Of course it's better... For that small group of elitists who supposivily can hear the frequency at which the universe vibrates. On a side not, I'll bet my 'Scorpians 2000' CD sounds better on an equivolently priced system too.
Mirriam-Webster defines Cult 5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion.
You're asking the masses to change their consumer habits? Piss into the wind some more, my friend, because unless it's something that's really painful, only time worn trends will change them. No offense, but the fact you could (but don't) illustrates the point.
"A guy goes to his friends house to see him. While talking on the porch, the guy notices his friends dog howling while simply lying there. The guys asks, "What's wrong with your dog"? The friend replies, "Oh, he's just sitting on a nail." The guy is a bit taken back. "A nail!?!? Why doesn't he move or soemthing!?" The friend replies, "Because it doesn't hurt bad enough..."
Like most of the people here, I have a tough time sypathizing with the RPAA here, especially considering the movie ranked #2 in all time weekend box-office sales. My question is what do they really think they've lost? Sales? Not this early. The people who are going to settle for a crappy internet/VCD quality rip are people who wouldn't have gone to the theaters to see it anyway. It's the experience. Hell, they may still go, but it's way to early to deal the "$$$ lost to piracy" card. If the video/DVD were already out, maybe I could believe it. But the piracy bandwagon is getting worn a little thin. It's like saying that since I downloaded Photoshop 6, Adobe just lost $300, which isn't true since I would have never bought PS6 in the first place. It was simply covenient. Figures lie and liars figure, I guess.
I actually agree with this guy. The hard core "death to all that oppose us" flavor of terrorist will do whatever it takes to get the job done, including plastic and bone grafting to change the structure of the face.
As for the HE detectors, I'm sure they'll help in some cases, but it wouldn't have mattered on 9/11, now would it? Face scanning technology will weed out the amateures and wannabes while bomb sniffing stuff will eliminate most explosives, but the only way you're going to stop the pros is by a good ol' fasioned weapons search and air-tight security. And the until the full body X-Ray technology gets the Ok, I can probably still get a ceramic knife along the spine of my back past security.
The biggest terrorism deterent? A "We aren't going to take this shit" attitude in the passengers. I guarantee that you airline terrorism would all but dry up if they knew every passenger would rend them limb from limb upon finding out their intentions.
When you consider the amount of casulties that one can inflict with 747 versus those of a car, I don't think most people have a problem with the security. And it's just not a firepower issue. After all, one could argue that a terrorist can load cars with nuclear weapons, therefore the police have a right to search all vehicals. The aircraft's own mobility makes them optimal targets for militants not only looking for hostages, but a means to escape to sympathizing countries. They will, no doubt, cross over other countries in the process. You now have a messy international incident waiting to happen. Somebody is going to catch a lot of crap when a terrorist decides he can't win the hostage route and slams a French airliner into Big Ben. Or US citizens get killed because of some flaw in the Brit negotiations. Sure, car bombs will people, but they generally don't have the damage or political fallout potential a jumbo jet has, thus the tighter regulation. It's tough for me to diagree with such a policy given the circumstances.
I'll venture out on a limb by mentioning that "denial of usage" is far from "owning" or "taking" the net. This worm is just the product of someone with way too much spare time on his hands (or on the RIAA payroll as somebody mentioned). Actually, these fools are useful. Somebody described these idiots as being similar to the way the body fights off an infection-- A virus pops up, the community adapts and puts it down before before it becomes life-threatening. That way when the real shit hits the fan (say, the first real internet war), the community will be able to combat it... Hopefully.
Ah, but that begs the question "What does a terrorist look like?" And it is an intriguing question he brings up. I would hope that after the first couple of times they make a note of it in the system or introduce some extra scanning routines when it comes to that person. Hopefully.
Besides my grousing earlier in the section, does anybody know what hardware is running this face recognition system? How beefy does a computer need to be to sort through 20-100 people at a time and match their face with potentially thousands of profiles given factors such as the targets speed and aspect to the camera. I'm figuring if they want this thing any more accurate, their going to have to map more points on the face and are going to need the hardware to back it up.
And what did you have in mind? Should I comment about how the system isn't all bad? Or that it had an 80% success rate in other areas? Or that it could be used for racial profiling? Or that it is too unreliable to be taken seriously now? Or that... Oh, wait... People have already posted all that shit...
Yep. I had a month to think about it, and now I'm wading in the warm jello bath of irony ^__^
What's scary, to me, is that we are giving up so much...
I really don't see the problem with having this system installed within the nations mass transit systems (air, rail, maybe bus). Eliminate a potential hijacking not just in the US, but in Europe and everywhere else? I wouldn't complain. I agree that the current system needs a lot of work, but it's also fair to mention that it scored upwards around 80% in some of the other airports in which it was tested. It's also true that it has the potential to become scary (like anything in government) if the proper counterveiling balances aren't installed to watch the watchers.
Sorry, but I want my Xbox to run PS1, PS2, DC games and any other ROM I can put onto a CD ^__^ The Xbox is a computer, computers emulate very well. Load the emulator onto the HD and bam. Instant near universal game machine.
Are you actually wagering that people are smart enough not to use this research for "less than benefical" purposes? I'll bet they were the same ones who wagered somebody wouldn't be stupid enough to wipe out an entire race of people because they were "genetically inferior". Damn right it's a slippery slope. Take a exerpt from Star Wars 2. No, really, as stupid as it sounds. I could easily see that slippery slope happening in todays world. You doubt that some mad man in power could resist inflating his armies by creating clones to augment his forces? They're willing to use nuclear and biologicals, why not clones?
"The slippery slope" is not simple assnine propaganda for the religious zealots out there. It's mentioned because people can be that extreme and it's been proven all throughout history...
At least someone sees that. I haven't seen it written anywhere in the Bible saying, "Thou shall not clone thyself nor grow parts from thy body." Parent is right... It devalues people as a whole knowing they can be grown, harvested and otherwise manipulated as parts. I'm reminded of the scandle in which medics let patients near death die because they have "organ doner" marked on their licence instead of trying to save them.
"Pack him, he's meat!" or "Hey, I'll bet his genetic material would help thousands of suffering people... Slice him up, boys!" Please don't be naive enough to say "it can't happen".
Clone researchers rejoice! By making the market illegle, you can now charge exorbitant prices for any cloning research or procedures! Of course I can see why this company was doing it. Cloning has just been elevated to the status of drugs, and with it, the cost you can quote to those desperate enough to want it done to them. If not some underground lab, then in some island in the Pacific right by Kazaa's office.
That's not to say i agree with the entire cloning thing, just that it's a service with potentially huge demand. Laws won't stop it unless the price of getting caught is higher than the rewards.
Why the heck isn't the RIAA sueing the major search engines as well? It's the same damn thing, really; I can find any number of MP3, warez, crackz and serialz sites through Google, but I don't see them or any other search engine getting it's ass sued off all day long, so what's the deal? Like a SE, any P2P application can provide you with legal as well as illegle content. Hell, AG even blocks some of it. F#@!$@# hypocitical, greedy bastards...
Normally this sort of comment would have been labelled "flaimbait"... Maybe there isn't a script making moderations after all... Nah, it's gotta be. You just got lucky.
Try Earthweb by Marc Stiegler. It starts out with nearly the same concept; The US Government/Military funding arcade games in order to harvest the the talent it needs to save the Earth from an apocalyptic menace (aren't they all?). It also introduces some cutting edge techno-social premises that I've only just now been seeing here on/. Oh, did anybody happen to mention The Last Starfighter? It's all actually not a bad concept until you find out that perfect soldier you were looking to recruit with a perfect virtual combat record is only thirteen. "Keep an eye on that one, Agent Jones..."
Let's all look at the simple, most basic real world example of this entire issue: A Search Engine for for the internet. Google will do just fine. I can surf Google all day long and find tons of sites on warez, cracks, serialz, credit card numbers, passwordz, mp3s, etc, etc... Where does the buck stop in this case? I don't see Google getting slammed with lawsuits. In fact, I don't see any search engine bearing the responsibility of what their results turn up. Now tell me how a P2P file sharing program is so different? I can search for any file on a Kazaa like any search engine out there, illegle or not. And now all of a sudden the responsibility rests on the software? No, I can't buy into that level of hypocrisy. The only concievable change I could see being made to the current P2P systems is not making the downloader anonomous, making the actual P2P network policable. Beyond that one point you didn't mention, the comparison doesn't hold water. Pure and simple, the P2P networks are weak targets that will fold easily under pressure in most cases and "the Man" is more than willing to go after them. Pick a bigger target like a Search Engine and now your "all of a sudden" trudging into the murky waters of free speech and the outcome of any lawsuit is far from certain there.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahem... Good point. My Bad.
Of course it's better... For that small group of elitists who supposivily can hear the frequency at which the universe vibrates. On a side not, I'll bet my 'Scorpians 2000' CD sounds better on an equivolently priced system too.
Mirriam-Webster defines Cult
5 a : great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b : a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion.
You're asking the masses to change their consumer habits? Piss into the wind some more, my friend, because unless it's something that's really painful, only time worn trends will change them. No offense, but the fact you could (but don't) illustrates the point.
"A guy goes to his friends house to see him. While talking on the porch, the guy notices his friends dog howling while simply lying there. The guys asks, "What's wrong with your dog"? The friend replies, "Oh, he's just sitting on a nail." The guy is a bit taken back. "A nail!?!? Why doesn't he move or soemthing!?" The friend replies, "Because it doesn't hurt bad enough..."
Like most of the people here, I have a tough time sypathizing with the RPAA here, especially considering the movie ranked #2 in all time weekend box-office sales. My question is what do they really think they've lost? Sales? Not this early. The people who are going to settle for a crappy internet/VCD quality rip are people who wouldn't have gone to the theaters to see it anyway. It's the experience. Hell, they may still go, but it's way to early to deal the "$$$ lost to piracy" card. If the video/DVD were already out, maybe I could believe it. But the piracy bandwagon is getting worn a little thin. It's like saying that since I downloaded Photoshop 6, Adobe just lost $300, which isn't true since I would have never bought PS6 in the first place. It was simply covenient. Figures lie and liars figure, I guess.
Perhapse I should have said "help eliminate" or "reduce" hijackings.
I actually agree with this guy. The hard core "death to all that oppose us" flavor of terrorist will do whatever it takes to get the job done, including plastic and bone grafting to change the structure of the face.
As for the HE detectors, I'm sure they'll help in some cases, but it wouldn't have mattered on 9/11, now would it? Face scanning technology will weed out the amateures and wannabes while bomb sniffing stuff will eliminate most explosives, but the only way you're going to stop the pros is by a good ol' fasioned weapons search and air-tight security. And the until the full body X-Ray technology gets the Ok, I can probably still get a ceramic knife along the spine of my back past security.
The biggest terrorism deterent? A "We aren't going to take this shit" attitude in the passengers. I guarantee that you airline terrorism would all but dry up if they knew every passenger would rend them limb from limb upon finding out their intentions.
When you consider the amount of casulties that one can inflict with 747 versus those of a car, I don't think most people have a problem with the security. And it's just not a firepower issue. After all, one could argue that a terrorist can load cars with nuclear weapons, therefore the police have a right to search all vehicals. The aircraft's own mobility makes them optimal targets for militants not only looking for hostages, but a means to escape to sympathizing countries. They will, no doubt, cross over other countries in the process. You now have a messy international incident waiting to happen. Somebody is going to catch a lot of crap when a terrorist decides he can't win the hostage route and slams a French airliner into Big Ben. Or US citizens get killed because of some flaw in the Brit negotiations. Sure, car bombs will people, but they generally don't have the damage or political fallout potential a jumbo jet has, thus the tighter regulation. It's tough for me to diagree with such a policy given the circumstances.
I'll venture out on a limb by mentioning that "denial of usage" is far from "owning" or "taking" the net. This worm is just the product of someone with way too much spare time on his hands (or on the RIAA payroll as somebody mentioned). Actually, these fools are useful. Somebody described these idiots as being similar to the way the body fights off an infection-- A virus pops up, the community adapts and puts it down before before it becomes life-threatening. That way when the real shit hits the fan (say, the first real internet war), the community will be able to combat it... Hopefully.
Ah, but that begs the question "What does a terrorist look like?" And it is an intriguing question he brings up. I would hope that after the first couple of times they make a note of it in the system or introduce some extra scanning routines when it comes to that person. Hopefully.
It's the future. The Police stop crime before it happens. They are never wrong.
They better test this one out better than they tested Agent Orange out. That stuff was safe for humans too... Just kidding. Here's the real link.
Besides my grousing earlier in the section, does anybody know what hardware is running this face recognition system? How beefy does a computer need to be to sort through 20-100 people at a time and match their face with potentially thousands of profiles given factors such as the targets speed and aspect to the camera. I'm figuring if they want this thing any more accurate, their going to have to map more points on the face and are going to need the hardware to back it up.
And what did you have in mind? Should I comment about how the system isn't all bad? Or that it had an 80% success rate in other areas? Or that it could be used for racial profiling? Or that it is too unreliable to be taken seriously now? Or that... Oh, wait... People have already posted all that shit...
Yep. I had a month to think about it, and now I'm wading in the warm jello bath of irony ^__^
What's scary, to me, is that we are giving up so much...
I really don't see the problem with having this system installed within the nations mass transit systems (air, rail, maybe bus). Eliminate a potential hijacking not just in the US, but in Europe and everywhere else? I wouldn't complain. I agree that the current system needs a lot of work, but it's also fair to mention that it scored upwards around 80% in some of the other airports in which it was tested. It's also true that it has the potential to become scary (like anything in government) if the proper counterveiling balances aren't installed to watch the watchers.
2002-05-19 16:06:51 Florida Face Recognition Fails (articles,privacy) -Rejected
Gee, only beat this submission by about a month.
Sorry, but I want my Xbox to run PS1, PS2, DC games and any other ROM I can put onto a CD ^__^ The Xbox is a computer, computers emulate very well. Load the emulator onto the HD and bam. Instant near universal game machine.
Are you actually wagering that people are smart enough not to use this research for "less than benefical" purposes? I'll bet they were the same ones who wagered somebody wouldn't be stupid enough to wipe out an entire race of people because they were "genetically inferior". Damn right it's a slippery slope. Take a exerpt from Star Wars 2. No, really, as stupid as it sounds. I could easily see that slippery slope happening in todays world. You doubt that some mad man in power could resist inflating his armies by creating clones to augment his forces? They're willing to use nuclear and biologicals, why not clones?
"The slippery slope" is not simple assnine propaganda for the religious zealots out there. It's mentioned because people can be that extreme and it's been proven all throughout history...
...not a religious one but an ethical one.
At least someone sees that. I haven't seen it written anywhere in the Bible saying, "Thou shall not clone thyself nor grow parts from thy body." Parent is right... It devalues people as a whole knowing they can be grown, harvested and otherwise manipulated as parts. I'm reminded of the scandle in which medics let patients near death die because they have "organ doner" marked on their licence instead of trying to save them.
"Pack him, he's meat!" or "Hey, I'll bet his genetic material would help thousands of suffering people... Slice him up, boys!" Please don't be naive enough to say "it can't happen".
Clone researchers rejoice! By making the market illegle, you can now charge exorbitant prices for any cloning research or procedures! Of course I can see why this company was doing it. Cloning has just been elevated to the status of drugs, and with it, the cost you can quote to those desperate enough to want it done to them. If not some underground lab, then in some island in the Pacific right by Kazaa's office.
That's not to say i agree with the entire cloning thing, just that it's a service with potentially huge demand. Laws won't stop it unless the price of getting caught is higher than the rewards.
Why the heck isn't the RIAA sueing the major search engines as well? It's the same damn thing, really; I can find any number of MP3, warez, crackz and serialz sites through Google, but I don't see them or any other search engine getting it's ass sued off all day long, so what's the deal? Like a SE, any P2P application can provide you with legal as well as illegle content. Hell, AG even blocks some of it. F#@!$@# hypocitical, greedy bastards...
Normally this sort of comment would have been labelled "flaimbait"... Maybe there isn't a script making moderations after all... Nah, it's gotta be. You just got lucky.
Try Earthweb by Marc Stiegler. It starts out with nearly the same concept; The US Government/Military funding arcade games in order to harvest the the talent it needs to save the Earth from an apocalyptic menace (aren't they all?). It also introduces some cutting edge techno-social premises that I've only just now been seeing here on /. Oh, did anybody happen to mention The Last Starfighter? It's all actually not a bad concept until you find out that perfect soldier you were looking to recruit with a perfect virtual combat record is only thirteen. "Keep an eye on that one, Agent Jones..."
You're right, of course, which makes my point all the more valid. I was just thinking it'd be easy to spoof Ip's and such.
Let's all look at the simple, most basic real world example of this entire issue: A Search Engine for for the internet. Google will do just fine. I can surf Google all day long and find tons of sites on warez, cracks, serialz, credit card numbers, passwordz, mp3s, etc, etc... Where does the buck stop in this case? I don't see Google getting slammed with lawsuits. In fact, I don't see any search engine bearing the responsibility of what their results turn up. Now tell me how a P2P file sharing program is so different? I can search for any file on a Kazaa like any search engine out there, illegle or not. And now all of a sudden the responsibility rests on the software? No, I can't buy into that level of hypocrisy. The only concievable change I could see being made to the current P2P systems is not making the downloader anonomous, making the actual P2P network policable. Beyond that one point you didn't mention, the comparison doesn't hold water. Pure and simple, the P2P networks are weak targets that will fold easily under pressure in most cases and "the Man" is more than willing to go after them. Pick a bigger target like a Search Engine and now your "all of a sudden" trudging into the murky waters of free speech and the outcome of any lawsuit is far from certain there.
If I were you, i'd be bitter over the N64 as a whole... "But it had Goldeneye!!!" WAHAhahaHAHAHAHahhaahHAHAHAHAHAH !!!