I believe we should test this, in the real world. Get 30 to 100 people. Setup a course with fake cars and such. Have them all drive it without anything in their system. Then get them drunk and do it again. Then when they are sober, let them smoke pot, and do it again. Then once that is clear have them drink and smoke pot, and go yet again. Then for fun, do it with someone who is just smoking a cig while driving. Compare the results.
Wow, in my home town, if you lived a mile or less away from the school, you had to walk to have parents transport you. I walked to school each day, as did my brother who was 7 through 10, while we lived there. Four years he walked half a mile each way. Parents now a days are going over board, as are police and CPS.
I agree, sounded like an NSA recipe for how to Encrypt things, so they can decrypt it easier, all at 350 degrees for 45 minutes, till light and golden brown.
Removing the flaws in software will help, but not stop the issue. Companies (where there are likely more bot net devices) need to actually implement security not just try to be "Compliant". Your biggest issues are stupid users and stupid companies that cut corners to get that bigger stock price or bonus. Since we cannot kill the CEO's, shut down the stock market, or kill users who install this shit, we have to find a better way to combat it.
Having worked in IT at many organizations, including 5 years at a Medical company, connected to a University, I had to deal with "beta testing" new ideas for our doctors by the Uni people all the time. While the MRI app clearly would not work, there are many ideas that would and have been tried before. Back then someone tried to use the Apache HUD tech to give a vitals display to the nurse. (Hence my suggestion). Not sure that there is one "killer app" for this tech yet, though similar tech has been used for how long in the Military?
This is exactly my thought. If this existed now, I could spend time with the kids talking and helping with homework, etc. on the days where we have to go 30 miles each way to do the custody exchange. Even more so on the trips we take to see Grandma or family vacations. Not only would it save on drive time (do it at night with no need to stop at a hotel), but allow for more important things in life, like bonding with the family. Would I spend $30k on a car without all the bells and whistles? Yes, none of my current cars have all the bells and whistles, these are out of date when you get the car (still only have DVD players, not BluRay or a Hard drive bay to stream from). If I have cruise control and a FM Radio, I am good.
I think its a great idea with great technology, just marketed wrong.
Google glass would work wonderful as a HUD in many applications, beyond just Military. Think of a doctor/nurse who could have stats in front of their eyes rather than on a cart behind them. Take it further and have it feed real time blood flow from an active scan, for where they are looking.
What is a Police officer, Bus driver, or other could have a camera showing whats behind the vehicle at all times, even when outside of it? How many times has a cop car been hit on the highway and the officer got lucky to survive? How about a security guard doing rounds of a building, he could get camera feeds or alarms sent to the HUD while out and about.
So the issue is not what they did or their idea, it was marketing it for the wrong places / application
Hrm, They are all about the same. Frankly the TOS movies and the reboot have much in common (Khan and one sided space battle for instance), and over all, are kinda cheesie. The series was worse, more so with TNG. The early episodes with Will Wheton where bad. Data having sex... Really? How many times did they have time loops, bubbles, or alternate time lines?
The novels are much better than any of the shows, but even then, they still have those same campie moments. Star Trek is like a day time soap, in space... "Turn in this week to see who Diana Troy is dating".,...
Yeah, very bad advice. If you get yourself into a Security audit / Compliance review position, where you have to be a CISSP, CISA or CISM (as an example), and the company is breached, you can be sued in cases. Granted the company should ask for proof, and two I have been at have asked, others take you at your word (CISSP has an ethic's policy for instance).
Easier to just take the test.
Sorta, there are some other parts that get ignored. But I have heard this before.
So HIPAA *SHOULD* apply to you *IF* you have to keep the medical record of the people you treat or transport. Likely you do not keep the record but provide it to the hospital, so would be fine (that or shred it when returning to the barn / fire house). In that case, the "mini security rule" part of the Privacy rules, would be all that applies to you.
At least that was the case when I was doing HIPAA (moved on to other things, while I still know it, focus on ISO, RFM, PCI, SOX, etc. now).
Oh, I agree, if you touch one card a year, and are a business, you need to ensure you are PCI compliant.
My comment was in reference to PWC trying to tell a company that did not touch cards are all, that they needed to be PCI and HIPAA compliant "Due to HR potentially having Medical data in employees files"...
I have worked with QSA's from 5 different organizations, including one that became an ISA for the company I worked at. None of them could agree what the PCI rules meant, much less how to meet them. Only One of them I would trust to do my review, but even then, my company told us to "Only answer what he asks, with short phrases, so he does not find issues"..... HELLO, they are there to help you prevent issues or protect you in the case of a breach (Hello, how was Target compliant with AV that was from 2007 and had been EOL for over three years?).
Sorry, I digress..... Compliance is important, but only when applied correctly. Security is even more important than compliance... but Compliance is NOT Security..... Never will be.
Sigh, wrong... HIPAA is for "Covered Entities".... So unless you work for a medical profession, insurance processor, etc. then your work is not covered by HIPAA. For everyone else that data is called PII. Now laws protect PII, but HIPAA is not one non-covered entities.
Working in Security, and being a former HIPAA Security officer, I hear that "excuse" all the time by people, especially outside auditors like PWC (They should know this shit right). The also try to push PCI on companies that do not process credit cards.
Sony could have that information, as part of FMLA requires you have that data, also some states (though mostly a company issue to cover their bases) requires medical notes if you miss three or more days of work, as "proof" you were sick. While for the doctor its HIPAA, for work its PII. This is to protect the company if you were to sue.
Potentially they would have it due to work related accidents, limited work requirements (such as someone with lifting restrictions), actor/actress requests, etc..
First off that break down is what YOU AND I would pay for the parts, not what Apple paid. Second, not everything in the iPod was developed by Apple, more so in the original iPods. In the iPod touches, they used the iPhone chips for years, that did not require more engineering (as it was 90% of an iPhone). Over time, your cost goes down when your not making 100% new things, just making updates or swapping out chips.
My point, which people forget, is that Apple has a lower cost margin than what others do, and therefore make more money per device.
That money does pay for costs in the devices, OS they designed, etc. Regardless, they are making more than 30% on the iPod. The first rev of the hardware and software cost more than the next generations. Or do you assume that the iPod classic they sold for almost 10 years never made them more money on the "updated versions"... How often did that OS get updates? The Hard Drive cost to Apple would have gone down over that time period, but those reductions were not passed on to the consumer. The Zune sure did not have a 30% profit minimum for Microsoft.
My statement was about the music. Apple has NEVER disclosed their contract with BMG, not once. (If you can prove otherwise, I will retract my statement). From my working in the Music industry for many years, I can tell you that BMG does not get 70 cents per dollar on songs. Radio stations paid a flat fee to BMG for a year, normally around 25k for Country Music (this was in 2000). They made money (on paper) back from RCA and others to play Garth Brooks more per hour than other artists. RCA would do that to sell more CD's and get more tours for Garth. That is where they made their money.
Their statement was for independent artists, without a dedicated contract, that the profit was 30% per song.
Only an Apple Fanboy would not wonder how Apple showed more than 30% profit many years in a row to Wall Street, and believe that they only made that little per device... Course, at the risk of causing negative comments and statements, if Microsoft had not given Apple money in the 90's and offered Office on Mac's, Apple would not be where it is today.... But as normal on Slashdot, Facts are optional.......
Interesting. So your saying that Apple has made all of their contract Public, so that anyone can search them when ever they want.... Who is the moron now,....
Apple has not done so for the Music Labels. What they charge the Independent people who sell music, without a written contract, is what you *know* about.
When Apple increased cost to allow for DRM free music, they said they would not disclose what the agreement between them and BMG was to allow for that.
If you have said contract, please share it. You would find that your numbers are way off.
Please, this is Apple we are talking about. I recall the first iPod touch was broken down, cost Apple $142 but they sold it for $500. That is a much larger mark up than the 30 cents you listed. That $1 song likely cost them 15 cents to the artist, 25 cents to the labels and 10 cents to BMG. If that.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, other than Fiat, not that I know of.......
Says the AC who is too Chicken to post under his name. Seems that its people like him that are the real problem. Just sayin
I believe we should test this, in the real world. Get 30 to 100 people. Setup a course with fake cars and such. Have them all drive it without anything in their system. Then get them drunk and do it again. Then when they are sober, let them smoke pot, and do it again. Then once that is clear have them drink and smoke pot, and go yet again. Then for fun, do it with someone who is just smoking a cig while driving. Compare the results.
Hrm, would say I second that, but sloppy seconds are not my cup of tea.
Oh here in the North, they call them Internet Pipes. South always has it backwards..... :-)
Wow, in my home town, if you lived a mile or less away from the school, you had to walk to have parents transport you. I walked to school each day, as did my brother who was 7 through 10, while we lived there. Four years he walked half a mile each way. Parents now a days are going over board, as are police and CPS.
I prefer Minecraft as my preferred emacs interpreter. :-) (could not resist)
I agree, sounded like an NSA recipe for how to Encrypt things, so they can decrypt it easier, all at 350 degrees for 45 minutes, till light and golden brown.
Removing the flaws in software will help, but not stop the issue. Companies (where there are likely more bot net devices) need to actually implement security not just try to be "Compliant". Your biggest issues are stupid users and stupid companies that cut corners to get that bigger stock price or bonus. Since we cannot kill the CEO's, shut down the stock market, or kill users who install this shit, we have to find a better way to combat it.
Having worked in IT at many organizations, including 5 years at a Medical company, connected to a University, I had to deal with "beta testing" new ideas for our doctors by the Uni people all the time. While the MRI app clearly would not work, there are many ideas that would and have been tried before. Back then someone tried to use the Apache HUD tech to give a vitals display to the nurse. (Hence my suggestion). Not sure that there is one "killer app" for this tech yet, though similar tech has been used for how long in the Military?
This is exactly my thought. If this existed now, I could spend time with the kids talking and helping with homework, etc. on the days where we have to go 30 miles each way to do the custody exchange. Even more so on the trips we take to see Grandma or family vacations. Not only would it save on drive time (do it at night with no need to stop at a hotel), but allow for more important things in life, like bonding with the family. Would I spend $30k on a car without all the bells and whistles? Yes, none of my current cars have all the bells and whistles, these are out of date when you get the car (still only have DVD players, not BluRay or a Hard drive bay to stream from). If I have cruise control and a FM Radio, I am good.
Google glass would work wonderful as a HUD in many applications, beyond just Military. Think of a doctor/nurse who could have stats in front of their eyes rather than on a cart behind them. Take it further and have it feed real time blood flow from an active scan, for where they are looking.
What is a Police officer, Bus driver, or other could have a camera showing whats behind the vehicle at all times, even when outside of it? How many times has a cop car been hit on the highway and the officer got lucky to survive? How about a security guard doing rounds of a building, he could get camera feeds or alarms sent to the HUD while out and about.
So the issue is not what they did or their idea, it was marketing it for the wrong places / application
The novels are much better than any of the shows, but even then, they still have those same campie moments. Star Trek is like a day time soap, in space... "Turn in this week to see who Diana Troy is dating".,...
Oh well, there goes the neighborhood.
So can I block all wireless signals in my home now, including those bleeding through from Comcast free wifi (via the Neighbors connection)?
Poor Flash, sometimes super speed is not a good thing......
That and Batman had that Kyptonight ring....
LOL
Yeah, very bad advice. If you get yourself into a Security audit / Compliance review position, where you have to be a CISSP, CISA or CISM (as an example), and the company is breached, you can be sued in cases. Granted the company should ask for proof, and two I have been at have asked, others take you at your word (CISSP has an ethic's policy for instance). Easier to just take the test.
So HIPAA *SHOULD* apply to you *IF* you have to keep the medical record of the people you treat or transport. Likely you do not keep the record but provide it to the hospital, so would be fine (that or shred it when returning to the barn / fire house). In that case, the "mini security rule" part of the Privacy rules, would be all that applies to you.
At least that was the case when I was doing HIPAA (moved on to other things, while I still know it, focus on ISO, RFM, PCI, SOX, etc. now).
My comment was in reference to PWC trying to tell a company that did not touch cards are all, that they needed to be PCI and HIPAA compliant "Due to HR potentially having Medical data in employees files"...
I have worked with QSA's from 5 different organizations, including one that became an ISA for the company I worked at. None of them could agree what the PCI rules meant, much less how to meet them. Only One of them I would trust to do my review, but even then, my company told us to "Only answer what he asks, with short phrases, so he does not find issues"..... HELLO, they are there to help you prevent issues or protect you in the case of a breach (Hello, how was Target compliant with AV that was from 2007 and had been EOL for over three years?).
Sorry, I digress..... Compliance is important, but only when applied correctly. Security is even more important than compliance... but Compliance is NOT Security..... Never will be.
Working in Security, and being a former HIPAA Security officer, I hear that "excuse" all the time by people, especially outside auditors like PWC (They should know this shit right). The also try to push PCI on companies that do not process credit cards.
Sony could have that information, as part of FMLA requires you have that data, also some states (though mostly a company issue to cover their bases) requires medical notes if you miss three or more days of work, as "proof" you were sick. While for the doctor its HIPAA, for work its PII. This is to protect the company if you were to sue.
Potentially they would have it due to work related accidents, limited work requirements (such as someone with lifting restrictions), actor/actress requests, etc..
Just my two cents
WOW dude....... That comment needs reported and removed. Not cool
First off that break down is what YOU AND I would pay for the parts, not what Apple paid. Second, not everything in the iPod was developed by Apple, more so in the original iPods. In the iPod touches, they used the iPhone chips for years, that did not require more engineering (as it was 90% of an iPhone). Over time, your cost goes down when your not making 100% new things, just making updates or swapping out chips.
My point, which people forget, is that Apple has a lower cost margin than what others do, and therefore make more money per device.
That money does pay for costs in the devices, OS they designed, etc. Regardless, they are making more than 30% on the iPod. The first rev of the hardware and software cost more than the next generations. Or do you assume that the iPod classic they sold for almost 10 years never made them more money on the "updated versions"... How often did that OS get updates? The Hard Drive cost to Apple would have gone down over that time period, but those reductions were not passed on to the consumer. The Zune sure did not have a 30% profit minimum for Microsoft.
My statement was about the music. Apple has NEVER disclosed their contract with BMG, not once. (If you can prove otherwise, I will retract my statement). From my working in the Music industry for many years, I can tell you that BMG does not get 70 cents per dollar on songs. Radio stations paid a flat fee to BMG for a year, normally around 25k for Country Music (this was in 2000). They made money (on paper) back from RCA and others to play Garth Brooks more per hour than other artists. RCA would do that to sell more CD's and get more tours for Garth. That is where they made their money.
Their statement was for independent artists, without a dedicated contract, that the profit was 30% per song.
Only an Apple Fanboy would not wonder how Apple showed more than 30% profit many years in a row to Wall Street, and believe that they only made that little per device... Course, at the risk of causing negative comments and statements, if Microsoft had not given Apple money in the 90's and offered Office on Mac's, Apple would not be where it is today.... But as normal on Slashdot, Facts are optional.......
Carry on with the "Media" facts now....
Apple has not done so for the Music Labels. What they charge the Independent people who sell music, without a written contract, is what you *know* about.
When Apple increased cost to allow for DRM free music, they said they would not disclose what the agreement between them and BMG was to allow for that.
If you have said contract, please share it. You would find that your numbers are way off.
Please, this is Apple we are talking about. I recall the first iPod touch was broken down, cost Apple $142 but they sold it for $500. That is a much larger mark up than the 30 cents you listed. That $1 song likely cost them 15 cents to the artist, 25 cents to the labels and 10 cents to BMG. If that.