to reuse the waster, which seems to also not be ok.
I am for the environment in balance. We can use the natural resources we have AND respect the environment. We can dig for oil and respect wildlife. We can cut down trees and have forests. The environment is not the end-all, be-all cause. It must be respected as part of a balance of goals, not as an absolute ideology.
My question related to how the Kompany can make Linux an easier product to use. Attempts have been made to make the product more user friendly, but Linux is still a product that requires more effort to use then most people are willing to exert. To some extent, this is even promoted by the Linux community, some people of which take the attitude that if you can't figure it out you're just out of luck. Perhaps documentation/tutorials are the answer? How can we make the process of going to Linux easier, including ease of installing the Linux OS, helping users find programs that will be equivalent to those under windows, and the like? How can us end users of Linux be more responsive to people who express an interest in Linux without scaring them off?
I was in Port-au-Prince, Haiti for 32 days, and let me tell you, they are poorer then their neighbors, which is really sad. Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. Let me tell you, honestly, that the unless you are the poorest of the poor of America, you cannot understand the utter poverty of Haiti. A trailer home is a Godsend in comparison. 5 meals a weak, dirt roads, and until recently, a government so corrupt there was a large US and UN presence (thought there still is some presence, but not like there used to be). There is rich in Haiti, even by American standards, and it is really depressing when three blocks up the street you can see a multi-million dollar home, and three blocks down the street you can see a house that was *literally* built from stuff the owner found in the street.
To keep this post on topic, I believe that the use of solar power can be very useful to such people, who's power needs are very minimal. As someone pointed out, Solar is not the most efficient, but the need is so minimal it doesn't matter. It is reliable (sun up, power comes in) and I think it would go a long way to improving the life in the communities in developing nations.
As the CNN article notes, this technology is currently being used in Europe and US Federal buildings. The reason that this is important is because it is the first time such technology has been used on the public at large. For those who are concerned with false positives as the/. editor who posted this story alluded to, humans confirm the computers matches before the person is confronted. I remember seeing on a TLC presentation or the like that this software has an 80% accuracy rate. For now, that means a human element has to be present.
I think having this on the streets of Florida is a little worry, but I think that having this in airport would be very valuable. Such technology might prevent people trying to flee the United States to escape judgement, and screen for terrorist groups.
I am a little scared too. 1984 is my favorite book ever. I once read it 96 (yes, 96) times in 24 weeks...seriously. The fear of technological darkness is not to be swept under the rug. The way I see it, just about every technology that has good uses can be used for evil too. I have not seen any government abuse this type of technology yet, so I will have to say its ok for now. The technology used well has too many useful purposes to be cast aside.
For the other side of the coin, the worry is the government is being legit now, but later they will abuse the technology. Such people worry that once the technology is in place, it will be too late. For those who disagree with me that this technology has legitimate and useful purposes on those grounds, I have complete respect.
This seems to me to have a great deal of potential. There have been some comments thus far that this isn't the first time such a thing has been done before. Error correcting algorithms help satellites to transmit correct images, and there are some programs with filters on the market.
I see this as being a more sophisticated program. And its free...come on, you/. people love that kind of thing. Source code too.
The thing about this program is that it isn't a bunch of pre-collected filters, like any good imaging software, but that it can create new filters on the fly. So, if you want to recreate something to look like something else, you can. Not morphing, but in similar styles. That is very cool. Totally custom and unique filters, and that is new.
I really like the pictures where there is a painting that is converted to look like a river in a marsh. The computer makes it look real. So there is potential for artists. Scientists can use it to project data based on samples. I think there are some unique and useful uses to this program.
Well, Microsoft Word's spell checker didn't catch it, so that's why it is spelled the way it is. Also, Merriam-Webster Online (see: www.m-w.com) has Mediums as an acceptable way to make Medium plural, so I wasn't incorrect.
I have to gripe a little about the strong possibility school are violating there own standards in some cases to meet the requirements to recieve funding from corperate sponsors.
Earlier on slashdot, there was an discussion on the question of student having ownership of their own works . The conclusion of that discussion was the revelation that in many cases, Universities have put clauses in their handbooks stating that any work done for a class belongs to them, not the student. Why? Well, if the student retained ownership, they would control the product, not the public institutions. Does this seem not to be compatable with this discussion?
Even more personally disturbing to me is this article on CNN.com where a teacher has for 20 years told a lie about his military service. In most school, a student would be expelled for fabrication at this level, yet the university stands behind the teacher. The teacher *volunterily* stopped teaching his current class, but so what? He goes on teaching, even after outright lying. I guess it is ok if a teacher breaks the rules, but students must stay well within the white lines. Whatever.
In relation to this article, public universities, who in many cases are incorperated in state laws, are charged with being part of the public interest. I suppose no one is bothered by universities turning around and refusing to serve that interest by making all research results public knowledge? Wierd. How is it universities and teachers can break the rules they set up for the students? I suppose one's own standards don't apply when one's own fate is conserned.
Sounds interesting. If the device operates on the principle on a laser, I bet the laser could be modified to not be affected by the lens of the eye. This could have interesting effects for people with less then perfect vision.
You could read a digital book without glasses, or see a HUD for your car. Pictures could be taken with a digital camera and super-imposed. Night vision and/or infrared vision without bulky vision gear perhaps?
The biggest problem would be screen burn in. You remember what happened to those monitors that only shown green. Burned in. Can't let your retina get burned. Also, any kind of a power spike would fry your eye. How about a virus written for these devises communicated via built in cell phone? Not cool.
I think I will go on the list of people who think this is a good idea, but will wait a couple of years for everyone else to try it first. "I got the first one on the block!".... Hey, more power to you. I will learn from your "beta test."
While I suspect that several on the slashdot crowd might disagree with this decision on privacy rights or the like, I must say that this decision does make logical sense.
I say this because I believe the laws in the online world should be no different then those in the physical world. This is why I get so upset when courts do not transcribe the same regulations governing laws in place to the domain of the digital community. The rights of someone online are the same IMHO as those in the real world. Historically, the government has been more restrictive with online rights then those in the physical world, which is why I am happily a member of the EFF. But I digress.
When someone has a trademarked name, it is illegal in the real world to use a name that is extremely similar to the trademarked name, just as it is illegal to use the exact same name. The courts get really mad when people pick a similar name with the intent that people will confuse them with the legitimate trademark holder. In this case, the courts said that the person registering a typo name of an entity that has a legitimate claim is unfair, and I agree.
It is important to make sure that this isn't taken to the Nth degree, but I think that, within limits, the decision of the courts is reasonable. I remain hopeful that this means that people squatting on typo names will be forced to vacate. I know that I have mistyped names in the past, and I find it highly irritating to be exposed to content I had no intent to view.
In the conclusion, I think we should respect the courts in this case for protecting the rights of those online in the same way those rights are protected in the real world. If this rule were universally applied, I think we would better off, though I wouldn't mind if the online rules were a touch less restrictive, due to the nature of the public forum that the is the Internet.
I noticed some links were bad. So, for your pleasure, look at http://www.nist.gov/aes instead. It has all the links to everything.
In case anyone is wondering if there are any applications that use AES, the newest version of PGP do. I am not using any version past 6.5.8 due to the NAI/PRZ split that was noted here on Monday, but I thought I would make sure you all knew. ----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
Wow! I can seen the visions in front of my eyes as I speak. I am worried about the nasty implications the submitter of this article mentioned.
Think about it. We have been reading in recent days about open source hardware and Apple trying to get an open source license for their software. We have been reading about the other side of that coin as well. About making all software limited time, so you are FORCED to buy upgrades. Not cool.
What's next? Someday, dishwashers come with licenses? End User Agreements? "By opening this box, you agree to..." You can fill in your own blank there. How about the end of Ebay? Or even more traditional, the garage sale? The end of collecting items from overseas as mementos of your trip? I can see it now; the end of souvenir beer mugs. How ridiculous can you get? What if I move from one place to another? I guess that means I have to sell all my things.
Even worse, does this mean that GE can now track my movements? Think deeper...they can track me, send me junk mail to my new address. Tell all there corporate buddies where I am living before I finish unpacking. Could it get any worse? What if you want to escape from someone? Can a PI use the chip in your washer to find you? Use the information from the chip to find out your habits? Could someone hack into the chip to find out info about you? A virus for your washing machine? Heck, with in home networks, all this information could be connected together.
And on top of all this evil, I can't think of a single good use for this technology. At all. Perhaps consumers won't go for this. I just want a toaster. Not a toaster that needs a firewall. ----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
Ah yea. I am looking forward to this. Running Linux on a laptop is too difficult. I have a two year old laptop, and when I tried to install Linux, I have too many issues to make it viable. Dual booting isn't really an option either; I have a 6GB hard drive. Also, the hardware tends (at least in my experience) to be less supported in a laptop then in its desktop cousins. Having a professional company contor the laptop specs to make it Linux complient would be great. Having them ship the computer with Linux is even better. Perhaps this will expand Linux use? Open source? ----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
I have to admit, the immediate goals of such a project illude me. USENET postings are already public. These are open forums, and the groups can be read from most libraries or other public sources.
I don't see the value in the long term achival of USENET posting. The library of congress contains just about every copywrited work ever written. This serves not only as a national archive of our author's produced works, but gives our legislature access to the documentation and research they need to do their job. Would the archiving of USENET posting serve the long term mission of the nation's library?
It also bothers me slightly to think that people's comments and flame wars will langish forever in the federal library. I don't think access to USENET postings is something the nation craves or needs. What the nation needs is access to works that have been researched and published, works from professionals. The library of congress is a lbrary of professional works, not the "my 2 cents" postings that tend to dominate USENET frequently. ----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
This article tells us very little about anything. The idea of not having to download the complete program for every update is nothing new.
Perhaps the idea is that there will be a different file for every virus definition. For example, you have version 5.0 that shipped with 10,000 definitions. The first part of the virus definition file contains a hash value that tells you what definitions you have.
So, you go to update you virus file from your favorite site. You send the hash value. They then know what 10,000 definitions you have. So the only need to send you the patch that contains the files you need.
This probably means no pre-defined patches. You will have to make patches on the fly. So person x gets the 100 definitions they need, and person y gets the 200 definitions they need, and these might be separate things.
This can be cool for several reasons:
* Everyone gets what they need
* Conversely, no one gets what they don't need
* No bad patches
* No one has archived patches that aren't good anymore
* Custom programs tailored to the user's needs
* Saved update time
I guess we will have to see if this is really anything new or not later. ----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
This article really pisses me off. I am sorry, but schools doing this to our children is wrong. I am only in college...how could things have changed so much in so little time?
Didn't you ever see "12 Angry Men?" You know, the movie where the sane guy notes that saying "I'm gonna kill you!" is something that is often said in passion, and is more often then not totally meaningless. We could all learn a lesson from old black and white movies.
I read an article the other day about a kid getting suspended for using a chicken finger as a gun. Oh please, whatever. When I am tired, I might hold a pen and make a little bang noise as I write. Is this threatening someone?
How about drawings? What if I doodle in my notebook and draw a picture of fighting? Is this a threat? My favorite thing to draw when I was in school was of a mass dogfight between two rival air forces. Is this bad?
Zero tolerance is bullshit! What ever happened to reality checks. Note the chicken finger story. Zero tolerance is really going to screw some people who don't deserve it.
This is just like that Starcraft story about people screaming "I am going to kill you" as they blow each other up on mock battlefields. And this shit is happening at colleges now! When will it stop? Where does it end? ----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
I think that this is a really great idea. Many companies are shipping computers (Imac, some laptops) without floppies these days. Disks are cheap, cheap, and most importantly cheap. Capacity of this size could spark a revolution.
Just one reality check. I understand the concept of how it might be possible to squeeze more data onto a floppy, but how about getting floppy drives to read them? Old floppy drives will not understand the format. Manufactures will undoubtedly put new drives to handle the new format if this idea pans out, but the old drives that are in your machine right now will probably not be able to handle it.
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x75D2DCCD
I see minimal additional threat being generated from wireless networks. Wireless networks tend to be short range. Several college campuses and business have them, but wireless can only do so much and only transmit so far. Vulnerability is localized, not global like over wireless' wired cousin.
You still need a wired network regardless. And the hacking opportunities are better on a wired network. Several factors prevent hacking from being a viable activity over a wireless network. Low bandwidth is the most obvious. There are some implications for a denial-of-service attack, but these will affect end users, not servers, and with triangulation, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out who is jamming the signal.
The biggest thing is you need a good parity algorithm to account for data loss and encryption to prevent people from picking up sensitive data. However, I dismiss the claim that there is more exposure on a wireless network then a wired one, and hopefully you are using encryption when you give your credit card over the net anyway. ----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x75D2DCCD
I have to say, while there may be some remote truth to this type of retoric and cynacism, I don't think it is fair to caractorize all doctors this way. It isn't any more fair then saying all lawyers are dishonest, or that all politicians are unethical.
I happen to know several ethical doctors and lawyers personally, and they tend to be the crux of society, not part of society's gutter.
Doctors have the right to earn a wage for the services they render, just like anyone else. Doctors provide an invaluable service to the community. Your ignorant diatribe is disturbing.
To the question at hand, I would harp that which has already been suggested: security, security, security. Most of the other benifits of the technology you propose should naturally fall into place, but security is a notable exception to this rule, and requires your full attention. ----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x75D2DCCD
Slashdot Mirror
Here is an additional link to the same story at cnn.com .
Perhaps this is partially a bid to counteract the suit against them to make the penalty weaker the second time around in the ongoing lawsuit or to help quite some of the PR criticism over smart tags or the forced registration for XP products?
I suppose this is a good thing. Microsoft seems to be listening to some of the harsher criticism that has been circling about. It is cool that OEMs will be able to make the Windows desktop more user friendly for their customers. I am fairly sure MS is doing this because of the bad PR lately. Even a company as huge as MS responds when its customers start getting mad. Its nice to see that no corporation is so huge that it can ignore the complaints of its clients. Use this as an opportunity to let your opinion is heard, rather then saying, "I can't make a difference."
Yeppers. Linus has a trademark on the name Linux, and that why he's the guy that gets to say what goes in the kernel that almost all distributions use.
First, I found it interesting the 35% of American's apparently believe global warming has a connection to forest fires. The more likely explanation is underbrush. It seems to me that our logging regulations have become so tight, that we can't thin out forests, even when failure to do so contributes to forest fires directly. Lots of close trees = very fast spreading fire. Logging regulations even prohibit logging companies from harvesting the trees that have burnt down due to these fires. The trees are dead and the wood can be used, but the environmentalists say "No way."
What we know for sure is that the earth is one degree warmer now then it was last century. What we don't know is why or if it matters. Man probably had played a role, but I don't think to the degree that it has been alleged.
I believe we should all do something to help the environment. I try to avoid getting a bag for my purchases wherever possible. One of the big problems is the amount of trash. Burning the trash would help, but people don't want to do that either. Burning would reduce the trash volume alot, and the ash could be used. They would rather bury it then smell the smoke. And people are unwilling to throw less away. People are environmentalist when it is a convenience. People protest about environmental action in other places, but never do it themselves.
We should have a minimum standard for gas efficiency for cars. Say 15 miles per gallon. Anything less then that in a non-commercial vehicle is either not allowed or taxed. That would help. Again, people are unwilling to give up their high gas consuming vehicles because it effects them. Environmentalist 'till it gets personal.
The Kyoto treaty is too restrictive, and I am glad we abandoned it, even though everyone is screaming at us. First, the rules would have really hurt the American economy. Rules that have minimal effect on a county like Andorra for example would have a more significant impact on a country a couple thousand miles wide. It would have disproportionately effected our ability to compete. We can be environmentally friendly and compete too. The two are not mutually exclusive. That is why I support America's decision to find our own environmental solutions.
I think the Bush energy plan is sound. We need more power plants. We need more oil. Americans demand power. But they want only clean power. Solar is ok, but can't supply our needs. Gas is great, but the environmentalists won't let us dig up the earth to lay the pipe. Nuclear is clean, but everyone screams because of the waste, even though there are ways to reuse the waster, which seems to also not be ok.
I am for the environment in balance. We can use the natural resources we have AND respect the environment. We can dig for oil and respect wildlife. We can cut down trees and have forests. The environment is not the end-all, be-all cause. It must be respected as part of a balance of goals, not as an absolute ideology.
My question related to how the Kompany can make Linux an easier product to use. Attempts have been made to make the product more user friendly, but Linux is still a product that requires more effort to use then most people are willing to exert. To some extent, this is even promoted by the Linux community, some people of which take the attitude that if you can't figure it out you're just out of luck. Perhaps documentation/tutorials are the answer? How can we make the process of going to Linux easier, including ease of installing the Linux OS, helping users find programs that will be equivalent to those under windows, and the like? How can us end users of Linux be more responsive to people who express an interest in Linux without scaring them off?
I was in Port-au-Prince, Haiti for 32 days, and let me tell you, they are poorer then their neighbors, which is really sad. Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. Let me tell you, honestly, that the unless you are the poorest of the poor of America, you cannot understand the utter poverty of Haiti. A trailer home is a Godsend in comparison. 5 meals a weak, dirt roads, and until recently, a government so corrupt there was a large US and UN presence (thought there still is some presence, but not like there used to be). There is rich in Haiti, even by American standards, and it is really depressing when three blocks up the street you can see a multi-million dollar home, and three blocks down the street you can see a house that was *literally* built from stuff the owner found in the street.
To keep this post on topic, I believe that the use of solar power can be very useful to such people, who's power needs are very minimal. As someone pointed out, Solar is not the most efficient, but the need is so minimal it doesn't matter. It is reliable (sun up, power comes in) and I think it would go a long way to improving the life in the communities in developing nations.
First, with respect, this story has already been discussed in a slashdot thread from just Sunday. See the prior story at http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/07/01/034822 6&mode=thread
/. editor who posted this story alluded to, humans confirm the computers matches before the person is confronted. I remember seeing on a TLC presentation or the like that this software has an 80% accuracy rate. For now, that means a human element has to be present.
As the CNN article notes, this technology is currently being used in Europe and US Federal buildings. The reason that this is important is because it is the first time such technology has been used on the public at large. For those who are concerned with false positives as the
I think having this on the streets of Florida is a little worry, but I think that having this in airport would be very valuable. Such technology might prevent people trying to flee the United States to escape judgement, and screen for terrorist groups.
I am a little scared too. 1984 is my favorite book ever. I once read it 96 (yes, 96) times in 24 weeks...seriously. The fear of technological darkness is not to be swept under the rug. The way I see it, just about every technology that has good uses can be used for evil too. I have not seen any government abuse this type of technology yet, so I will have to say its ok for now. The technology used well has too many useful purposes to be cast aside.
For the other side of the coin, the worry is the government is being legit now, but later they will abuse the technology. Such people worry that once the technology is in place, it will be too late. For those who disagree with me that this technology has legitimate and useful purposes on those grounds, I have complete respect.
This seems to me to have a great deal of potential. There have been some comments thus far that this isn't the first time such a thing has been done before. Error correcting algorithms help satellites to transmit correct images, and there are some programs with filters on the market.
/. people love that kind of thing. Source code too.
I see this as being a more sophisticated program. And its free...come on, you
The thing about this program is that it isn't a bunch of pre-collected filters, like any good imaging software, but that it can create new filters on the fly. So, if you want to recreate something to look like something else, you can. Not morphing, but in similar styles. That is very cool. Totally custom and unique filters, and that is new.
I really like the pictures where there is a painting that is converted to look like a river in a marsh. The computer makes it look real. So there is potential for artists. Scientists can use it to project data based on samples. I think there are some unique and useful uses to this program.
Well, Microsoft Word's spell checker didn't catch it, so that's why it is spelled the way it is. Also, Merriam-Webster Online (see: www.m-w.com) has Mediums as an acceptable way to make Medium plural, so I wasn't incorrect.
That is an interesting question. Slightly more interesting is whether or not I can demand that this whole thread be removed sometime in the future:)
I don't know the joke about 31 Oct==25 Dec. Wanna tell the /. crowd?
I have to gripe a little about the strong possibility school are violating there own standards in some cases to meet the requirements to recieve funding from corperate sponsors.
Earlier on slashdot, there was an discussion on the question of student having ownership of their own works . The conclusion of that discussion was the revelation that in many cases, Universities have put clauses in their handbooks stating that any work done for a class belongs to them, not the student. Why? Well, if the student retained ownership, they would control the product, not the public institutions. Does this seem not to be compatable with this discussion?
Even more personally disturbing to me is this article on CNN.com where a teacher has for 20 years told a lie about his military service. In most school, a student would be expelled for fabrication at this level, yet the university stands behind the teacher. The teacher *volunterily* stopped teaching his current class, but so what? He goes on teaching, even after outright lying. I guess it is ok if a teacher breaks the rules, but students must stay well within the white lines. Whatever.
In relation to this article, public universities, who in many cases are incorperated in state laws, are charged with being part of the public interest. I suppose no one is bothered by universities turning around and refusing to serve that interest by making all research results public knowledge? Wierd. How is it universities and teachers can break the rules they set up for the students? I suppose one's own standards don't apply when one's own fate is conserned.
Ug.
I give up. I am not that geeky. Want to tell us non-enlightened what B8 00 4C CD 21 means?
Sounds interesting. If the device operates on the principle on a laser, I bet the laser could be modified to not be affected by the lens of the eye. This could have interesting effects for people with less then perfect vision.
You could read a digital book without glasses, or see a HUD for your car. Pictures could be taken with a digital camera and super-imposed. Night vision and/or infrared vision without bulky vision gear perhaps?
The biggest problem would be screen burn in. You remember what happened to those monitors that only shown green. Burned in. Can't let your retina get burned. Also, any kind of a power spike would fry your eye. How about a virus written for these devises communicated via built in cell phone? Not cool.
I think I will go on the list of people who think this is a good idea, but will wait a couple of years for everyone else to try it first. "I got the first one on the block!".... Hey, more power to you. I will learn from your "beta test."
While I suspect that several on the slashdot crowd might disagree with this decision on privacy rights or the like, I must say that this decision does make logical sense.
I say this because I believe the laws in the online world should be no different then those in the physical world. This is why I get so upset when courts do not transcribe the same regulations governing laws in place to the domain of the digital community. The rights of someone online are the same IMHO as those in the real world. Historically, the government has been more restrictive with online rights then those in the physical world, which is why I am happily a member of the EFF. But I digress.
When someone has a trademarked name, it is illegal in the real world to use a name that is extremely similar to the trademarked name, just as it is illegal to use the exact same name. The courts get really mad when people pick a similar name with the intent that people will confuse them with the legitimate trademark holder. In this case, the courts said that the person registering a typo name of an entity that has a legitimate claim is unfair, and I agree.
It is important to make sure that this isn't taken to the Nth degree, but I think that, within limits, the decision of the courts is reasonable. I remain hopeful that this means that people squatting on typo names will be forced to vacate. I know that I have mistyped names in the past, and I find it highly irritating to be exposed to content I had no intent to view.
In the conclusion, I think we should respect the courts in this case for protecting the rights of those online in the same way those rights are protected in the real world. If this rule were universally applied, I think we would better off, though I wouldn't mind if the online rules were a touch less restrictive, due to the nature of the public forum that the is the Internet.
Contrary to the article's implications, the current CEO of Microsoft is Steve Ballamer. See his webpage
Bill Gates is the Chief Software Architect and chairman of the board. See Bill's page
Gray
Grey
Gray
Grey
Deal with it.
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
Not much to say here.
I noticed some links were bad. So, for your pleasure, look at http://www.nist.gov/aes
instead. It has all the links to everything.
In case anyone is wondering if there are any applications that use AES, the newest version of PGP do. I am not using any version past 6.5.8 due to the NAI/PRZ split that was noted here on Monday, but I thought I would make sure you all knew.
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
Wow! I can seen the visions in front of my eyes as I speak. I am worried about the nasty implications the submitter of this article mentioned.
Think about it. We have been reading in recent days about open source hardware and Apple trying to get an open source license for their software. We have been reading about the other side of that coin as well. About making all software limited time, so you are FORCED to buy upgrades. Not cool.
What's next? Someday, dishwashers come with licenses? End User Agreements? "By opening this box, you agree to..." You can fill in your own blank there. How about the end of Ebay? Or even more traditional, the garage sale? The end of collecting items from overseas as mementos of your trip? I can see it now; the end of souvenir beer mugs. How ridiculous can you get? What if I move from one place to another? I guess that means I have to sell all my things.
Even worse, does this mean that GE can now track my movements? Think deeper...they can track me, send me junk mail to my new address. Tell all there corporate buddies where I am living before I finish unpacking. Could it get any worse? What if you want to escape from someone? Can a PI use the chip in your washer to find you? Use the information from the chip to find out your habits? Could someone hack into the chip to find out info about you? A virus for your washing machine? Heck, with in home networks, all this information could be connected together.
And on top of all this evil, I can't think of a single good use for this technology. At all. Perhaps consumers won't go for this. I just want a toaster. Not a toaster that needs a firewall.
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
Ah yea. I am looking forward to this. Running Linux on a laptop is too difficult. I have a two year old laptop, and when I tried to install Linux, I have too many issues to make it viable. Dual booting isn't really an option either; I have a 6GB hard drive. Also, the hardware tends (at least in my experience) to be less supported in a laptop then in its desktop cousins. Having a professional company contor the laptop specs to make it Linux complient would be great. Having them ship the computer with Linux is even better. Perhaps this will expand Linux use? Open source?
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
I have to admit, the immediate goals of such a project illude me. USENET postings are already public. These are open forums, and the groups can be read from most libraries or other public sources.
I don't see the value in the long term achival of USENET posting. The library of congress contains just about every copywrited work ever written. This serves not only as a national archive of our author's produced works, but gives our legislature access to the documentation and research they need to do their job. Would the archiving of USENET posting serve the long term mission of the nation's library?
It also bothers me slightly to think that people's comments and flame wars will langish forever in the federal library. I don't think access to USENET postings is something the nation craves or needs. What the nation needs is access to works that have been researched and published, works from professionals. The library of congress is a lbrary of professional works, not the "my 2 cents" postings that tend to dominate USENET frequently.
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
This article tells us very little about anything. The idea of not having to download the complete program for every update is nothing new.
Perhaps the idea is that there will be a different file for every virus definition. For example, you have version 5.0 that shipped with 10,000 definitions. The first part of the virus definition file contains a hash value that tells you what definitions you have.
So, you go to update you virus file from your favorite site. You send the hash value. They then know what 10,000 definitions you have. So the only need to send you the patch that contains the files you need.
This probably means no pre-defined patches. You will have to make patches on the fly. So person x gets the 100 definitions they need, and person y gets the 200 definitions they need, and these might be separate things.
This can be cool for several reasons:
* Everyone gets what they need
* Conversely, no one gets what they don't need
* No bad patches
* No one has archived patches that aren't good anymore
* Custom programs tailored to the user's needs
* Saved update time
I guess we will have to see if this is really anything new or not later.
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
This article really pisses me off. I am sorry, but schools doing this to our children is wrong. I am only in college...how could things have changed so much in so little time?
Didn't you ever see "12 Angry Men?" You know, the movie where the sane guy notes that saying "I'm gonna kill you!" is something that is often said in passion, and is more often then not totally meaningless. We could all learn a lesson from old black and white movies.
I read an article the other day about a kid getting suspended for using a chicken finger as a gun. Oh please, whatever. When I am tired, I might hold a pen and make a little bang noise as I write. Is this threatening someone?
How about drawings? What if I doodle in my notebook and draw a picture of fighting? Is this a threat? My favorite thing to draw when I was in school was of a mass dogfight between two rival air forces. Is this bad?
Zero tolerance is bullshit! What ever happened to reality checks. Note the chicken finger story. Zero tolerance is really going to screw some people who don't deserve it.
This is just like that Starcraft story about people screaming "I am going to kill you" as they blow each other up on mock battlefields. And this shit is happening at colleges now! When will it stop? Where does it end?
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x4FB5FB1D
I think that this is a really great idea. Many companies are shipping computers (Imac, some laptops) without floppies these days. Disks are cheap, cheap, and most importantly cheap. Capacity of this size could spark a revolution.
Just one reality check. I understand the concept of how it might be possible to squeeze more data onto a floppy, but how about getting floppy drives to read them? Old floppy drives will not understand the format. Manufactures will undoubtedly put new drives to handle the new format if this idea pans out, but the old drives that are in your machine right now will probably not be able to handle it.
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x75D2DCCD
I see minimal additional threat being generated from wireless networks. Wireless networks tend to be short range. Several college campuses and business have them, but wireless can only do so much and only transmit so far. Vulnerability is localized, not global like over wireless' wired cousin.
You still need a wired network regardless. And the hacking opportunities are better on a wired network. Several factors prevent hacking from being a viable activity over a wireless network. Low bandwidth is the most obvious. There are some implications for a denial-of-service attack, but these will affect end users, not servers, and with triangulation, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out who is jamming the signal.
The biggest thing is you need a good parity algorithm to account for data loss and encryption to prevent people from picking up sensitive data. However, I dismiss the claim that there is more exposure on a wireless network then a wired one, and hopefully you are using encryption when you give your credit card over the net anyway.
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x75D2DCCD
I have to say, while there may be some remote truth to this type of retoric and cynacism, I don't think it is fair to caractorize all doctors this way. It isn't any more fair then saying all lawyers are dishonest, or that all politicians are unethical.
I happen to know several ethical doctors and lawyers personally, and they tend to be the crux of society, not part of society's gutter.
Doctors have the right to earn a wage for the services they render, just like anyone else. Doctors provide an invaluable service to the community. Your ignorant diatribe is disturbing.
To the question at hand, I would harp that which has already been suggested: security, security, security. Most of the other benifits of the technology you propose should naturally fall into place, but security is a notable exception to this rule, and requires your full attention.
----------------------
Kurt A. Mueller
kurtm3@bigfoot.com
PGP key id:0x75D2DCCD