Warnings, they argue, would be misunderstood or dismissed, the same way ancient grave robbers ignored curses inscribed on the tombs of Egyptian pharaohs to seize the riches inside. The curse of plutonium packs a painful penalty.'"
What great examples. Record keeping is so much better kept and used more since the middle ages. I'm not sure if anyone, other than who did it, and again they failed to keep records, knew what Stone Hedge was. Curses...how many of the curses have come true? All theses tombs found and raided, and I haven't heard of any curses coming true. Despite what civilization is becoming, we are getting more intelligent and we are keeping records, sometimes too many. I'm sure what ever symbol we use will still mean the same, and if not, someone can find it in a record.
Passive tags will lie under your skin dormant until something sends a message to it to ask a question. Then it will answer.
Active tags will do more than just send out a responce. It will have to authenticate the query, then send information instead of just handing it out to any old request.
I'd say right a little database frontend in perl and query a mysql database. It's cheap (as in free), mysql runs on MS and Linux(free) and Linux can handle more hits and abuse than MS. Hell, if you run Linux you don't even need bleeding edge machinery.
If you want to get pretty with it you can make it web page based using php. And you even use Vbasic to run it if you're stuck on a MS box.
You don't have to make it public who it is, just notify the authorities. If I see a person on the most wanted list, I'm gonna call the authorities, not broadcast to everyone that he's on the most wanted so he goes running.
And with that I'm fine. But If I'm to pay for an application, especially as much as Office is,it better not have ads. If they released a version that was free and still had the basic features, I can handle ads in that.
It would simply answer the quest for information instead of just broadcasting when it gets hit w/ radio frequencies. Some how a private converstation has to happen w/ encryption of soe sort.
I have no problem with unobtrusive ads in searches or hotmail and what not. Howerver, I *DO* have a problem w/ them in Office which I may have shelled money out for. Or any mobile application I may have paid for. Ads are to generate money so you *don't* have to pay to subscribe. If you're gonna put ads in bought for programs, then just make it Open Source and I'll happily click on an ad or two.
Now that's a decent compromise, but how would you deactivate the device? Unless it has a some kind of cellular receiver in it that you can just send a signal from anywhere in the world.
Unless of course, you do it from the other end and once you find it's missing you remove the device ID from the system it works on, therefore makint it null and void. So if it is stolen, then someone can try to use it but it won't work because the ID it sends to authenticate won't exhist any more.
That's a good point. If RFID tags are to happen, God forbid, protocols have to be in established world wide, and the tag has to be active not just passive. By that I mean that when you go to unlock your office door at work, it needs to send a "Hi, who are you?" signtal to your tag, then YOUR tag has to send "Hello I'm the man that works here". But it has to somehow be encrypted.
It seems that this all more and more a headache in the securtiy department.
If they really do know who's behind the attack, don't they have the ethical duty to report them if not to prevent it from happening to other companies, but for themselves? The fact they know who and won't tell makes them no better than the spammers themselves.
That's like hearing a domestic abuse fight in your apt building, but don't call the cops.
It seems that in a social acceptance point of view, the majortiy wouldn't do this and find it unacceptable. And give that this is still a free, at least in choice, country, I don't think this will ever happen in the near future.
I'm not trying to argue, and I'm in no way condoning a RFID device. But extenral things have to come off eventually. Wheater it be a nipple ring that has to come off for an MRI (boy that would hurt), a watch to take off for a job (I had to take it off for when I worked in the food business) or whatever. For this to work, unfortunately it would have to go inside.
The only way that would work is if the watch would work ONLY for that person. Otherwise that's alot of info prime taking for a pick pocket or someone where you need to take off jewlery.
* You're in a car accident or you collapse and you have to go to the hospital and they need a medical history.
* You're child is lost and they need to find his address/phone number (this sounds incredibally pet like, I know. But the kid should be allowd to have it turned off/removed @ age 18 or younger if parents consent)
Minuses
* Let's say someone finds a way to sniff the signal, and can open your car/house what have you
* You want to take a job in the covert business..
* Anyone can track you
* If this takes off and business impliment it and you don't want to do it then you can't buy goods and what not.
I personally would never do this. It's just wrong in sooo many ways, religiously and ethically.
Well that's not so much the device as the fuel I would think. Dilithium (sp?) crystals or whatever it may be. But to power a cloak type device means it needs some kind of built in power device. Something powerful to run it for a while. Personally I don't wanna strap a nuclear reactor to my back. I want kids.
I can only imagine the power it would take to run a cloak like in Start Trek or Stargate, howerver certain concepts are here. For instance Active Camoflage. Granted it's not refracting light around the object, but it still gets the same result. I don't think we'll see a personal cloaking device, or for that matter one for a ship (where it makes it invisible) for a long time.
Right, but I'm guessing that they just say 18 and over to circumvent any type of headache this may provide. I'm not saying that it's a huge problem or a problem at all, but I'd guess they would rather just have Student Joe Shmoe sign without have to get his gurardians to come too. It's just plainly easier, I would think.
This reminds me of an article on/. the other day about young people losing interesting in coding. The fact that they can have this program and it's successful tells me that they are in fact *not* losing interest in coding.
I think that commercial on the web site mis-represents PC's. Now we all know they're speaking about MS, but how many times, other than kernel upgrades does Linux reboot?
I guess they couldn't go right out and just destroy MS in the ad. And to a average home user, a PC is basically a MS machine. But still. It may even hurt teaching some naive person Linux because they could be "Well it runs on a PC and PC's reboot."
I have the Linux+ certifcation and it's on my resume. I've applied from Linux Help desk to Linux Admin jobs. At the moment, I make mattresses for a living.
So now, think about this for a minute. Would you hire someone with 1 certification or are you likely to hire someone with multiple certs? I think it's good now that most certs require practical parts too so you demonstrate you know what you're doing.
Idealy, the prime candidate is somone with both certs and experience. Certs aren't everything, but experience doesn't teach you all the proper ways either.
Slashdot Mirror
Warnings, they argue, would be misunderstood or dismissed, the same way ancient grave robbers ignored curses inscribed on the tombs of Egyptian pharaohs to seize the riches inside. The curse of plutonium packs a painful penalty.'"
What great examples. Record keeping is so much better kept and used more since the middle ages. I'm not sure if anyone, other than who did it, and again they failed to keep records, knew what Stone Hedge was. Curses...how many of the curses have come true? All theses tombs found and raided, and I haven't heard of any curses coming true. Despite what civilization is becoming, we are getting more intelligent and we are keeping records, sometimes too many. I'm sure what ever symbol we use will still mean the same, and if not, someone can find it in a record.
I'll try to cler up what I'm saying.
Passive tags will lie under your skin dormant until something sends a message to it to ask a question. Then it will answer.
Active tags will do more than just send out a responce. It will have to authenticate the query, then send information instead of just handing it out to any old request.
I'd say right a little database frontend in perl and query a mysql database. It's cheap (as in free), mysql runs on MS and Linux(free) and Linux can handle more hits and abuse than MS. Hell, if you run Linux you don't even need bleeding edge machinery.
If you want to get pretty with it you can make it web page based using php. And you even use Vbasic to run it if you're stuck on a MS box.
You don't have to make it public who it is, just notify the authorities. If I see a person on the most wanted list, I'm gonna call the authorities, not broadcast to everyone that he's on the most wanted so he goes running.
And with that I'm fine. But If I'm to pay for an application, especially as much as Office is,it better not have ads. If they released a version that was free and still had the basic features, I can handle ads in that.
It would simply answer the quest for information instead of just broadcasting when it gets hit w/ radio frequencies. Some how a private converstation has to happen w/ encryption of soe sort.
I have no problem with unobtrusive ads in searches or hotmail and what not. Howerver, I *DO* have a problem w/ them in Office which I may have shelled money out for. Or any mobile application I may have paid for. Ads are to generate money so you *don't* have to pay to subscribe. If you're gonna put ads in bought for programs, then just make it Open Source and I'll happily click on an ad or two.
Now that's a decent compromise, but how would you deactivate the device? Unless it has a some kind of cellular receiver in it that you can just send a signal from anywhere in the world.
Unless of course, you do it from the other end and once you find it's missing you remove the device ID from the system it works on, therefore makint it null and void. So if it is stolen, then someone can try to use it but it won't work because the ID it sends to authenticate won't exhist any more.
That's a good point. If RFID tags are to happen, God forbid, protocols have to be in established world wide, and the tag has to be active not just passive. By that I mean that when you go to unlock your office door at work, it needs to send a "Hi, who are you?" signtal to your tag, then YOUR tag has to send "Hello I'm the man that works here". But it has to somehow be encrypted.
It seems that this all more and more a headache in the securtiy department.
If they really do know who's behind the attack, don't they have the ethical duty to report them if not to prevent it from happening to other companies, but for themselves? The fact they know who and won't tell makes them no better than the spammers themselves.
That's like hearing a domestic abuse fight in your apt building, but don't call the cops.
It seems that in a social acceptance point of view, the majortiy wouldn't do this and find it unacceptable. And give that this is still a free, at least in choice, country, I don't think this will ever happen in the near future.
Oh, I agree whole heartedly. I would never allow anything to go in my childs skin that I wouldn't allow in mine alone.
Right. As long as it stay attached.
I'm not trying to argue, and I'm in no way condoning a RFID device. But extenral things have to come off eventually. Wheater it be a nipple ring that has to come off for an MRI (boy that would hurt), a watch to take off for a job (I had to take it off for when I worked in the food business) or whatever. For this to work, unfortunately it would have to go inside.
The only way that would work is if the watch would work ONLY for that person. Otherwise that's alot of info prime taking for a pick pocket or someone where you need to take off jewlery.
- Pluses
* You're in a car accident or you collapse and you have to go to the hospital and they need a medical history.* You're child is lost and they need to find his address/phone number (this sounds incredibally pet like, I know. But the kid should be allowd to have it turned off/removed @ age 18 or younger if parents consent)
- Minuses
* Let's say someone finds a way to sniff the signal, and can open your car/house what have you* You want to take a job in the covert business..
* Anyone can track you
* If this takes off and business impliment it and you don't want to do it then you can't buy goods and what not. I personally would never do this. It's just wrong in sooo many ways, religiously and ethically.
Well that's not so much the device as the fuel I would think. Dilithium (sp?) crystals or whatever it may be. But to power a cloak type device means it needs some kind of built in power device. Something powerful to run it for a while. Personally I don't wanna strap a nuclear reactor to my back. I want kids.
I can only imagine the power it would take to run a cloak like in Start Trek or Stargate, howerver certain concepts are here. For instance Active Camoflage. Granted it's not refracting light around the object, but it still gets the same result. I don't think we'll see a personal cloaking device, or for that matter one for a ship (where it makes it invisible) for a long time.
When I was in high school I was 18 my senior year. But the point is the same. I'm sure they were interested in high school if they're interested now.
Right, but I'm guessing that they just say 18 and over to circumvent any type of headache this may provide. I'm not saying that it's a huge problem or a problem at all, but I'd guess they would rather just have Student Joe Shmoe sign without have to get his gurardians to come too. It's just plainly easier, I would think.
This reminds me of an article on /. the other day about young people losing interesting in coding. The fact that they can have this program and it's successful tells me that they are in fact *not* losing interest in coding.
Because I'm sure you might have to sign a contract of some sort.
I think that commercial on the web site mis-represents PC's. Now we all know they're speaking about MS, but how many times, other than kernel upgrades does Linux reboot?
I guess they couldn't go right out and just destroy MS in the ad. And to a average home user, a PC is basically a MS machine. But still. It may even hurt teaching some naive person Linux because they could be "Well it runs on a PC and PC's reboot."
So, then you're just reenforcing my statement that it's not an antitrust issue?
I have the Linux+ certifcation and it's on my resume. I've applied from Linux Help desk to Linux Admin jobs. At the moment, I make mattresses for a living.
So now, think about this for a minute. Would you hire someone with 1 certification or are you likely to hire someone with multiple certs? I think it's good now that most certs require practical parts too so you demonstrate you know what you're doing.
Idealy, the prime candidate is somone with both certs and experience. Certs aren't everything, but experience doesn't teach you all the proper ways either.