A layer of rubber or thick nonconductive cloth might save you, but I imagine the person fitting your collar, er, bracelet will make sure it contacts skin.
Your cost estimate is woefully optimistic. Current prices for bottom-end electronic dog collars are about $200, but that unit lacks the reliability and range you'd need in an airport terminal, so we'd be upgrading to the $700 unit. Yes, that's what they cost. No doubt it's mostly profit, but it's what the market has been paying for them for almost 60 years. I don't expect prices would drop just because it's the TSA buying them. Indeed, I'd expect a sharp increase, since one of the big tech challenges has been to get several collars to play nice together in the same area... if you need 50 or 500 or whatever number per flight and per airport, you're talking about a much more sophisticated transmitter bank than the one-collar/one-transmitter unit that's currently on the market. (Okay, so you can buy a 2-collar transmitter... for a suitable upgrade fee.)
I agree with you -- it's not average Americans who are doing this. Average Americans are going WTF??
But the media has discovered that fear makes a good eyeball magnet, and they're all about selling eyeballs to advertisers. So the more they can convince us we're in fear of [insert bogeyman here] the richer the media outlets become.
And the younger generation of yuppies who've never lived outside their city cocoons are already half-afraid of anything unfamiliar (in much the same way little kids are often afraid of the dark), so it's easy to for the media to embue them with a culture of fear, even tho in truth they have "nothing to fear but fear itself".
This technology is well-understood and widely available -- the canine shock collar first came into use in the 1950s. Today's models are highly refined, capable of variable shocks from "barely a tingle" to "FRY". (Note: as a professional dog trainer, this falls into my area of expertise.)
Setting aside the "Your agonizer, Komrade!" aspects for the moment... how much will this cost us in tax dollars? How many passengers are in the air at any one time, at a wild-assed guess about 50,000?? The most basic canine unit costs about $200, but that one won't be sufficiently reliable or securable for airline use, nor does it have enough range for a large terminal, so let's upgrade to the $700 unit (which has a range of up to one mile under ideal conditions). That's $35 million just to purchase the units.
[And the average lifespan, in daily use, is about 3 to 5 years, then it's off to The Collar Clinic, which charges about 30% of the value of the collar for repairs.]
As to hackability -- this has been a problem since way back; one of the design challenges was ensuring that the transmitter from one collar didn't make another go off by mistake. And there are only so many radio frequencies available, and that too is old tech.
If I were bent on causing chaos on a plane, I wouldn't even get on board myself. I'd hide a scanning transmitter in the luggage, which would start transmitting "FRY" across the spectrum at random intervals. Passengers would never know who was going to get shocked next, or when the next shock was coming. Wouldn't that do wonders for air travel! (Encrypted signal required, you say? Okay, I'll just set my trigger to hit the electronics AFTER the decryption point.)
These devices are generally safe, as they are designed to be painful yet harmless. But someone with a weak heart or epilepsy could be in big trouble -- on FRY the shock is similar to a weedburner-type electric fence; it'll put you right on your ass. Even on "tickle", what happens to someone wearing a pacemaker??
My question is the same as it would be were this any other software: Is the author trustworthy? If not, is it possible that the software is similarly untrustworthy?
Furthermore, is it really all that good, or is it mostly ego?
I don't know, but his actions cast doubt on his character and therefore on his works.
Under the law, and this has been tested repeatedly, you can call yourself anything you wish SO LONG AS THERE IS NO INTENT TO DEFRAUD. There is no legal requirement that you call yourself by your birth name, except on certain documents relating to property. Since there is no monetary loss here, there was no fraud. Deceiving someone SOCIALLY is not fraud. If it were, every high school clique would be in jail.
Ah, thanks, hopefully it'll start working for me now... it's been one of the little things that kept annoying me into not keeping any of my linux trial balloons. I'm about to do another round of testing... I keep hoping for a linux I can switch to!!
Why would window position not be saved by default? I was talking to someone the other day who had the same complaint, and worse, it was some multi-windowed app (maybe GIMP, I don't remember) that required several windows to be positioned at the start of each session. A small lack, but it's these small chronic annoyances that miscolour our perceptions.
What Jesus_666 said about "smart" features (and especially "smart" menus) -- please, ghu, let us be able to turn off that brain -- its thoughts are not always OUR thoughts!!
Since you're requesting input, my own personal pet peeve: when I select Detail View in Konq (indeed, in ANY file manager), I expect it to stick (as View settings do in Windows Explorer). But when I start a new session, it's back to Icon view (and has forgotten window size and position too), causing me to think evil thoughts at the developer. This has been a consistent problem with every Linux file manager I can remember ever trying, back over about 10 years, and no amount of pounding on Settings or Preferences makes it stick. [plaintively] Can someone PLEASE fix this??
I *am* glad to hear that missing stuff is "not fully baked yet" rather than "we changed the recipe". Invariably when stuff is removed, it's something I can't live without, causing me to stay with old versions (indeed, I'm posting this with Netscape *3*:)
Back in the olden days I'd liked KDE best of the various desktops.. didn't care so much for v3.x (for lots of little reasons which I've since forgotten), but am hoping 4.x will be my new fave:)
Actually, that strikes me as an insight on his thinking. "Amended" and "changed" are not really the same thing. "Amend" generally means an *addition* to; "change" MAY be comprised of parts added, altered, AND/OR removed.
"Better to have a heterogeneous system with a variety of different ways of handling security. Overall this may mean more potential weaknesses, but an attack on one will leave other systems still standing."
Which is one of the reasons that it's good to have Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines. Some duplication and some overlap, but if one is compromised, it won't take down the whole system. And if one branch's policies fail, it won't destroy the entire military. And so forth.
Besides, we need a certain raw number of military personnel. If that's (random numbers) 200,000 warm bodies total, and 50,000 are in each of the four main forces, that's still the required number of warm bodies.
Furthermore, as organizations grow, they often lose touch between levels. When communication is critical, a smaller organization is usually better. So again, probably better to have several smaller armed forces than one monolithic force.
In my observation, news stopped being factual when it became another aspect of the ratings war -- when how many eyeballs you could sell to your advertisers became more important than the concept of news itself. This shift happened in two stages -- initially in the mid-1970s, when some stations started hiring standup comics to deliver weather and sports, and a larger shift in the early 1980s that affected primary newscasting, not coincidentally about the time the second generation (to whom TV was not a novelty) raised with television came of news-watching age. To previous generations, television news was, well, NEWS. To the current generations, TV is primarily entertainment, and current news presentation styles reflect that.
As to TFInterview, I think the good officer was as truthful as he was able to be in the context of his job, tho I did notice a lot of non-information.
WW2 was before my time, but I grew up during the Cold War. It's definitely scary to watch our country turn into the backside of the Iron Curtain that we worked for so long to tear down.
[laughing] Being familiar with sheep myself, I'm sure you're right (tho if not shorn regularly, what they actually turn into is steaming piles of maggots). Sheep may be too dim to recognise "clippers" but they sure do like being freed from their annual growth! After shearing, even old ewes leap around like spring lambs.
Remember the article on high-temperature biofuel-to-power conversion from a couple weeks ago? Occurred to me then that even if it's not terribly efficient from a power-generation standpoint, it would be a great way to get rid of solid waste of any description (including hazardous waste) and surely metals extraction could be part of the process. Maybe pass the ash through various types of smelting processes, since it's likely to have a high concentration of various metals once the organics are burned away.
Happens in California too. Constructions sites have to be guarded 24/7 to keep everything metal from walking with Jesus.
And people show up at the recycle yards with big spools of brand-new wire that say "PACIFIC BELL" or "EDISON" on them, and the recyclers still take them... come on, does it need to have "STOLEN" stenciled across it before you figure it out??
I think the solution is the same one that B&M libraries already use: multiple/regional libraries, with multiple copies of popular works, which can only be checked out as complete works. (Like you can't check out just one song off a CD, or just one page out of a book.)
IOW, a distributed system, where content can be digitally shifted from one library to another depending on demand, and where checkout periods are similar to B&M libraries -- so you digitally check out a whole CD for a week or two, rather than checking out one song for 3 minutes.
"The interesting thing is that this 'island behavior' usually includes the French language somehow, check out Quebec and Belgium for instance."
I was going to bring up that point -- there must be something awry in the culture that the French language engenders, because the "island behaviour" is indeed a problem wherever French is the dominant language. Quebec is at times every bit as extreme an example as France itself.
That's a good point. Where does something become "restricted" from further sales -- at the retail level? At the wholesaler? at the initial processor of raw materials?? at the point of origin (mines, farms, sheep, etc.) for said raw materials?
I can just see it... "You may not resell this sweater without permission from all the sheep whose wool was used to create it."
As you say -- we're being pwn3d by foreign interests -- legal, legislative, and business, and this is no different. Huge chunks of our infrastructure are now foreign-owned; foreign companies dictate new laws that affect American citizens; we all get to pay (in taxes and in shoddy goods) for the privilege of becoming the world's piggy bank. It needs to stop, before it's too late (if it's not already). NO country has ever survived either being in debt to or being primarily owned by foreign powers.
Slashdot Mirror
A layer of rubber or thick nonconductive cloth might save you, but I imagine the person fitting your collar, er, bracelet will make sure it contacts skin.
Your cost estimate is woefully optimistic. Current prices for bottom-end electronic dog collars are about $200, but that unit lacks the reliability and range you'd need in an airport terminal, so we'd be upgrading to the $700 unit. Yes, that's what they cost. No doubt it's mostly profit, but it's what the market has been paying for them for almost 60 years. I don't expect prices would drop just because it's the TSA buying them. Indeed, I'd expect a sharp increase, since one of the big tech challenges has been to get several collars to play nice together in the same area... if you need 50 or 500 or whatever number per flight and per airport, you're talking about a much more sophisticated transmitter bank than the one-collar/one-transmitter unit that's currently on the market. (Okay, so you can buy a 2-collar transmitter... for a suitable upgrade fee.)
Animals are shipped in crates, in the baggage compartment.
Oh shit, now I've given them another lame idea...
I agree with you -- it's not average Americans who are doing this. Average Americans are going WTF??
But the media has discovered that fear makes a good eyeball magnet, and they're all about selling eyeballs to advertisers. So the more they can convince us we're in fear of [insert bogeyman here] the richer the media outlets become.
And the younger generation of yuppies who've never lived outside their city cocoons are already half-afraid of anything unfamiliar (in much the same way little kids are often afraid of the dark), so it's easy to for the media to embue them with a culture of fear, even tho in truth they have "nothing to fear but fear itself".
This technology is well-understood and widely available -- the canine shock collar first came into use in the 1950s. Today's models are highly refined, capable of variable shocks from "barely a tingle" to "FRY". (Note: as a professional dog trainer, this falls into my area of expertise.)
Setting aside the "Your agonizer, Komrade!" aspects for the moment... how much will this cost us in tax dollars? How many passengers are in the air at any one time, at a wild-assed guess about 50,000?? The most basic canine unit costs about $200, but that one won't be sufficiently reliable or securable for airline use, nor does it have enough range for a large terminal, so let's upgrade to the $700 unit (which has a range of up to one mile under ideal conditions). That's $35 million just to purchase the units.
[And the average lifespan, in daily use, is about 3 to 5 years, then it's off to The Collar Clinic, which charges about 30% of the value of the collar for repairs.]
As to hackability -- this has been a problem since way back; one of the design challenges was ensuring that the transmitter from one collar didn't make another go off by mistake. And there are only so many radio frequencies available, and that too is old tech.
If I were bent on causing chaos on a plane, I wouldn't even get on board myself. I'd hide a scanning transmitter in the luggage, which would start transmitting "FRY" across the spectrum at random intervals. Passengers would never know who was going to get shocked next, or when the next shock was coming. Wouldn't that do wonders for air travel! (Encrypted signal required, you say? Okay, I'll just set my trigger to hit the electronics AFTER the decryption point.)
These devices are generally safe, as they are designed to be painful yet harmless. But someone with a weak heart or epilepsy could be in big trouble -- on FRY the shock is similar to a weedburner-type electric fence; it'll put you right on your ass. Even on "tickle", what happens to someone wearing a pacemaker??
My question is the same as it would be were this any other software: Is the author trustworthy? If not, is it possible that the software is similarly untrustworthy?
Furthermore, is it really all that good, or is it mostly ego?
I don't know, but his actions cast doubt on his character and therefore on his works.
Thanks! very good info.
THANK YOU for the cites ... do you have the Wiki article link handy too??
Under the law, and this has been tested repeatedly, you can call yourself anything you wish SO LONG AS THERE IS NO INTENT TO DEFRAUD. There is no legal requirement that you call yourself by your birth name, except on certain documents relating to property. Since there is no monetary loss here, there was no fraud. Deceiving someone SOCIALLY is not fraud. If it were, every high school clique would be in jail.
Ah, thanks, hopefully it'll start working for me now... it's been one of the little things that kept annoying me into not keeping any of my linux trial balloons. I'm about to do another round of testing... I keep hoping for a linux I can switch to!!
Why would window position not be saved by default? I was talking to someone the other day who had the same complaint, and worse, it was some multi-windowed app (maybe GIMP, I don't remember) that required several windows to be positioned at the start of each session. A small lack, but it's these small chronic annoyances that miscolour our perceptions.
What Jesus_666 said about "smart" features (and especially "smart" menus) -- please, ghu, let us be able to turn off that brain -- its thoughts are not always OUR thoughts!!
Since you're requesting input, my own personal pet peeve: when I select Detail View in Konq (indeed, in ANY file manager), I expect it to stick (as View settings do in Windows Explorer). But when I start a new session, it's back to Icon view (and has forgotten window size and position too), causing me to think evil thoughts at the developer. This has been a consistent problem with every Linux file manager I can remember ever trying, back over about 10 years, and no amount of pounding on Settings or Preferences makes it stick. [plaintively] Can someone PLEASE fix this??
I *am* glad to hear that missing stuff is "not fully baked yet" rather than "we changed the recipe". Invariably when stuff is removed, it's something I can't live without, causing me to stay with old versions (indeed, I'm posting this with Netscape *3* :)
Back in the olden days I'd liked KDE best of the various desktops.. didn't care so much for v3.x (for lots of little reasons which I've since forgotten), but am hoping 4.x will be my new fave :)
Actually, that strikes me as an insight on his thinking. "Amended" and "changed" are not really the same thing. "Amend" generally means an *addition* to; "change" MAY be comprised of parts added, altered, AND/OR removed.
"Better to have a heterogeneous system with a variety of different ways of handling security. Overall this may mean more potential weaknesses, but an attack on one will leave other systems still standing."
Which is one of the reasons that it's good to have Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines. Some duplication and some overlap, but if one is compromised, it won't take down the whole system. And if one branch's policies fail, it won't destroy the entire military. And so forth.
Besides, we need a certain raw number of military personnel. If that's (random numbers) 200,000 warm bodies total, and 50,000 are in each of the four main forces, that's still the required number of warm bodies.
Furthermore, as organizations grow, they often lose touch between levels. When communication is critical, a smaller organization is usually better. So again, probably better to have several smaller armed forces than one monolithic force.
In my observation, news stopped being factual when it became another aspect of the ratings war -- when how many eyeballs you could sell to your advertisers became more important than the concept of news itself. This shift happened in two stages -- initially in the mid-1970s, when some stations started hiring standup comics to deliver weather and sports, and a larger shift in the early 1980s that affected primary newscasting, not coincidentally about the time the second generation (to whom TV was not a novelty) raised with television came of news-watching age. To previous generations, television news was, well, NEWS. To the current generations, TV is primarily entertainment, and current news presentation styles reflect that.
As to TFInterview, I think the good officer was as truthful as he was able to be in the context of his job, tho I did notice a lot of non-information.
WW2 was before my time, but I grew up during the Cold War. It's definitely scary to watch our country turn into the backside of the Iron Curtain that we worked for so long to tear down.
[laughing] Being familiar with sheep myself, I'm sure you're right (tho if not shorn regularly, what they actually turn into is steaming piles of maggots). Sheep may be too dim to recognise "clippers" but they sure do like being freed from their annual growth! After shearing, even old ewes leap around like spring lambs.
Geez, don't go to that planet. They're torturing everyone!!!
Remember the article on high-temperature biofuel-to-power conversion from a couple weeks ago? Occurred to me then that even if it's not terribly efficient from a power-generation standpoint, it would be a great way to get rid of solid waste of any description (including hazardous waste) and surely metals extraction could be part of the process. Maybe pass the ash through various types of smelting processes, since it's likely to have a high concentration of various metals once the organics are burned away.
Aluminum requires vast amounts of electricity to extract from bauxite, and electricity is not presently in infinite supply.
Not to mention the fire hazards with domestic wiring that several replies spoke of.
Happens in California too. Constructions sites have to be guarded 24/7 to keep everything metal from walking with Jesus.
And people show up at the recycle yards with big spools of brand-new wire that say "PACIFIC BELL" or "EDISON" on them, and the recyclers still take them... come on, does it need to have "STOLEN" stenciled across it before you figure it out??
Things changed when companies stopped selling a product, and started selling customers to each other.
I think the solution is the same one that B&M libraries already use: multiple/regional libraries, with multiple copies of popular works, which can only be checked out as complete works. (Like you can't check out just one song off a CD, or just one page out of a book.)
IOW, a distributed system, where content can be digitally shifted from one library to another depending on demand, and where checkout periods are similar to B&M libraries -- so you digitally check out a whole CD for a week or two, rather than checking out one song for 3 minutes.
"The interesting thing is that this 'island behavior' usually includes the French language somehow, check out Quebec and Belgium for instance."
I was going to bring up that point -- there must be something awry in the culture that the French language engenders, because the "island behaviour" is indeed a problem wherever French is the dominant language. Quebec is at times every bit as extreme an example as France itself.
That's a good point. Where does something become "restricted" from further sales -- at the retail level? At the wholesaler? at the initial processor of raw materials?? at the point of origin (mines, farms, sheep, etc.) for said raw materials?
I can just see it... "You may not resell this sweater without permission from all the sheep whose wool was used to create it."
As you say -- we're being pwn3d by foreign interests -- legal, legislative, and business, and this is no different. Huge chunks of our infrastructure are now foreign-owned; foreign companies dictate new laws that affect American citizens; we all get to pay (in taxes and in shoddy goods) for the privilege of becoming the world's piggy bank. It needs to stop, before it's too late (if it's not already). NO country has ever survived either being in debt to or being primarily owned by foreign powers.