The company is banking on several advancements. Using "self driving" pods instead of a long train of cars, allowing point to point transport without having to change lines. Using modular pods that allow for a variety of cargo: passengers, a single passenger in his car, goods, whatever. Having these things travel at a higher speed to further reduce travel time. Access points with a low footprint and fast lifts, meaning you can afford to have many smaller points of ingress instead of just a couple of large (and in urban settings hugely expensive) subway stations. Technically it can be done, though I have my doubts about the economics of the whole thing. In any case it'll be interesting to see how this develops.
These private entities will literally cruise up and down the isles of parking lots at various public venues -- malls, stadiums, walmart, etc -- scanning/recording plates and waiting for statistics to find them a car/person of interest. As a bonus they also sell all their collected data to the commercial private databases.
Just... wow... At least here in Europe that sort of thing is extremely illegal.
There are some very good uses of the technology, sure. Catching people with false or stolen plates is another (it's becoming a real problem here). I'm not against this sort of information being collected and used, in principle. But there should be plenty of rules to safeguard our privacy. So:
- Clearly defined use and retention policies, and oversight.
- No sharing with other departments.
- Access to the data should require probable cause or a warrant, with the level of access determined by the alleged violation. If the system flags you for speeding, the police gets two data points to prove the speeding violation only, nothing further. If your car is flagged as uninsured, they only need one data point to issue a fine for that. But getting all the data on your whereabouts should require a little bit more: driving with stolen plates, or a warrant in case the driver is suspected of a crime.
- I'm also ok with the data being used for "road pricing", as long as the system automatically issues the monthly bills without any human having access to my data... unless there is reason to verify the data, such as me disputing a bill.
- All of that requires ironclad security and a complete audit trail that is inspected on a regular basis.
ALPR's are a useful tool that I think the police should have access to... however I do not trust for one second that they will make proper use, that the security is adequate, that the audit trail is inspected, that unauthorized data access is adequately punished, and that the politicians will not greatly expand the allowed use of the system once it is in place. They have proven countless times that they are not to be trusted on any of those points on previous occasions.
If you invest other people's money, you actually have to make a profit to pay them out the return you promised. If you run a Ponzi scheme, you can promise double digit returns, and all you have to do is keep finding more suckers and use their money to pay out to earlier investors, before you take the lot and skip town. They require two completely different skills: investment savvy vs. being a charismatic salesman.
How exactly would you propose making a quick legal $45.000 with GPS spoofing?
In other words: "Please pay to train our workforce. And please make sure you train enough of them to drive the hourly wage down a bit, we're not running a damn charity here"
Dyson is an innovator, not an inventor. He invented none of the things that make his famous products possible: the bagless vacuum, the bladeless fan, and the airblade hand dryer all existed previously. What he did was made them practical and/or apply a little design and turn them into premium products. Kind of what Apple did with the iPhone.
I'll say this for his vacuums though: we've tried quite a few different bagless designs from various A brands (we provide them to our tenants and we wanted the most maintenance-free option), and so far I would only give the Dyson a passing grade. With many of the others you will spend more time cleaning the air filters than doing any actual vacuuming.
Space age means cheap launches and the means to get a lot of heavy stuff to orbit. And after decades of stagnation, SpaceX is finally making some progress on that front again.
"Demonstrated" is the right word. I suppose you're referring to the Space Shuttle.
For starters, rocket reuse is not a goal in itself, it is a means by which launch costs can potentially be lowered. The Space Shuttle was a reusable launch system, but launches were pretty expensive (in terms of kg to orbit), and reusing the SRBs did very, very little to bring those costs down. In contrast, using refurbished Falcon 9 first stages turns out to be a real cost saver. The amazing part is not just the technology (especially landing those stages on land or barges, which is where the cost savings come in), but the economics as well. If SpaceX meet their upcoming development goals, they are going to be a game changer.
That's still doesn't making Americans use Android a rational decision. If you can afford an iPhone model that you like, and if you prefer the extra security and lack of crappy bloatware that the walled garden provides, then iOS might be a better choice for you. Personally I think it's good to have a choice of operating systems, and while I have an Apple iPhone, my tablets run Android.
We (in Europe) have laws that apply to individual countries (somewhat comparable to states in the USA in this context), as well as laws that apply to all of Europe.
It has stood up in court countless times. Following orders is not an excuse when, in the eyes of the court, the accused should have known his actions were highly immoral, or in clear violation of the law or human rights. When things are a little less clear, "only following orders" most certainly weighs in on the court's decision. There is some room between "clearly permissible" and "nazi war crimes", you know.
Not just that; I'd say that in face of potential but not immediately apparent lethal danger, a police offers has less justification than an ordinary citizen to use lethal force, not more. They are there to "serve and protect", and the public comes first. Including potential suspects, if they are not presenting a clear danger.
But with that said: if firing on suspects who reach for something when told not to is indeed the standard MO, and if this is what officers are told and trained to do, then you can not fault them for following standard police procedure. In that case, you will have to change that procedure first.
The summary does, though. Anyway: this story can be summarized by "Execs fail(ed) to predict the future, and isn't that dumb?". There are many similar stories of execs selling an asset cheaply only to see it blossom into a profitable powerhouse. And while these stories are a good example of survivor bias, the reverse also happens: they buy a highly successful promising startup, which then turns out to be a thoroughly unprofitable one hit wonder. It happens.
I never read those comics, the whole superhero thing somehow just didn't appeal to me (and still doesn't). And in general they were less popular here in NL; most kids on the block had a sizable collection of comic books, but those were mostly from Dutch, French and Belgian cartoonists, sporting more ordinary heroes such as Tintin, Michel Vaillant, Asterix, Storm, Thorgal, and the downright ordinary Gaston. As well as the often rather preachy but nevertheless nice comics by Vandersteen. Somehow those comics are a bit more believable and run at a somewhat better pace. I found the superhero comics to be rather over the top, and the movies are the same, these days they seem to have devolved mostly into scenes of characters of various stripes throwing each other spectacularly into or through buildings.
Still, one has to respect and admire Stan Lee. He did what he loved, was good at it, and turned his creations into widely beloved cultural icons.
Currently there are no relevant rights of use left.
Yet here in the Netherlands and several other EU countries we are still paying for them. That's right, there's a tax on every blank CD, MP3 player, cell phone and hard disk sold, to compensate the music and film industry for what has been dubbed "home copying" of copyrighted material.
The tax was introduced to compensate the industry for downloading of copyrighted material, which was legal or at least condoned at the time. When downloading was made illegal, the tax was lowered a little but remained in place. Ostensibly to compensate the music industry for time or format shifting of legally owned media (hence the name "home copy")... but that has always been a right, and the industry has never had the right to collect a tax for that: making a copy of media you already own does not constitute a lost sale (as several judges have confirmed).
Interestingly, it was the EU Court who ruled that the "home copy" levy - as compensation for illegal downloads - was in itself illegal. And since the government was no longer allowed to compensate the industry, downloading of copyrighted material promptly was made illegal by law and the levy was to be repealed. In the past, every proposal to make downloading illegal was accompanied by one to repeal the levy at the same time, yet due to a lobbying effort that reached bizarre levels on intensity, the levy remained. You'd think if the industry was being compensated for home copies, there should also be a law that guarantees my right to make such a copy, but you'd be wrong. And thanks to DRM I sometimes cannot even use original media that I own legally (thanks, HDCP)
It's exactly that: airlines are scared to death of losing business class customers to a more comfortable economy class. 10%? I'd be happy to pay 50% more for a 50% increase in space, or 100% for double the space. I'm happy to pay for extra comfort on longer flights, but I've never found premium economy to be worth the price. Better to pay a bit extra for an exit seat. In the old days, paying 100-150% extra got me in business class, but not anymore (though that depends a lot on where you're flying from; Schiphol used to be great for bargains and direct flights, but there's less of both these days, it seems)
I've worked for a few companies where they've switched from business class to (premium) economy on transatlantic flights... and a couple have since switched back. Seems the airlines' tactics are working.
Dutch banks have you covered there: a couple of them now only require user/pass to log in to your account, with additional 2FA only needed for actual transactions. So an average script kiddie can find the high value targets with ease, after which spear phishing or even more targeted measures become profitable.
Slashdot Mirror
The company is banking on several advancements. Using "self driving" pods instead of a long train of cars, allowing point to point transport without having to change lines. Using modular pods that allow for a variety of cargo: passengers, a single passenger in his car, goods, whatever. Having these things travel at a higher speed to further reduce travel time. Access points with a low footprint and fast lifts, meaning you can afford to have many smaller points of ingress instead of just a couple of large (and in urban settings hugely expensive) subway stations. Technically it can be done, though I have my doubts about the economics of the whole thing. In any case it'll be interesting to see how this develops.
These private entities will literally cruise up and down the isles of parking lots at various public venues -- malls, stadiums, walmart, etc -- scanning/recording plates and waiting for statistics to find them a car/person of interest. As a bonus they also sell all their collected data to the commercial private databases.
Just... wow... At least here in Europe that sort of thing is extremely illegal.
There are some very good uses of the technology, sure. Catching people with false or stolen plates is another (it's becoming a real problem here). I'm not against this sort of information being collected and used, in principle. But there should be plenty of rules to safeguard our privacy. So:
- Clearly defined use and retention policies, and oversight.
- No sharing with other departments.
- Access to the data should require probable cause or a warrant, with the level of access determined by the alleged violation. If the system flags you for speeding, the police gets two data points to prove the speeding violation only, nothing further. If your car is flagged as uninsured, they only need one data point to issue a fine for that. But getting all the data on your whereabouts should require a little bit more: driving with stolen plates, or a warrant in case the driver is suspected of a crime.
- I'm also ok with the data being used for "road pricing", as long as the system automatically issues the monthly bills without any human having access to my data... unless there is reason to verify the data, such as me disputing a bill.
- All of that requires ironclad security and a complete audit trail that is inspected on a regular basis.
ALPR's are a useful tool that I think the police should have access to... however I do not trust for one second that they will make proper use, that the security is adequate, that the audit trail is inspected, that unauthorized data access is adequately punished, and that the politicians will not greatly expand the allowed use of the system once it is in place. They have proven countless times that they are not to be trusted on any of those points on previous occasions.
If you invest other people's money, you actually have to make a profit to pay them out the return you promised. If you run a Ponzi scheme, you can promise double digit returns, and all you have to do is keep finding more suckers and use their money to pay out to earlier investors, before you take the lot and skip town. They require two completely different skills: investment savvy vs. being a charismatic salesman.
How exactly would you propose making a quick legal $45.000 with GPS spoofing?
What the hell is a "call"?
When are they buying Commodore?
In other words: "Please pay to train our workforce. And please make sure you train enough of them to drive the hourly wage down a bit, we're not running a damn charity here"
so he spent the prize money on booze. A vacuum cleaner and a fan would still have been better.
Disagree.
Dyson is an innovator, not an inventor. He invented none of the things that make his famous products possible: the bagless vacuum, the bladeless fan, and the airblade hand dryer all existed previously. What he did was made them practical and/or apply a little design and turn them into premium products. Kind of what Apple did with the iPhone.
I'll say this for his vacuums though: we've tried quite a few different bagless designs from various A brands (we provide them to our tenants and we wanted the most maintenance-free option), and so far I would only give the Dyson a passing grade. With many of the others you will spend more time cleaning the air filters than doing any actual vacuuming.
Space age means cheap launches and the means to get a lot of heavy stuff to orbit. And after decades of stagnation, SpaceX is finally making some progress on that front again.
"Demonstrated" is the right word. I suppose you're referring to the Space Shuttle.
For starters, rocket reuse is not a goal in itself, it is a means by which launch costs can potentially be lowered. The Space Shuttle was a reusable launch system, but launches were pretty expensive (in terms of kg to orbit), and reusing the SRBs did very, very little to bring those costs down. In contrast, using refurbished Falcon 9 first stages turns out to be a real cost saver. The amazing part is not just the technology (especially landing those stages on land or barges, which is where the cost savings come in), but the economics as well. If SpaceX meet their upcoming development goals, they are going to be a game changer.
Many people thought that the alternative candidate was worse...
That's still doesn't making Americans use Android a rational decision. If you can afford an iPhone model that you like, and if you prefer the extra security and lack of crappy bloatware that the walled garden provides, then iOS might be a better choice for you. Personally I think it's good to have a choice of operating systems, and while I have an Apple iPhone, my tablets run Android.
So how much did the lawyers get?
We (in Europe) have laws that apply to individual countries (somewhat comparable to states in the USA in this context), as well as laws that apply to all of Europe.
did not stand up in a real court of law then
It has stood up in court countless times. Following orders is not an excuse when, in the eyes of the court, the accused should have known his actions were highly immoral, or in clear violation of the law or human rights. When things are a little less clear, "only following orders" most certainly weighs in on the court's decision. There is some room between "clearly permissible" and "nazi war crimes", you know.
Not just that; I'd say that in face of potential but not immediately apparent lethal danger, a police offers has less justification than an ordinary citizen to use lethal force, not more. They are there to "serve and protect", and the public comes first. Including potential suspects, if they are not presenting a clear danger.
But with that said: if firing on suspects who reach for something when told not to is indeed the standard MO, and if this is what officers are told and trained to do, then you can not fault them for following standard police procedure. In that case, you will have to change that procedure first.
At second glance, there's a lot more to that question, and a lot more that has to be answered. But sometimes, less is more.
Art is seen, not made
At first glance, that's one of the best answers to the question "what is art?" I've read.
The story doesn't end there
The summary does, though. Anyway: this story can be summarized by "Execs fail(ed) to predict the future, and isn't that dumb?". There are many similar stories of execs selling an asset cheaply only to see it blossom into a profitable powerhouse. And while these stories are a good example of survivor bias, the reverse also happens: they buy a highly successful promising startup, which then turns out to be a thoroughly unprofitable one hit wonder. It happens.
I never read those comics, the whole superhero thing somehow just didn't appeal to me (and still doesn't). And in general they were less popular here in NL; most kids on the block had a sizable collection of comic books, but those were mostly from Dutch, French and Belgian cartoonists, sporting more ordinary heroes such as Tintin, Michel Vaillant, Asterix, Storm, Thorgal, and the downright ordinary Gaston. As well as the often rather preachy but nevertheless nice comics by Vandersteen. Somehow those comics are a bit more believable and run at a somewhat better pace. I found the superhero comics to be rather over the top, and the movies are the same, these days they seem to have devolved mostly into scenes of characters of various stripes throwing each other spectacularly into or through buildings.
Still, one has to respect and admire Stan Lee. He did what he loved, was good at it, and turned his creations into widely beloved cultural icons.
Currently there are no relevant rights of use left.
Yet here in the Netherlands and several other EU countries we are still paying for them. That's right, there's a tax on every blank CD, MP3 player, cell phone and hard disk sold, to compensate the music and film industry for what has been dubbed "home copying" of copyrighted material.
The tax was introduced to compensate the industry for downloading of copyrighted material, which was legal or at least condoned at the time. When downloading was made illegal, the tax was lowered a little but remained in place. Ostensibly to compensate the music industry for time or format shifting of legally owned media (hence the name "home copy")... but that has always been a right, and the industry has never had the right to collect a tax for that: making a copy of media you already own does not constitute a lost sale (as several judges have confirmed).
Interestingly, it was the EU Court who ruled that the "home copy" levy - as compensation for illegal downloads - was in itself illegal. And since the government was no longer allowed to compensate the industry, downloading of copyrighted material promptly was made illegal by law and the levy was to be repealed. In the past, every proposal to make downloading illegal was accompanied by one to repeal the levy at the same time, yet due to a lobbying effort that reached bizarre levels on intensity, the levy remained. You'd think if the industry was being compensated for home copies, there should also be a law that guarantees my right to make such a copy, but you'd be wrong. And thanks to DRM I sometimes cannot even use original media that I own legally (thanks, HDCP)
"For only $100 extra you can have the seat that we used to offer in economy".
It's exactly that: airlines are scared to death of losing business class customers to a more comfortable economy class. 10%? I'd be happy to pay 50% more for a 50% increase in space, or 100% for double the space. I'm happy to pay for extra comfort on longer flights, but I've never found premium economy to be worth the price. Better to pay a bit extra for an exit seat. In the old days, paying 100-150% extra got me in business class, but not anymore (though that depends a lot on where you're flying from; Schiphol used to be great for bargains and direct flights, but there's less of both these days, it seems)
I've worked for a few companies where they've switched from business class to (premium) economy on transatlantic flights... and a couple have since switched back. Seems the airlines' tactics are working.
Dutch banks have you covered there: a couple of them now only require user/pass to log in to your account, with additional 2FA only needed for actual transactions. So an average script kiddie can find the high value targets with ease, after which spear phishing or even more targeted measures become profitable.