" Oddly enough I only see physical health gadgets. No gadgets for mental health at all. You'd think they could have made even a simple token gesture attempt. Perhaps the stereotypical video conferencing solution, or digital picture frames of the grand kids, or something, something at all."
FTA: "Rutherford is playing the word jumble game. The results of the game, as well as typos and even the intervals between keystrokes, are monitored for abnormalities that could foreshadow physical or mental infirmity."
"A few months ago, the former waitress even tested a robot with a Skype-like video monitor that lets faraway relatives check on loved ones."
They're doing some mental health work. OHSU is a teaching hospital and research facility so they're aware of all health aspects.
Every smart home research group has their own focus and interests. OHSU's BME group does a wide range and they're a very strong stable of researchers, but they still have to pick their battles. I spent a couple minutes trying to track down some of the video picture frames used in other projects, but I didn't find the really good ones that do conferencing with additional activity detection and status information.
What's almost more important:
"Neither Medicaid nor most private insurance policies cover these expenses"
-- This insurance issue is actually a serious sticking point in smart home tech development right now. Only a couple of states actually recognize it and have required the insurance companies to pay for preventative/monitoring tech.
I don't believe so, but don't dispair! It turns out that all US Males between 17 and 45 are in the militia. Odds are that's you.
BTW: I had to sell my reproduction 1863 Springfield rifle because I wasn't doing the re-enactments anymore. That was a heavy gun (10 lbs with bayonet) and man did it kick! 58 caliber 1 inch lead bullets on 90 grains was accurate, but left my shoulder bruised every time I went target shooting. How did those guys do it all day back then?
Both of these groups are tragedies, but I feel that many people have their pritorities in the wrong place. Education goes a very long way in solving the unintential shootings. Guns do not fire accidentally unless they're faulty. Training people to properly care for and use any tool is important. Why many people do not see guns in this light, I have no idea.
Standing toe to toe against modern military, armed and trained lightly would be a death wish.
Anyone seriously considering rebellion won't do #1
"equally numerous" is unjustified here. Any serious rebellion will outnumber the remaining military that has decided to remain loyal to the oppressors and see #2 for hints about how the rebellion will operate.
The vast majority of the fighting will be long range, hit and run, bombings and disruptive attacks. The only true way to stop it when the populace rises up is in true tyrannical style and calls for mass killings of the people. Otherwise, you have no idea if that people passing your soldiers on the street is with you or against you, and they might not know either. Start killing his neighbors en masse and he'll quickly make a decision one way or the other. You may not like his choice.
If you look at the history of an obviously outgunned force, you will see a history of geurilla warefare, "underhanded" tactics and all too often the winners in the end. Combat is more about determination than equipment and training. When you are facing an actively militant rebellion any actions you take to supress it will mostly create more determination and generational focus. Eventually you'll be wondering why it's now the great-granddaddy's rifle doing the shooting.
Because the day the decision is made to revolt, for whatever reason, there will be armed citizens in every corner of this country. Deciding which ones are revolutionaries, which are loyal and which don't care will be extremely difficult. This makes the decisions that will cause rebelllion something to at least think about, instead of trying and taking out any sources of weaponry they'll have to go house to house. Good luck with that.
Oh, and after the termination of the USSR documents came to light that the leaders of the USSR had long decided that there would be no way to actually conquer the US. The two reasons cited for the decision were:
Our interstate system, allowing mass travel to any part of the country by anyone
The fact that our populace was incredibly well armed and willing to defend their country en masse
We can thank the US government for the first thing and the founding fathers for the second. I'd rather future potential conquers, be they foreign or domestic, come to the same conclusions.
Murder is a greater crime than robbery, but it is not murder to kill someone bent on doing yourself or your family bodily harm. That is the root of the reason why there are different terms for different types of killing, ala poaching vs hunting. One is justified, the other is against society's rules.
If someone tries to harm myself or my family my first instict is to run, but if that is not feasible then that person will need to look to their life, as they are treatening mine. Taking away the best tools that I have available to defend my life seems like you don't care about my well being. Instead, you seem to feel that any harm visited on another is unjustified, even in the face of unmagable aggression. You want me to use less effective means (tasers and mace often fail to stop determined people, which is why police still carry guns), or no means at all to protect myself. I should just let them harm me and hope they're merciful.
I am in favor of education and training for anyone who owns and wishes to employ a firearm. The rate of legitimate concealed carry license owners commiting *any* kind of firearm crime is incredibly low, in the range of 1..10 events *ever*. Everyone that I've ever known who used firearms for recreation or defense, and spent the time to learn the consequences of using this particular tool, has never had any kind of problems, but some of them have had to employ this tool to defend their lives. In all cases the mere statement that they were armed diffused the situation, although I assure you they would have drawn if need be. Bluffing would be The Boy Who Cried Wolf and would not cut it, the threat has to be real and backed up if needed.
Taking away any citizen's ability to defend themselves *right now*, as the police will only be along some minutes after being informed of the situation, is tantamount to harming them yourself. The world is dangerous, I'm sorry but it is. I wish it wasn't. I do my best to be neighborly and kind wherever I go, but that's not what everyone does. I wish that I could walk down any city alley way at any time of day and feel perfectly safe, but that's not reality. The people that worry me don't follow laws and they surely care more about my wallet contents than my life. If you asked me for my wallet I'll give it to you, it is but a thing. Threaten me or mine and I'll do *everything* in my power to ensure our safety. First that means going to the authorities, but if they're too far away and the issue is right now, anyone in that situation should have any tool they feel they need to deal with those involved. Taking that tool away from the people in this country just leaves them at the mercy of those who don't care one bit about wether they live or die.
The hand crank was there in early prototypes but the actual shipping units will use an off-board human-power system, connected to the power brick. Candidates include a foot-pedal charger similar to the Freecharge portable charger.
The crank was found to be both too fragile and too energy wasting. It has been replaced by a yoyo kind of system that is designed be used by pulling and a third party is working with a foot pedal kind of system.
And sorrier still if you fat techie douchebags don't get up and vote two weeks from now.
I'm not fat and I've already voted. Let's hear it for not even getting up to vote via the use of mail in ballots. Of course, given enough not getting up to vote, I guess I'll be fat someday.... that cake does smell good.
It *would* have come here, but the current executive branch administration never gave it clearance, despite it being ready and waiting on a runway to lift off.
Yes, that's a poke at both you and the current administration. Them for not having their things together enough to be able to accept help when it's offered and you for not realizing that other parts of the world like to help anyone out who needs it, even when people put it right under your nose.
I'm having trouble accepting the reality that police (sheriffs) would do what they did. (Yes, I'm a middle class white boy, so I've never experienced how badly the authorities can treat people) Arrest someone for having a shirt that says something you don't like, and happens to be on a public street? Welcome to today's America, I guess.
I feel that the worst part was them asking the camera man to turn it off and when he refused they tried to argue that having audio on it meant that they should turn it off. Who watches the watchers? The authorities are supposedly working for the public. It's our responsibility for their actions and being able to record those actions should be our duty, as long as it doesn't get in the way of their duties. Filming them once they're making an arrest doesn't hinder their work.
The best part was that the young man who was being arrested did not resist in any way. He did the right thing under the circumstances. I hope that he gets his time in front of a judge and that judge does the correct thing, berates the sheriffs and dismisses the case with prejudice.
i believe that any possible revolt would be quickly quashed
Kudos to you right back for some actual dialogue about a tough topic.
I agree that any open revolt would be quashed. Have you considered the root of many of the atrocities committed during a country occupation? It's because the soldiers on the ground have *no idea* who their opponent is. When you stand in a crowd and have to pick out the people that are passively, and some actively, resisting you things get ugly. Most resistance to an occupation do not run around in their pickup waving firearms.
It really comes down to the fact that no government can hold a country if the people there don't want them. This rings especially true if those people are able to violently resist from day one. All the oppressors can do is kill the people en mass. This sounds like a bad trade, but it's the only one you have when someone else is trying to violently assert their will over you. If your only choices are: give in, peacefully demonstrate (see Tinamen Square, if the government has the drive to do it in front of internet broadcasts [can't trust the national media in such cases]), or fight, the US founding fathers would hope that their descendants would pick the last option. "Live free or die."
I personally hope that it never comes to that in this country. The only way to prevent it is civic participation and education. The lack of civics courses in the schools here worries me, our youth are being raised without awareness of what it takes to maintain any kind of representative government. If it does come to it.... I'm not willing to remove the tools needed to use the fourth box. There are four boxes for use in defense of democracy: soap, ballot, jury, ammo
I also happen to agree with the numbers that show that a knowingly armed society has lower rates of violent crime. Yes, you run the risk of individuals making rash/poor/ignorant decisions with accessible weapons, but much of that alleviated on an individual basis through education. You cannot protect everyone all the time from the real world. No matter how many layers of bubble wrap you put around pointy objects, someone must deal with those edges. The police recognize that they are not the ones responsible for your safety: you are. When the sh*t hits the fan, it up to you to deal with it. I say give them your wallet, but if they try to harm you & yours it is time for you to prove why you deserve to continue to exist. I'm not willing to take away valid tools from you. If you decide to not use those tools, that's your choice. I'd appreciate it if you extend me the same courtesy.
John Varley wrote the screenplay for Millennium and turned a classic short story into the worst film made by anybody, anywhere.
That's quite a claim to make. Please take a few minutes to peruse the bottom 100 at IMDB and then think about it again. You've missed such jems as "Manos, The Hands of Fate" and "From Justin to Kelly". There are movies of such horror that Millenium is unable to even show up on the bottom 100 radar.
The standards are much higher than you think for worst movie. Millenium has a score around 5.1
The IMDB bottom 100 needs no higher than 3.1 to get in.
You'll have to do much better than Millenium to even begin to make "worst movie ever" claims.
It really depends on the kind of software you work on. Many engineers produce products that will harm no-one if they go wrong, and many programmers produce software that will cause deaths if it goes wrong. It may well be that more programmers work on non-critical software, but many of us who worked as programmers did so on projects where people would get hurt if our software went wrong. Not to mention that all the cool hardware the engineers produced was basically useless without our software.
I agree that it's not just about lives. The designing of a product to be used, when a solid process to create it is followed, is engineering. What makes it Engineering is the legal stamp that can be placed on it that puts the Engineer and the licensing body (normally the state) behind it. Also, the hardware engineers of the world thank you for doing your part to make their cool toys blink the blinky lights.
It is also not true that software does not have the rigorus and formal tools and processes that the older engineering fields do. The problem is that software is far more difficult and complicated than other types of engineering. Because of this we may never reach the stage of confidence in design methods that we have in other areas of engineering. That doesn't mean programming isn't engineering.
It does have the tools, but they are often ignored or misapplied. Having gone through a CS degree now, I can tell you that the engineering programs spend more time on how to design and how to be and Engineer (eventually) than the CS systems do. It is two radically different approaches through the education systems. The way the CS students are taught is much too adhoc for the engineering program, and they often take that to the real world . That kind of teaching and the way we teach our future generations of programmers will make them either just programmers, or eventually, Software Engineers.
There is no real difference between engineer and applied scientist. It is what the applied scientist/engineer is working on that determines how concerned they need to be with the consequences of a mistake.
That is not true. They can both make the same thing, but the applied scientist is practicing science, and the Engineer is putting his professional weight behind it. It is a very small difference for many areas. I don't think my lighting layout in the office that I worked on will result in any major deaths if it wasn't perfect, but I do know that my supervisor (the one with the stamp) did stamp it. If there is a problem it comes down on his head, at any reasonable point in the future. If he was just an applied scientist the state would never allow him to use that stamp, nor allow the permits (a system I'm not entirely happy with for homeowners *grumble*) to even build the building.
I do agree that software is more comlex. It is based entirely on mathematics and the world is built by those who use it. No other field really has that flexibility or that curse. Eventually the processes will be better defined and refined. This will determine an eventual PE for programmers, I hope that day comes as soon as possible and no sooner. For now, though, you have to rely on knowing the developers and knowing the business putting out the product, use your head and hopefully get the source so you can fix any boneheaded code.
The problem is one of scale. I often see the "Engineers are responsible for peoples lives, one mistake kills many" phrase floated about, especially when debates come up as to whether "Software Engineer" is a realistic job description or position. Generally the argument runs similar to what you have posted: "Real" Engineers that make mistakes cost lives, Software engineers just have a patch to put out. Unfortunatly I find this example to be overly biased.
I agree that relying on that is an oversimplification of the difference between an applied scientist (be it physical or software) and an Engineer. A large part of the difference is that the design and Engineer puts out is the result of years of experience, review in the face of peers and has the confidence of the public (in the form of the PE). Schools still call their programs "Computer Science" for a reason: it's not Software Engineering yet. I also agree that a few areas of software have reached the point that requires the same discipline and stringent demands placed on the designs as "real" Engineers. Mostly that is in the real time and control systems fields. Those are also some of the fields that work closest with Engineers to get the job done. They're also the ones where a bug can cause untold monetary and physical damages. Hopefully the same level of detail and design work in those fields will continue to seep into the larger realm of software development.
I agree that a great number of the programmers out there do not qualify as what I would call Softare Engineers. I agree that we do not take a standadized test in order to be qualified as Professional Engineers. But to say that these two facts therefore mean that there can not be Software Engineers is to say that before there was a PE there were no Engineers. And this I find hard to believe.
When you area approached by someone you've never met who writes software, how well do they do it? Is it well architected? Do they include valid and capable tests? Are they able to really understand the underlying principles that make up a quality product? The PE certification is a professional and *legal* stamp that an Engineer puts on the product. Rarely, does it come with a ULA that says: "neener neener, can't sue me!". I agree that there is a core set of programmers who would qualify as Software Engineers already, but the system to determine who they are is not yet in place. Before the PE there were not Engineers, only people who practiced engineering. To be an Engineer is to put your whole career on the line - Legally - when you produce your product. Eventually that level of confidence will be reached, and required, in the software world.
Engineering is a process. That is why it can be applied to so many disparate fields. Many will add an addendum that it is a process that only applies to physical objects, but that does not make much sense, as it is a process the "engineer" follows, a process of planning and how to plan, developing and how to develop, testing and how to test. This process existed before the PE and this process is the basic model that is used to define the correct way to design and develop software.
Engineering is a process, I concur. It is a process for any kind of designing of a system, be it physical or not. So far it is normally applied to physical systems, but there is nothing that says it cannot be applied to software. So far the process for applying it to software is not well enough understood to be applied uniformly.
In any case, I'd like to continue this but have to hit the shower to get to work,
It was nice conversing with you. Have a nice day and I hope the meetings aren't too tedious.
--Azimir
GP: I may be wrong, but that sounds to me like "applied computer science". If that is so, then you are not an engineer, but a programmer.
P: Any more than a mechanical engineer practices "applied physics"?
While getting my Master's in CS we had a course on software development. We spent a whole class talking about whether programmers today are engineers. My conclusion is most definately no.
Why not? I spent a short time working as a junior engineer doing power and lighting for buildings before the market drove me back to school. While there I was exposed to the whole "Professional Engineer" process. Really, to become a leading Engineer (capitalization intended) at the organization you would need to get your Professional Engineer (PE) certificate. That alone would allow you to approve a design for use. When the design documents were finalized, one of the PE certified engineers would open up their safe and get out their stamp. They would stamp the design and sign it. From there on out any flaws found, including possible deaths or damages, would be on his head. Before participating in this process I had no idea how important it was for an Engineer to truly and wholly know and understand the final design. Their approval is worth its weight in gold.
Compare that with a software product. Yes, it is approved at the end by a small group of highly experienced individuals before it ships, but if somthing goes wrong it's "We found a bug". Sometimes it has a large impact, but it doesn't have the career impact that an Engineer faces once their design is found to be flawed. There is just a difference in how the two groups operate and the requirements that are placed on them. Don't get me wrong, programmers and software architects are often highly intelligent and creating things of wonder, but the software industry just does not have the rigorus and formal tools and processes that the older engineering fields do.
The thing to remember is that software engineering is still almost entirely R&D for every project. Because they are operating with tools that have no substance and really only mathematical limitations they can do *anything* at creation time. This makes the sky the limit every time a programmer sits down at their keyboard. As further processes and design styles are developed the industry will mature. You also need to remember that computer science is really only about 40 years old. This is very young for an engineering field, and especially for one that is based purely on mathematics and not physical limitations. Back in the early 1900's there were no electrical engineers, only scientists - the schools taught applied electrical sciences. Eventually the processes and methods were given more form and eventually the schools developed the concept of an electrical engineer, not just an applied scientist. Someday applied computer scientists will get to that level, and the signs point to sooner than people think, but not yet.
It is an area of deep discussion because it goes to the roots of what makes an Engineer more than just an applied scientist, but there is a difference. Seeing it is tough if you have never been exposed to the process of what makes an Engineer what they are, and the responsibilities that come with it.
Just so you know. My bachelor's was electrical engineering, but a lack of jobs around 2001 lead me to sysadmin jobs and now I've wrapped up a MSCS and I'm looking at Phd programs. Being an Engineer is very hard, especially after you graduate. It's more than just hard work, it's responsibility to the world around you.
In 1982, Kennesaw, Georgia, passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate dropped 89% In 1991, the residential burglary rate in Kennesaw was still 72% lower than in 1981. - Dr. Gary Kleck, Crime Control Through the Private Use of Armed Force.
My Favorite line from the last link:
And during those ten years, alligator attacks outpaced the number of crimes committed by carry holders; gators 146, illegal shootings 88- the gators are winning! Florida Game Commission and the Florida Department of State, Firearms Licensing.
Then you head a common direction of gun control advocates:
Guns are tools made to kill things. We hardly have any reasons to kill things any longer. Hence, we no longer need the tool.
The issue is not wether I need to kill things. In fact, I really abhor the thought of doing so without great need. The issue is that there are quite a few individuals or organizations that might think little of doing myself, or my family, harm. Taking away the best tools we have to defend ourselves in a time of need, no, not now, but possibly some day is a shortsighted and cowardly thing to do. Being free takes vigilance, effort, and often danger. I'm willing to learn and use the tools needed to keep myself, my family and my country free, how about you?
I was raised doing some target shooting and was taught gun safety and proper handling from day one. I don't even have a handgun around the house right now, but when my children get old enough they'll be taught everything they need to keep themselves safe, both from the tools and from external dangers.
You are forgetting that any time someone mentions that Oregon is not *always* being deluged like the second flood 100 Californians move here! Didn't you get the email about the Party line?
Party line:
Rain rain rain. Oh! The Rain. It pours and we freeze day in and day out. Oh look! Freezing rain! Yay, a change.
Now I need to go work on my early season tan with a nice hike through the neighborhood park.
Benito Mussolini, inventor of Fascism, once said that it could more properly be called Corporatism, since it is the merging of government and corporations.
Actually, just so you know, Mussolini did not "invent" Fascism. He put his name on the work of Giovanni Gentile. Now, that's not to say that Mussolini didn't do a good job of advancing the ideas of Facism and actually implement a few of them.
Read the above quote again, folks. We live in The United Coporations of America - a fascist country.
As to this statement? I'm not sure, but we're seeing all too many signs of it. Since Corporations have one goal: To make money, with a few exceptions, a government merged with corporate interests will wield all of its powers to advance its goal. This will include the use of lawmaking, tarriffs and military involvement to advance the power of the corporations in charge.
Overall this doesn't feel like a good direction for any country to take.
Would a nice metric/Linux using country take me in? I don't take up much room, I have a college education and I love to watch Soccer (sorry, Football), and Hockey.
Do you have the model 1038Z or the 1200x series Oribiting Brain Lasers? I found a sourceforge project that as a partially working kernel patch for the 1038Z, but you will need to be running a 2.4.20 kernel, and make sure to include all of the last USB patches for the 2.4.x series, or you won't have support for the solar panel controls.
Oh, and make sure to check your number dependancies, at least once.
Slashdot Mirror
" Oddly enough I only see physical health gadgets. No gadgets for mental health at all. You'd think they could have made even a simple token gesture attempt. Perhaps the stereotypical video conferencing solution, or digital picture frames of the grand kids, or something, something at all."
FTA: "Rutherford is playing the word jumble game. The results of the game, as well as typos and even the intervals between keystrokes, are monitored for abnormalities that could foreshadow physical or mental infirmity."
"A few months ago, the former waitress even tested a robot with a Skype-like video monitor that lets faraway relatives check on loved ones."
They're doing some mental health work. OHSU is a teaching hospital and research facility so they're aware of all health aspects.
Every smart home research group has their own focus and interests. OHSU's BME group does a wide range and they're a very strong stable of researchers, but they still have to pick their battles. I spent a couple minutes trying to track down some of the video picture frames used in other projects, but I didn't find the really good ones that do conferencing with additional activity detection and status information.
What's almost more important:
"Neither Medicaid nor most private insurance policies cover these expenses"
-- This insurance issue is actually a serious sticking point in smart home tech development right now. Only a couple of states actually recognize it and have required the insurance companies to pay for preventative/monitoring tech.
I don't believe so, but don't dispair! It turns out that all US Males between 17 and 45 are in the militia. Odds are that's you.
BTW: I had to sell my reproduction 1863 Springfield rifle because I wasn't doing the re-enactments anymore. That was a heavy gun (10 lbs with bayonet) and man did it kick! 58 caliber 1 inch lead bullets on 90 grains was accurate, but left my shoulder bruised every time I went target shooting. How did those guys do it all day back then?
To back up your #1 with some real numbers:
s .pdf
e arm_facts.pdf
In 2002, 905 children under the age of 14 drowned in 5 gallon buckets.
http://www.ctsafekids.org/pdf_files/Drowning_Fact
Whereas, in that same year 60 children were killed in unintentional shootings.
http://www.usa.safekids.org/content_documents/Fir
Both of these groups are tragedies, but I feel that many people have their pritorities in the wrong place. Education goes a very long way in solving the unintential shootings. Guns do not fire accidentally unless they're faulty. Training people to properly care for and use any tool is important. Why many people do not see guns in this light, I have no idea.
The vast majority of the fighting will be long range, hit and run, bombings and disruptive attacks. The only true way to stop it when the populace rises up is in true tyrannical style and calls for mass killings of the people. Otherwise, you have no idea if that people passing your soldiers on the street is with you or against you, and they might not know either. Start killing his neighbors en masse and he'll quickly make a decision one way or the other. You may not like his choice.
If you look at the history of an obviously outgunned force, you will see a history of geurilla warefare, "underhanded" tactics and all too often the winners in the end. Combat is more about determination than equipment and training. When you are facing an actively militant rebellion any actions you take to supress it will mostly create more determination and generational focus. Eventually you'll be wondering why it's now the great-granddaddy's rifle doing the shooting.
Oh, and after the termination of the USSR documents came to light that the leaders of the USSR had long decided that there would be no way to actually conquer the US. The two reasons cited for the decision were:
We can thank the US government for the first thing and the founding fathers for the second. I'd rather future potential conquers, be they foreign or domestic, come to the same conclusions.
Murder is a greater crime than robbery, but it is not murder to kill someone bent on doing yourself or your family bodily harm. That is the root of the reason why there are different terms for different types of killing, ala poaching vs hunting. One is justified, the other is against society's rules.
If someone tries to harm myself or my family my first instict is to run, but if that is not feasible then that person will need to look to their life, as they are treatening mine. Taking away the best tools that I have available to defend my life seems like you don't care about my well being. Instead, you seem to feel that any harm visited on another is unjustified, even in the face of unmagable aggression. You want me to use less effective means (tasers and mace often fail to stop determined people, which is why police still carry guns), or no means at all to protect myself. I should just let them harm me and hope they're merciful.
I am in favor of education and training for anyone who owns and wishes to employ a firearm. The rate of legitimate concealed carry license owners commiting *any* kind of firearm crime is incredibly low, in the range of 1..10 events *ever*. Everyone that I've ever known who used firearms for recreation or defense, and spent the time to learn the consequences of using this particular tool, has never had any kind of problems, but some of them have had to employ this tool to defend their lives. In all cases the mere statement that they were armed diffused the situation, although I assure you they would have drawn if need be. Bluffing would be The Boy Who Cried Wolf and would not cut it, the threat has to be real and backed up if needed.
Taking away any citizen's ability to defend themselves *right now*, as the police will only be along some minutes after being informed of the situation, is tantamount to harming them yourself. The world is dangerous, I'm sorry but it is. I wish it wasn't. I do my best to be neighborly and kind wherever I go, but that's not what everyone does. I wish that I could walk down any city alley way at any time of day and feel perfectly safe, but that's not reality. The people that worry me don't follow laws and they surely care more about my wallet contents than my life. If you asked me for my wallet I'll give it to you, it is but a thing. Threaten me or mine and I'll do *everything* in my power to ensure our safety. First that means going to the authorities, but if they're too far away and the issue is right now, anyone in that situation should have any tool they feel they need to deal with those involved. Taking that tool away from the people in this country just leaves them at the mercy of those who don't care one bit about wether they live or die.
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/OLPC_myths#The_laptop_w
The crank was found to be both too fragile and too energy wasting. It has been replaced by a yoyo kind of system that is designed be used by pulling and a third party is working with a foot pedal kind of system.
And sorrier still if you fat techie douchebags don't get up and vote two weeks from now.
I'm not fat and I've already voted. Let's hear it for not even getting up to vote via the use of mail in ballots. Of course, given enough not getting up to vote, I guess I'll be fat someday.... that cake does smell good.
How about the care package that included two large water purifying plants from Sweden?H urricane_Katrina
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_response_to_
It *would* have come here, but the current executive branch administration never gave it clearance, despite it being ready and waiting on a runway to lift off.
Yes, that's a poke at both you and the current administration. Them for not having their things together enough to be able to accept help when it's offered and you for not realizing that other parts of the world like to help anyone out who needs it, even when people put it right under your nose.
Wow. Just... wow.
I'm having trouble accepting the reality that police (sheriffs) would do what they did. (Yes, I'm a middle class white boy, so I've never experienced how badly the authorities can treat people) Arrest someone for having a shirt that says something you don't like, and happens to be on a public street? Welcome to today's America, I guess.
I feel that the worst part was them asking the camera man to turn it off and when he refused they tried to argue that having audio on it meant that they should turn it off. Who watches the watchers? The authorities are supposedly working for the public. It's our responsibility for their actions and being able to record those actions should be our duty, as long as it doesn't get in the way of their duties. Filming them once they're making an arrest doesn't hinder their work.
The best part was that the young man who was being arrested did not resist in any way. He did the right thing under the circumstances. I hope that he gets his time in front of a judge and that judge does the correct thing, berates the sheriffs and dismisses the case with prejudice.
i believe that any possible revolt would be quickly quashed
Kudos to you right back for some actual dialogue about a tough topic.
I agree that any open revolt would be quashed. Have you considered the root of many of the atrocities committed during a country occupation? It's because the soldiers on the ground have *no idea* who their opponent is. When you stand in a crowd and have to pick out the people that are passively, and some actively, resisting you things get ugly. Most resistance to an occupation do not run around in their pickup waving firearms.
It really comes down to the fact that no government can hold a country if the people there don't want them. This rings especially true if those people are able to violently resist from day one. All the oppressors can do is kill the people en mass. This sounds like a bad trade, but it's the only one you have when someone else is trying to violently assert their will over you. If your only choices are: give in, peacefully demonstrate (see Tinamen Square, if the government has the drive to do it in front of internet broadcasts [can't trust the national media in such cases]), or fight, the US founding fathers would hope that their descendants would pick the last option. "Live free or die."
I personally hope that it never comes to that in this country. The only way to prevent it is civic participation and education. The lack of civics courses in the schools here worries me, our youth are being raised without awareness of what it takes to maintain any kind of representative government. If it does come to it.... I'm not willing to remove the tools needed to use the fourth box.
There are four boxes for use in defense of democracy: soap, ballot, jury, ammo
I also happen to agree with the numbers that show that a knowingly armed society has lower rates of violent crime. Yes, you run the risk of individuals making rash/poor/ignorant decisions with accessible weapons, but much of that alleviated on an individual basis through education. You cannot protect everyone all the time from the real world. No matter how many layers of bubble wrap you put around pointy objects, someone must deal with those edges. The police recognize that they are not the ones responsible for your safety: you are. When the sh*t hits the fan, it up to you to deal with it. I say give them your wallet, but if they try to harm you & yours it is time for you to prove why you deserve to continue to exist. I'm not willing to take away valid tools from you. If you decide to not use those tools, that's your choice. I'd appreciate it if you extend me the same courtesy.
Ignorance brings fear.
That's quite a claim to make. Please take a few minutes to peruse the bottom 100 at IMDB and then think about it again. You've missed such jems as "Manos, The Hands of Fate" and "From Justin to Kelly". There are movies of such horror that Millenium is unable to even show up on the bottom 100 radar.
The standards are much higher than you think for worst movie. Millenium has a score around 5.1
The IMDB bottom 100 needs no higher than 3.1 to get in.
You'll have to do much better than Millenium to even begin to make "worst movie ever" claims.
I do agree that software is more comlex. It is based entirely on mathematics and the world is built by those who use it. No other field really has that flexibility or that curse. Eventually the processes will be better defined and refined. This will determine an eventual PE for programmers, I hope that day comes as soon as possible and no sooner. For now, though, you have to rely on knowing the developers and knowing the business putting out the product, use your head and hopefully get the source so you can fix any boneheaded code.
--Azimir
While getting my Master's in CS we had a course on software development. We spent a whole class talking about whether programmers today are engineers. My conclusion is most definately no.
Why not? I spent a short time working as a junior engineer doing power and lighting for buildings before the market drove me back to school. While there I was exposed to the whole "Professional Engineer" process. Really, to become a leading Engineer (capitalization intended) at the organization you would need to get your Professional Engineer (PE) certificate. That alone would allow you to approve a design for use. When the design documents were finalized, one of the PE certified engineers would open up their safe and get out their stamp. They would stamp the design and sign it. From there on out any flaws found, including possible deaths or damages, would be on his head. Before participating in this process I had no idea how important it was for an Engineer to truly and wholly know and understand the final design. Their approval is worth its weight in gold.
Compare that with a software product. Yes, it is approved at the end by a small group of highly experienced individuals before it ships, but if somthing goes wrong it's "We found a bug". Sometimes it has a large impact, but it doesn't have the career impact that an Engineer faces once their design is found to be flawed. There is just a difference in how the two groups operate and the requirements that are placed on them. Don't get me wrong, programmers and software architects are often highly intelligent and creating things of wonder, but the software industry just does not have the rigorus and formal tools and processes that the older engineering fields do.
The thing to remember is that software engineering is still almost entirely R&D for every project. Because they are operating with tools that have no substance and really only mathematical limitations they can do *anything* at creation time. This makes the sky the limit every time a programmer sits down at their keyboard. As further processes and design styles are developed the industry will mature. You also need to remember that computer science is really only about 40 years old. This is very young for an engineering field, and especially for one that is based purely on mathematics and not physical limitations. Back in the early 1900's there were no electrical engineers, only scientists - the schools taught applied electrical sciences. Eventually the processes and methods were given more form and eventually the schools developed the concept of an electrical engineer, not just an applied scientist. Someday applied computer scientists will get to that level, and the signs point to sooner than people think, but not yet.
It is an area of deep discussion because it goes to the roots of what makes an Engineer more than just an applied scientist, but there is a difference. Seeing it is tough if you have never been exposed to the process of what makes an Engineer what they are, and the responsibilities that come with it.
Just so you know. My bachelor's was electrical engineering, but a lack of jobs around 2001 lead me to sysadmin jobs and now I've wrapped up a MSCS and I'm looking at Phd programs. Being an Engineer is very hard, especially after you graduate. It's more than just hard work, it's responsibility to the world around you.
From an NIS perspective, you *must* encrypt into the database.
If you've ever poked around an NIS environment, give this one a try:
ypcat passwd
Viola! It spits out the entire password file! Fire up John the Ripper and go to town. Built in compromised password databases.
But what about these cases:
http://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1440764.stm
http://iresist.com/cbg/guns.html
From the last link:
My Favorite line from the last link:
Then you head a common direction of gun control advocates:
The issue is not wether I need to kill things. In fact, I really abhor the thought of doing so without great need. The issue is that there are quite a few individuals or organizations that might think little of doing myself, or my family, harm. Taking away the best tools we have to defend ourselves in a time of need, no, not now, but possibly some day is a shortsighted and cowardly thing to do. Being free takes vigilance, effort, and often danger. I'm willing to learn and use the tools needed to keep myself, my family and my country free, how about you?
I was raised doing some target shooting and was taught gun safety and proper handling from day one. I don't even have a handgun around the house right now, but when my children get old enough they'll be taught everything they need to keep themselves safe, both from the tools and from external dangers.
Party line:
Now I need to go work on my early season tan with a nice hike through the neighborhood park.
No problem, drop on in!
Actually, just so you know, Mussolini did not "invent" Fascism. He put his name on the work of Giovanni Gentile. Now, that's not to say that Mussolini didn't do a good job of advancing the ideas of Facism and actually implement a few of them.
As to this statement? I'm not sure, but we're seeing all too many signs of it. Since Corporations have one goal: To make money, with a few exceptions, a government merged with corporate interests will wield all of its powers to advance its goal. This will include the use of lawmaking, tarriffs and military involvement to advance the power of the corporations in charge.
Overall this doesn't feel like a good direction for any country to take.
Would a nice metric/Linux using country take me in? I don't take up much room, I have a college education and I love to watch Soccer (sorry, Football), and Hockey.
Just tell me where I can send my resume.
But, I am busy throwing rocks at the moment.
Do you have the model 1038Z or the 1200x series Oribiting Brain Lasers? I found a sourceforge project that as a partially working kernel patch for the 1038Z, but you will need to be running a 2.4.20 kernel, and make sure to include all of the last USB patches for the 2.4.x series, or you won't have support for the solar panel controls.
Oh, and make sure to check your number dependancies, at least once.
Damn it's good to be a Supervillain.
A quick reboot goes somthing like this.
I call dibs if they have an LCD display!