It's another case of revolving door - where a senior government officer getting a high ranking position in the private sector the minute he quit his government job
I'm afraid that in a civil society like what we have, we can't do nothing to this form of corruption
Human nature, being human nature, we should know when to put a stop before it becomes too late
Since when has knowing when to stop ever been part of human nature? We'll stop when the oil runs out, or when the Y2.038k bug has reduced us all to cannibalism (whichever comes first)... and not a moment before.:^P
Well, I think your argument is self-negating. Intelligence is not the rote memorization of facts, unless you consider books and computers to be the most intelligent things around
I totally agree with you that rote memorizing of facts does not represent "Intelligence"
But "Intelligence" must still start from a base point
You see, "Intelligence" includes "Imagination", "Thinking", "Problem Solving"
How do you start imagining?
Often that not we start imagine something when we are not satisfied with the thing that we are facing in our real lives
When our wives ain't sexy no more, we start to imagine ourselves with very sexy girlfriends
When our house gets to crowded, we start to imagine having a bigger house
See a pattern here?
Yes, we must have a starting point to imagine, to think, to ponder, to begin to solve a question, and that "Starting Point", my friend, is a FACT
If we can't even remembering a FACT, if we relegate the roll of remembering all the facts to a gadget, please tell me how would we improve our intelligence if we can't remember all the important facts?
In the past, your friends would draw you a simplified map of the neighboring streets using a device known as a pen on permanent non-volatile memory surface known as paper. The really neat thing was that as long you kept it dry, the information would be retained permanently. If you were really lucky, they might photocopy part of a map and place a photograph of their house. These too were really neat in that they stored street numbers, so you knew what end to travel too.
Sometime they might even leave the front porch light on, place balloons outside the entrance, or place candles along the driveway like landing lights, so you knew you were heading in the right direction.
A smartphone is really that much of a dumb-down
It's the over-reliance of gadgets that are making us more and more lazy
And the most dangerous part is, we are at the verge of being so lazy that we may become too lazy to think, to memorize, to use our own brain
5 or 6 generations ago, the whole world could go on functioning without electricity
3 or 4 generations ago, human beings started relying on electricity
And now, if there is a black-out, you see people started panicking
3 or 4 generation ago, banks could go on functioning without computers
Now? If the "system down" sign is up, there is a sure bet that you won't be able to do almost any transaction in a bank
Human nature, being human nature, we should know when to put a stop before it becomes too late
Over-reliance on the smart phone will only get us into yet another pitfall --- what if the smartphone breaks down? What if the GPS gadgets break down? Are we able to function without them?
No, it's not randian, but instead, it's the most practical way to live one's own life in the world we are living in
It's the you-are-responsible-for-your-own-wellbeing way of living
In this world where everything could be archived somewhere, if you reveal things about yourselves, like the water that has splashed out of a cup, there's no way to get the genie back into the bottle
For example - I recently sent a URL to a friend with gmail address.
I noticed from the logs that google spidered that website within minutes of me sending that email. Not much of a surprise that google would do it (although a bit chilling to see it in practice), but the problem with your approach is that not only do I need to know that Google will suck up everything I send to someone at a gmail address I also need to know what every other email host will do with email sent to their systems
This world we live in is indeed very different from the world our forefathers lived
And the way we live in this world should also be very different from the way our forefathers lived in their world
We must change faster than the pace the world is changing, or we will be consumed by it all
That's not practical - especially when google does things like offer free email services for personal domains, then I have to do something like dig through MX records to find out who the real host is for every single person I ever send an email too and then figure out what their policies are and if they have changed since the last time I sent an email. That is beyond "not practical" and is now firmly in the territory of ridiculous
If you think that it's ridiculous, think of the world our offspring will inhibit
Their every-day-lives will be recoded somewhere
Their presence in every place will be noted, what they said and do will be archived, everything including their shoe-size will be known to people who wants to know
I make comments on digg and soulpancake. I recently did a google search on my user name. I discovered that all of my comments on digg and soulpancake were listed there and they were on the first page. Not only was my username there but also my real name and a picture and my hometown. I did notice that slashdot was not listed so I am grateful for that. I do not know how they associated my real name with my user name. Even though it is possible to know my real name from this I doubt that anyone has taken the time to do so
It's not hard to associate one person's real name with his online name if that person reveals too much too often regarding his/her own real lives to the world
Do you know that it's possible to get the social security numbers of many people?
Many associations (plural) routinely put their membership list online, and yes, with their member's social-security-number listed as well
This is the difference between the US and the EU. In the US privacy is perhaps a commodity. In the EU it's a fundamental human right protected by the constution
In this world where data-mining is practised by almost everybody and their great-grand-mother, it does not matter if your privacy is protected by whatever "constitution", if you keep on revealing who you are to the world, then the world will know about you, and they will know something about you that you yourself haven't yet realized
When you do not reveal everything to your friends, colleagues, and even to your own family members, how much do you think they can reveal to the world about you?
I really don't think I can keep my friends/relatives from knowing my name...
True, but do they all know your social security card number?
Do they know your credit card number?
That's the gist of it
There are things that we simply can NOT keep to ourselves, like our names
But there are _still_ many other things that we can keep under wrap
I know, it takes efforts, and sometimes it seems like it's unnecessarily troublesome to be so extraordinarily careful with our own lives
But that's the cost of living in this modern society, where we are no longer a "Human Being", we are merely a "Number", a "Blot" on the statistical charts somewhere
And if some of your information is already on the internet (address, etc), someone could use that name to find out even more.
I agree, living in a bubble is awesome! Steve Jobs did!
It's not "living in a bubble"
It's merely living your own life without having to tell the world everything about yourself
I've friends who are loud mouths and they will tell everything about everybody, including everything about themselves to the world
Hey, to those people, they are willingly revealing where they work, how much they earn, who their doctors are, what type of disease they have, what political inclination they belong to, and so on...
For people like that, don't blame the corporations if one day they can't purchase health insurance no more because everyone know that they gonna have cancer to the liver/lung/whatever in the future
One other thing, these "other ways to protect your privacy" cost money. So, either way companies are still making money off of you.
Who says that you need to pay to protect your privacy?
All you need to do is to zip your mouth shut and to be extra careful of what you do online and off-line
If I do not want people to know where I shop, when I shop, how much I pay for milk a month, I don't shop in ONE store and I don't use my credit card when I do my shopping
If I do not want people to know the frequency of my travelling from Detroit to Chicago, then I change my mode of transportation often - fly some times, drive some other times
It all boils down to what you do with your own live
Do not blame the corporations if you reveal everything yourself
As someone else said, your relatives/friends could mindlessly give away your information on Facebook or something such as that. Even just a name may be enough for someone to learn something revealing about you with a quick search
When you do not reveal everything to your friends, colleagues, and even to your own family members, how much do you think they can reveal to the world about you?
After all, the word "Privacy" came from "Private", and the most "Private" thing there is yourself - yes, your very own self
Each of us has our own privacy, and each of us interpret "Privacy" a little bit differently
As to whether we have given away our privacy to the corporations, I think it's too much of a blanket statement
You see, privacy is ours to begin with. The decision of whether not our privacy is handed over to the corporation largely falls into our own hand
If you decide to value your own privacy, then you won't reveal your own real identity online - and there are many ways to keep your real earth identity separate from your online identity
Plus, if you are so afraid that huge corporations like Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook may be gathering your privacy, then you should take step to ensure that whatever they gather from your activities online would not reflect who you are, in real life
Do not blame the corporations if you reveal everything yourself
And one more very important thing - Your privacy is not only in danger on the Internet
There are other areas that your privacy might be revealed to others - like your medical history, your driving licence, your voting records, the secret files the government (governments ?) keeps on you, et cetera
Do not think that just because your online privacy is threatened that your off-line privacy is not
I just have to salute all the Sysops out there, who somehow managed to keep the world-wide FidoNet (and several other smaller net) working, despite all odds
What happened on Dec-31-1983 illustrates the greatness of the many un-named Sysops all around the world:
Someone from Australia posted a "Happy New Year" greeting on one of the Fidonet newsgroups on Dec-31-1983
The message reached America some 5 hours later (to those un-initiated, FidoNet messages did not travel on light-speed, unlike Emails nowadays) and someone in America replied his "Happy New Year" greeting
That reply message took another 8 hours or so to got back to Australia, just in time for the original Australian message poster to receive on 23:57 that very same day
It was just a message, a simple message, but behind it, the round-trip message had travelled more than 60 hops
Meaning - for that single message, it took the effort of more than 60 Sysops to make it happened
For this, please allow me to salute all the Sysops for a job Well Done !!!
Re:I've been observing Stratfor since its inceptio
on
Is Stratfor a "Joke"?
·
· Score: 1
S/he wasn't questioning the basis, but the implied precision. 23%? 23's an awfully specific number, which implies you're not saying "oh about 1 in 5" but are instead saying "they were incorrect on 423 of the 1839 facts I carefully recorded in this log here to track their accuracy rate"
Sure, I can say something like "1 out of 5", I can even say something like "less than 25%", if that makes you happy
But I rather be more precise and quote the figure that I gather from several test cases that I carried out myself
After all, this is Slashdot - and Slashdot supposed to be a place for people who are more to technology (which means more precise number) than to fashion (in which the difference between "C-cup" and "D-cup" does not measure in micrometers)
You know how fast are the network connections in between cities back in the early 1980's?
300 baud - that's the speed for an "ultra fast" modem
Yes, we do have "networks" back then, it's called "FidoNet", and it's the sysops (system operators) who are carrying out all those internode connections
Re:I've been observing Stratfor since its inceptio
on
Is Stratfor a "Joke"?
·
· Score: 1
It's not meaningful unless you can compare it to other ratings for other news services
For the subjects that I'm very familiar with, I'm afraid that many other news services do not even give any coverage, and when they do, they (and I mean other news services) more than often quote their source from Stratfor, or similar quasi-intel sources
In other words, it's not very likely that I can make any comparison
As for the figure 20% to 23%, it's based on the accuracy on specific facts - date, location, events, person involved, and so on
I've been observing Stratfor since its inception
on
Is Stratfor a "Joke"?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I've been observing Stratfor - plus several other similar operations - since the late 1990's
I've subscribed (paid subscriptions) to many of them
I do so to gauge the correctness of their so-called "intel reports" as well as learn new and interesting "stuffs" that I'm not aware of
For Startfor, for the subjects that I'm very familiar with, I would say that they are correct about 20-23% of the time
For the subjects that I'm not familiar with, however, I won't be able to comment
Sorry, Mr RIAA CEO, it wasn't a one time deal. As long as you morons try passing this crap, we'll keep protesting. And the protests will only get bigger and bigger
I so hope you are correct. Sadly that does not seem to be how these things traditionally work. They keep making slight changes and resubmitting them over and over until the public becomes apathetic and finally passing it
Or worse !
They could have hired a skilled FUD expert from Microsoft to replace that dumbfuck Cary Sherman as CEO of MAFIAA
Through carefully placements of artfully crafted FUDs that guy (or gal) would be able to assemble tons of MAFIAA fanbois to spread whatever of his "gospel truths" to the world !
Whenever some entity says that they are the authority of the Net and wants to represent the users of the Net, I can't help but think of ICANN
Decades ago when ICANN was first organized they had a "crowdsource" campaign - they actually let the public at large to "register as members" and yes, I still keep the "ICANN membership card" that they sent me
But what is ICANN today? Do they care about the millions of "registered members"?
We _do_ have laws on the book that supposed to be just - that is, whoever does the wrong thing will be punished - but then, how many times do we see the laws being applied to the RICH & POWERFUL??
Laws - especially those news laws that were created in recent years - were created to benefit the RICH & POWERFUL - and TFA is just a case in point
If bird chirping in the background can become the property of anyone - I say it's the property of GOD - but in this world we live in, someone always come up and takes the place of God
In this case, Rumblefish thinks that it's God, so it claims the bird chirping as their property
That lies my original statement --- the radiation from brain scans - except perhaps for MRI --- is that they introduce enough radiation into the brain in order to be able to "read" the result
The amount of radiation introduced in any brain scan is definitely not "negligible"
If I can recall correctly, brain scan does introduces radiation into the brain
What are they thinking?
Scanning the little brains of little babies will only do more harm than good to those babies
I do not object of performing brain scan on babies - but on those babies who may have cancer or other fatal illness in order to diagnose their condition
Autism may be serious, but at least, it's not a fatal sickness
Slashdot Mirror
It's another case of revolving door - where a senior government officer getting a high ranking position in the private sector the minute he quit his government job
I'm afraid that in a civil society like what we have, we can't do nothing to this form of corruption
Human nature, being human nature, we should know when to put a stop before it becomes too late
Since when has knowing when to stop ever been part of human nature? We'll stop when the oil runs out, or when the Y2.038k bug has reduced us all to cannibalism (whichever comes first)... and not a moment before. :^P
Can't argue with that :)
Well, I think your argument is self-negating. Intelligence is not the rote memorization of facts, unless you consider books and computers to be the most intelligent things around
I totally agree with you that rote memorizing of facts does not represent "Intelligence"
But "Intelligence" must still start from a base point
You see, "Intelligence" includes "Imagination", "Thinking", "Problem Solving"
How do you start imagining?
Often that not we start imagine something when we are not satisfied with the thing that we are facing in our real lives
When our wives ain't sexy no more, we start to imagine ourselves with very sexy girlfriends
When our house gets to crowded, we start to imagine having a bigger house
See a pattern here?
Yes, we must have a starting point to imagine, to think, to ponder, to begin to solve a question, and that "Starting Point", my friend, is a FACT
If we can't even remembering a FACT, if we relegate the roll of remembering all the facts to a gadget, please tell me how would we improve our intelligence if we can't remember all the important facts?
In the past, your friends would draw you a simplified map of the neighboring streets using a device known as a pen on permanent non-volatile memory surface known as paper. The really neat thing was that as long you kept it dry, the information would be retained permanently. If you were really lucky, they might photocopy part of a map and place a photograph of their house. These too were really neat in that they stored street numbers, so you knew what end to travel too.
Sometime they might even leave the front porch light on, place balloons outside the entrance, or place candles along the driveway like landing lights, so you knew you were heading in the right direction.
A smartphone is really that much of a dumb-down
It's the over-reliance of gadgets that are making us more and more lazy
And the most dangerous part is, we are at the verge of being so lazy that we may become too lazy to think, to memorize, to use our own brain
5 or 6 generations ago, the whole world could go on functioning without electricity
3 or 4 generations ago, human beings started relying on electricity
And now, if there is a black-out, you see people started panicking
3 or 4 generation ago, banks could go on functioning without computers
Now? If the "system down" sign is up, there is a sure bet that you won't be able to do almost any transaction in a bank
Human nature, being human nature, we should know when to put a stop before it becomes too late
Over-reliance on the smart phone will only get us into yet another pitfall --- what if the smartphone breaks down? What if the GPS gadgets break down? Are we able to function without them?
Your approach is way too randian
No, it's not randian, but instead, it's the most practical way to live one's own life in the world we are living in
It's the you-are-responsible-for-your-own-wellbeing way of living
In this world where everything could be archived somewhere, if you reveal things about yourselves, like the water that has splashed out of a cup, there's no way to get the genie back into the bottle
For example - I recently sent a URL to a friend with gmail address.
I noticed from the logs that google spidered that website within minutes of me sending that email. Not much of a surprise that google would do it (although a bit chilling to see it in practice), but the problem with your approach is that not only do I need to know that Google will suck up everything I send to someone at a gmail address I also need to know what every other email host will do with email sent to their systems
This world we live in is indeed very different from the world our forefathers lived
And the way we live in this world should also be very different from the way our forefathers lived in their world
We must change faster than the pace the world is changing, or we will be consumed by it all
That's not practical - especially when google does things like offer free email services for personal domains, then I have to do something like dig through MX records to find out who the real host is for every single person I ever send an email too and then figure out what their policies are and if they have changed since the last time I sent an email. That is beyond "not practical" and is now firmly in the territory of ridiculous
If you think that it's ridiculous, think of the world our offspring will inhibit
Their every-day-lives will be recoded somewhere
Their presence in every place will be noted, what they said and do will be archived, everything including their shoe-size will be known to people who wants to know
I make comments on digg and soulpancake. I recently did a google search on my user name. I discovered that all of my comments on digg and soulpancake were listed there and they were on the first page. Not only was my username there but also my real name and a picture and my hometown. I did notice that slashdot was not listed so I am grateful for that. I do not know how they associated my real name with my user name. Even though it is possible to know my real name from this I doubt that anyone has taken the time to do so
It's not hard to associate one person's real name with his online name if that person reveals too much too often regarding his/her own real lives to the world
Do you know that it's possible to get the social security numbers of many people?
Many associations (plural) routinely put their membership list online, and yes, with their member's social-security-number listed as well
When electronic calculators started surfacing back in the 1960's/1970's, students stop memorizing the multiplication tables
Now it's the turn of the smartphone that will affect a whole new generation of people
Used to be that we know the address of a friend of ours
No more
With smartphone/tablets, you don't need to remember anything - by just tapping on the glass panel you will get all the info that you need
The more gadgets we surround ourselves, the dumber we will become
This is the difference between the US and the EU. In the US privacy is perhaps a commodity. In the EU it's a fundamental human right protected by the constution
In this world where data-mining is practised by almost everybody and their great-grand-mother, it does not matter if your privacy is protected by whatever "constitution", if you keep on revealing who you are to the world, then the world will know about you, and they will know something about you that you yourself haven't yet realized
When you do not reveal everything to your friends, colleagues, and even to your own family members, how much do you think they can reveal to the world about you?
I really don't think I can keep my friends/relatives from knowing my name...
True, but do they all know your social security card number?
Do they know your credit card number?
That's the gist of it
There are things that we simply can NOT keep to ourselves, like our names
But there are _still_ many other things that we can keep under wrap
I know, it takes efforts, and sometimes it seems like it's unnecessarily troublesome to be so extraordinarily careful with our own lives
But that's the cost of living in this modern society, where we are no longer a "Human Being", we are merely a "Number", a "Blot" on the statistical charts somewhere
And if some of your information is already on the internet (address, etc), someone could use that name to find out even more.
I agree, living in a bubble is awesome! Steve Jobs did!
It's not "living in a bubble"
It's merely living your own life without having to tell the world everything about yourself
I've friends who are loud mouths and they will tell everything about everybody, including everything about themselves to the world
Hey, to those people, they are willingly revealing where they work, how much they earn, who their doctors are, what type of disease they have, what political inclination they belong to, and so on ...
For people like that, don't blame the corporations if one day they can't purchase health insurance no more because everyone know that they gonna have cancer to the liver/lung/whatever in the future
One other thing, these "other ways to protect your privacy" cost money. So, either way companies are still making money off of you.
Who says that you need to pay to protect your privacy?
All you need to do is to zip your mouth shut and to be extra careful of what you do online and off-line
If I do not want people to know where I shop, when I shop, how much I pay for milk a month, I don't shop in ONE store and I don't use my credit card when I do my shopping
If I do not want people to know the frequency of my travelling from Detroit to Chicago, then I change my mode of transportation often - fly some times, drive some other times
It all boils down to what you do with your own live
Do not blame the corporations if you reveal everything yourself
As someone else said, your relatives/friends could mindlessly give away your information on Facebook or something such as that. Even just a name may be enough for someone to learn something revealing about you with a quick search
When you do not reveal everything to your friends, colleagues, and even to your own family members, how much do you think they can reveal to the world about you?
After all, the word "Privacy" came from "Private", and the most "Private" thing there is yourself - yes, your very own self
Privacy is a commodity - a private commodity
Each of us has our own privacy, and each of us interpret "Privacy" a little bit differently
As to whether we have given away our privacy to the corporations, I think it's too much of a blanket statement
You see, privacy is ours to begin with. The decision of whether not our privacy is handed over to the corporation largely falls into our own hand
If you decide to value your own privacy, then you won't reveal your own real identity online - and there are many ways to keep your real earth identity separate from your online identity
Plus, if you are so afraid that huge corporations like Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook may be gathering your privacy, then you should take step to ensure that whatever they gather from your activities online would not reflect who you are, in real life
Do not blame the corporations if you reveal everything yourself
And one more very important thing - Your privacy is not only in danger on the Internet
There are other areas that your privacy might be revealed to others - like your medical history, your driving licence, your voting records, the secret files the government (governments ?) keeps on you, et cetera
Do not think that just because your online privacy is threatened that your off-line privacy is not
I just have to salute all the Sysops out there, who somehow managed to keep the world-wide FidoNet (and several other smaller net) working, despite all odds
What happened on Dec-31-1983 illustrates the greatness of the many un-named Sysops all around the world:
Someone from Australia posted a "Happy New Year" greeting on one of the Fidonet newsgroups on Dec-31-1983
The message reached America some 5 hours later (to those un-initiated, FidoNet messages did not travel on light-speed, unlike Emails nowadays) and someone in America replied his "Happy New Year" greeting
That reply message took another 8 hours or so to got back to Australia, just in time for the original Australian message poster to receive on 23:57 that very same day
It was just a message, a simple message, but behind it, the round-trip message had travelled more than 60 hops
Meaning - for that single message, it took the effort of more than 60 Sysops to make it happened
For this, please allow me to salute all the Sysops for a job Well Done !!!
S/he wasn't questioning the basis, but the implied precision. 23%? 23's an awfully specific number, which implies you're not saying "oh about 1 in 5" but are instead saying "they were incorrect on 423 of the 1839 facts I carefully recorded in this log here to track their accuracy rate"
Sure, I can say something like "1 out of 5", I can even say something like "less than 25%", if that makes you happy
But I rather be more precise and quote the figure that I gather from several test cases that I carried out myself
After all, this is Slashdot - and Slashdot supposed to be a place for people who are more to technology (which means more precise number) than to fashion (in which the difference between "C-cup" and "D-cup" does not measure in micrometers)
You know how fast are the network connections in between cities back in the early 1980's?
300 baud - that's the speed for an "ultra fast" modem
Yes, we do have "networks" back then, it's called "FidoNet", and it's the sysops (system operators) who are carrying out all those internode connections
It's not meaningful unless you can compare it to other ratings for other news services
For the subjects that I'm very familiar with, I'm afraid that many other news services do not even give any coverage, and when they do, they (and I mean other news services) more than often quote their source from Stratfor, or similar quasi-intel sources
In other words, it's not very likely that I can make any comparison
As for the figure 20% to 23%, it's based on the accuracy on specific facts - date, location, events, person involved, and so on
I've been observing Stratfor - plus several other similar operations - since the late 1990's
I've subscribed (paid subscriptions) to many of them
I do so to gauge the correctness of their so-called "intel reports" as well as learn new and interesting "stuffs" that I'm not aware of
For Startfor, for the subjects that I'm very familiar with, I would say that they are correct about 20-23% of the time
For the subjects that I'm not familiar with, however, I won't be able to comment
Sorry, Mr RIAA CEO, it wasn't a one time deal. As long as you morons try passing this crap, we'll keep protesting. And the protests will only get bigger and bigger
I so hope you are correct. Sadly that does not seem to be how these things traditionally work. They keep making slight changes and resubmitting them over and over until the public becomes apathetic and finally passing it
Or worse !
They could have hired a skilled FUD expert from Microsoft to replace that dumbfuck Cary Sherman as CEO of MAFIAA
Through carefully placements of artfully crafted FUDs that guy (or gal) would be able to assemble tons of MAFIAA fanbois to spread whatever of his "gospel truths" to the world !
Whenever some entity says that they are the authority of the Net and wants to represent the users of the Net, I can't help but think of ICANN
Decades ago when ICANN was first organized they had a "crowdsource" campaign - they actually let the public at large to "register as members" and yes, I still keep the "ICANN membership card" that they sent me
But what is ICANN today? Do they care about the millions of "registered members"?
I don't think so
Pregnancy in forty-five-year-old women is a dangerous proposition.
If it's dangerous for the mother, think of the child in the womb
Babies born by older mothers have much higher chances of having being born with many types of defects
Down syndrome is just one of them.
Of the many sci fi novels that I've read, I do enjoy those authored by David Brin
We _do_ have laws on the book that supposed to be just - that is, whoever does the wrong thing will be punished - but then, how many times do we see the laws being applied to the RICH & POWERFUL??
Laws - especially those news laws that were created in recent years - were created to benefit the RICH & POWERFUL - and TFA is just a case in point
If bird chirping in the background can become the property of anyone - I say it's the property of GOD - but in this world we live in, someone always come up and takes the place of God
In this case, Rumblefish thinks that it's God, so it claims the bird chirping as their property
... he got suffocated inside a fridge
And this is not a fake news
It happened, about 4 decades ago
I think George Lucas ought to be careful of movie scenario he puts on his movies.
Children watching the movie might just do what the hero does - hide inside a fridge, - and suffocate, just like that poor child who died 4 decades ago
That lies my original statement --- the radiation from brain scans - except perhaps for MRI --- is that they introduce enough radiation into the brain in order to be able to "read" the result
The amount of radiation introduced in any brain scan is definitely not "negligible"
If I can recall correctly, brain scan does introduces radiation into the brain
What are they thinking?
Scanning the little brains of little babies will only do more harm than good to those babies
I do not object of performing brain scan on babies - but on those babies who may have cancer or other fatal illness in order to diagnose their condition
Autism may be serious, but at least, it's not a fatal sickness