First- what is this 'private data' that everyone is so worried about? Kiddie porn? It's not like anyone uses Quicken anymore- you can get banking info on-line. So I always wonder what the heck is so private.
How about people who use a computer to run a business from home. Is that $99/yr going to buy you a service that is HIPAA compliant if you are in the medical business?
I just love it when a PR written piece of festering crap gets posted as an article on/.
On Nov. 15, a New York-based startup called TransMedia plans to release an integrated suite of consumer media applications that has the potential to radically alter the balance of power among Internet and software service providers.
...snip...
As a result, companies like Comcast, Disney, SBC, and Verizon will have the opportunity to offer an integrated, monetizable service that, at first glance, look significantly more compelling than the offerings from Internet portals like AOL and Internet software services like MySpace.com.
I can see a future where cybernetic implants that are integrated with the human sensory system will be common. Of course, all such implants will have MPAA/RIAA approved interfaces that enforce DRM. That will enable entire new venues of enforcing IP in order realize revenue streams. Consider the following example:
Joe decides to visit a new art exhibit at local art gallery. Since the artists have asserted a viewing royalty, Joe will be unable to perceive any of the artwork until he mentally agree to the payment and a license is loaded into his implant. Joe then goes to hang out with his friends after the exhibit. Unable to discuss the art due to a discussion royalty (all the big artists reserve the discussion rights), Joe purchases a discussion license...though he buys only a one hour license in order to save money (there were 30 items in the gallery).
One of his friends, who is intrigued by the verbal description of one of the pieces, decides to download (via a local network connection between implants) a copy of Joe's visual memory of the artwork. Since he is not sure he will like it, he only buys a one day license--one can always buy a lifetime license later.
Joe then goes home, humming a popular tune, which generates a royalty payment to ASCAP. As he walks by a McDonalds, Joe suddenly feels hungry and decide to walk in and get something to eat. It occurs to Joe that the free cybernetic implant from Google--Google MindBar--was not the best idea and perhaps it might be better to pay when he upgrades to the new implants. He also makes a mental note not to get the one made by Sony, since it contains an embedded rootkit.
Since it is also election day, Joe decides it is his civic duty to vote. As a registered member of the political party, the ballot card presented in his cybernetic implant has only the party approved candidates and issues. He has his implant sign the ballot with his social security private key (election fraud and ambiguity was eliminated when each ballot could be traced to an individual).
On the way home an ad from Microsoft is delivered to his mental mailbox. Joe is excited by the contents--Windows Vista is going to ship next quarter!
I don't think the goal of the lawyers is to prove that breathlyzers do not work or that the procedures are incorrect. The lawyers are making three points:
Once a device is accepted as valid by the court, do software revisions invalidate that acceptance?
Does the device have software errors that cause the device to malfunction?
Is the algorithm valid in the conditions that existed when the defendant was tested?
In the first point, when a new technique or device is presented in court, there is expert testimony on applicability and validity. Once that is established and it is recognized by the court, there is no need for the court to hear such testimony again. For example, one does not have to demonstrate the validity of fingerprinting in general. If the software is revised by the manufacturer, is that a material change in validity of the device. The defense lawyer is unable to ascertain that fact without access to the source code.
I can best illustrate the second point by using the Patriot missile system as an example. During Desert Storm v1.0, the Army discovered that the Patriot system would not operate correctly after being operated continously. It turns out it was overflowing a counter--the software had not been tested in that mode. Another example is the Mars Polar Lander that had a units conversion error.
In the third point, the defense may want to determine if the device operates correctly in the manner that it was used. Perhaps after continous operation the unit heats up and that introduces a bias. Without access to the source code, there is no way of verifying that the algorithm is correct for the specific case. Consider the fingerprint analogy: The prosecution may have to present testimony to explain how a particular fingerprint was recovered and identified.
How do you know the calibration routine is correct? Based on your description, it seems that you perform a calibration using a single data point. Maybe that is valid in 90% of the cases. Maybe, when the humidity is over 60%, the temperature is greater than 27.3 C, and the device has been operated for more than two hours since last calibration, the error in the calibration increases by 50%.
IMHO the breathalyzer should be used as a screening tool for a blood sample. A black box carried around in the field is not reliable. I support the apprehension of drunk drivers--I lived in New Mexico and seen first hand how bad it can get--but I believe that defendants have the right to face their accusers, which in this case is software.
You posted what I was about to say. I just love the irony of GPL becoming less free in order to encourage a behavior. The very idea is 180 out from what free software is fundamentally about. If this change is adopted then the GPL sold its soul.
Some may argue that this change is to help promote additional freedom--a restriction for the greater good. There are so many quotes that come to mind, my favorite are
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin (possibly)
"If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will
You either believe in free software or you don't." - Yoda (obligatory for the/. crowd)
Bottom line--either you are for free software or you are not.
The price at the pump is primarily driven by the lack of refining capacity in this country and taxes than the price of crude. The last refinery built in the United States was in Garyville, LA back in 76.
Some of the idiotic thing we are doing in this country in terms of energy policy is heating oil and power production from oil (which, granted, is a small percentage, about ~6%). Oil is best used either as a portable source of energy or for industrial products (e.g. plastics). Fixed (as in location) energy production or heating is a waste.
Ditto on Latex--Word with Mathtype still does not do as good a job as Latex.
As for excel, I used it for a bit a decade ago. Mathematica has since become my "swiss army knife"--I even use it in place of a calculator.
As for plotting, gnuplot and plplot are my primary choices.
I think all the states require you to have a drivers license in order to operate a vehicle. If that is a true statement, then your example is not the same.
I like the part about "cheaper"
on
Apple to Buy TiVo?
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Analysts said that Apple's focus on its immensely successful iPod digital music player would probably preclude it from going after money-losing TiVo, whose growth strategy has been questioned due to the rise of cheaper DVRs being deployed by cable TV providers.
If Apple did buy TiVo, the price differential would no longer be an issue--everybody expects to pay the Apple premium!
Technically, the UN does not manage the CTBTO, ignoring the fact that the CTBTO does not exist at this point in time. If you look closely, its name is the "CTBTO Prepartory Commission" and it is managed by the "CTBT Prepatory Commission", (PrepCom). The technical affairs are overseen by Working Group B (WGB), which reports to the PrepCom. The PrepCom is composed of all the signatories of the CTBT. When the treaty enters into force, which has not happened, the CTBTO will be working for the States Parties and not the UN. The "CTBTO" does take advantage of the UN HR system.
Let me say it takes a lot of effort on the part of the states parties to keep it operational. The international data center was developed by the United States along with a select group of non-US scientists. Development of the IDC was transitioned to the Provisional Technical Secretariat (PTS), which is staffed by states parties. The CTBTO is a bit unique in that the States parties specifically created the organization to have the minimal bureaucracy possible and a high technical aptitude. The budget for the PTS is closely monitored by WGB and the PrepCom.
Do you have any idea how UN/International organizations are staffed, particularly at the senior level? Let me tell how it works. The senior management grades are P1 through P5, with P5 being higher than a P1. So, lets say an organization has 4 P5 positions. Those P5 positions are partitioned by region. If there is a German in a P5 slot, it will almost be impossible for another European to get another P5 position no matter how qualified they are.
My point is that putting something in the UN does not solve problems. Putting a high-profile function like managing the Internet into an international body would be one the most complex treaties ever negotiated.
Only if you have a very broad definition of nuclear bomb. Looking at the product of the expected number
of neutrons per fission times the microscopic cross-section ($\nu \sigma_f$), it is pretty boring until you get to a high mass number. A simpler example is hydrogen--you can bombard H-1 with neutrons all day and night and it will never fission.
I'm guessing what you are thinking about is causing fission in the other transuranics (or anything with Z numbers greater than lead) by using high-energy neutrons. Even in that case, you will not get the exponential growth in energy necessary to make a nuclear bomb. There are only a few nuclides that have the right properties for making a nuclear bomb.
If you want to include fusion, then using anything other than hydrogen in the mix is real challenging .
As a person who has seen SAIC product, I am less than thrilled with SAIC. I am not suprised that they had such a poor security arrangment with their own data.
I think you demean the value of "argument by analogy," which is just a type of inductive reasoning. The key point on whether my analogy is a valid one is the crux of the whole IP argument--has intellectual property become the same as physical property?
You make the assertion that it is not "remotely the same thing" and that view is what is being eroded by various legislative actions, both in the US and in the EU. Why is that assertion true? What makes intellectual property different than physical property? Is that reason immutable?
My view is that IP rights should be limited--but I am a scientist by nature and science usually progresses by building on the works of others. Others have different views. I particularly don't like how Congress chips away at what the US Constitution states in Section 8, Clause 8 by incrementally extending copyrights. Bring the issue through the front door by amending the Constitution.
The balancing act between "works of art" passing into the public domain and the rights of individuals to their property is a difficult one. Intellectual property has been come as real as physical property in many countries in the world. So, I think what we are seeing is the extension of physical property rights into the intellectual domain.
Consider the following example, lets say your parents bought a house in Northern Virginia 40-50 years ago for $100,000 and that home is now worth $1,000,000. Your parents pass away and you inherit the property. Would you want that property to become public property 28 years after your parents passed away? The very concept is absurd because most societies have a well defined concept of physical property rights.
Is the right answer perpetual copyrights? I don't know. Should a piece of land be able to be passed down from generation to generation?
I hope you are right, but I really do not see that happening. Lenovo didn't buy the PC division for the quality, they bought the name and access--and they get the name for only five years. It will take a radical paradigm shift for Lenovo to adopt IBM's design practices, particularly when it was those expensive practices that motivated IBM to sell its PC division.
Argh. I fear that the Thinkpads are going to become more like the Dells (which IMHO feel pretty flimsy). Every Thinkpad I've used has been rock solid and reliable. Every Dell I've had feels flimsy in comparison. I knew I should have gotten an X40 when I had the chance--I guess it is time to look at Apple.
Re:how is that different from other companies
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: 1
I disagree with your point that the senior leadership of a company is irrelevant. I will admint I didn't elaborate sufficiently on my last point--an organization can tolerate the short-term absence.
I was not making anything up--I was following your point about the irrelevancy of senior leadership. You were making baseless assertions about the utility of senior leadership. Show me one Fortune 500 company that is functioning without any senior leadership. I will give you one relatively recent example where the senior leadership changed the direction of a company: Steve Jobs and Apple. My point is that every component of a company is important.
Re:how is that different from other companies
on
NYT on EA Games
·
· Score: 1
By your logic, companies should never go out of business because upper management does not affect the production process. If we extend your logic even further, any arbitrary group of individuals can easily create a multi-billion dollar business. Your grasp of the business process is astounding.
I would like to point out that the mark of a successful organizational head is if the organization functions correctly in their absence.
Why should anybody pay attention to this. If EA is paying less than the prevailing wage for an equivalent level of skill, nobody would work there or there is some intangible benefit associated with working at EA (likes working on games, obtaining experience in the field).
If anybody is working under less than legal circumstances (e.g. being forced to work unpaid overtime) they have only themselves to blame--I doubt they are that ignorant of the law. Correct the situation (which may involve suing them) or quit.
As for young people being coerced--where to begin with that one. That is like saying students are being coerced to study in order to get an "A." Most young people I know who work extra do it because they want stand out. If you had your own business, who would you promote--the person who puts in exactly 40 hours/week or the person that puts in extra hours and produces more? I know the answer--promote the person with more seniority. A young person has very little "capital" to expend in the work place--time is usually their only choice.
As for unions--they are rapidly making themselves obsolete. They have done hardly anything constructive recently except establish a hostile relationship with business. The only idea they have vocalized about stopping the outsourcing of jobs is to punish business.
Slashdot Mirror
It worked real well for United Airlines.
- Once a device is accepted as valid by the court, do software revisions invalidate that acceptance?
- Does the device have software errors that cause the device to malfunction?
- Is the algorithm valid in the conditions that existed when the defendant was tested?
In the first point, when a new technique or device is presented in court, there is expert testimony on applicability and validity. Once that is established and it is recognized by the court, there is no need for the court to hear such testimony again. For example, one does not have to demonstrate the validity of fingerprinting in general. If the software is revised by the manufacturer, is that a material change in validity of the device. The defense lawyer is unable to ascertain that fact without access to the source code.I can best illustrate the second point by using the Patriot missile system as an example. During Desert Storm v1.0, the Army discovered that the Patriot system would not operate correctly after being operated continously. It turns out it was overflowing a counter--the software had not been tested in that mode. Another example is the Mars Polar Lander that had a units conversion error.
In the third point, the defense may want to determine if the device operates correctly in the manner that it was used. Perhaps after continous operation the unit heats up and that introduces a bias. Without access to the source code, there is no way of verifying that the algorithm is correct for the specific case. Consider the fingerprint analogy: The prosecution may have to present testimony to explain how a particular fingerprint was recovered and identified.
How do you know the calibration routine is correct? Based on your description, it seems that you perform a calibration using a single data point. Maybe that is valid in 90% of the cases. Maybe, when the humidity is over 60%, the temperature is greater than 27.3 C, and the device has been operated for more than two hours since last calibration, the error in the calibration increases by 50%.
IMHO the breathalyzer should be used as a screening tool for a blood sample. A black box carried around in the field is not reliable. I support the apprehension of drunk drivers--I lived in New Mexico and seen first hand how bad it can get--but I believe that defendants have the right to face their accusers, which in this case is software.
Some may argue that this change is to help promote additional freedom--a restriction for the greater good. There are so many quotes that come to mind, my favorite are
- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin (possibly)
- "If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will
You either believe in free software or you don't." - Yoda (obligatory for the
/. crowd)
Bottom line--either you are for free software or you are not.Some of the idiotic thing we are doing in this country in terms of energy policy is heating oil and power production from oil (which, granted, is a small percentage, about ~6%). Oil is best used either as a portable source of energy or for industrial products (e.g. plastics). Fixed (as in location) energy production or heating is a waste.
Ditto on Latex--Word with Mathtype still does not do as good a job as Latex. As for excel, I used it for a bit a decade ago. Mathematica has since become my "swiss army knife"--I even use it in place of a calculator. As for plotting, gnuplot and plplot are my primary choices.
I think all the states require you to have a drivers license in order to operate a vehicle. If that is a true statement, then your example is not the same.
F = m a
(N = kg m s^-2)
Technically, the UN does not manage the CTBTO, ignoring the fact that the CTBTO does not exist at this point in time. If you look closely, its name is the "CTBTO Prepartory Commission" and it is managed by the "CTBT Prepatory Commission", (PrepCom). The technical affairs are overseen by Working Group B (WGB), which reports to the PrepCom. The PrepCom is composed of all the signatories of the CTBT. When the treaty enters into force, which has not happened, the CTBTO will be working for the States Parties and not the UN. The "CTBTO" does take advantage of the UN HR system. Let me say it takes a lot of effort on the part of the states parties to keep it operational. The international data center was developed by the United States along with a select group of non-US scientists. Development of the IDC was transitioned to the Provisional Technical Secretariat (PTS), which is staffed by states parties. The CTBTO is a bit unique in that the States parties specifically created the organization to have the minimal bureaucracy possible and a high technical aptitude. The budget for the PTS is closely monitored by WGB and the PrepCom. Do you have any idea how UN/International organizations are staffed, particularly at the senior level? Let me tell how it works. The senior management grades are P1 through P5, with P5 being higher than a P1. So, lets say an organization has 4 P5 positions. Those P5 positions are partitioned by region. If there is a German in a P5 slot, it will almost be impossible for another European to get another P5 position no matter how qualified they are. My point is that putting something in the UN does not solve problems. Putting a high-profile function like managing the Internet into an international body would be one the most complex treaties ever negotiated.
I'm guessing what you are thinking about is causing fission in the other transuranics (or anything with Z numbers greater than lead) by using high-energy neutrons. Even in that case, you will not get the exponential growth in energy necessary to make a nuclear bomb. There are only a few nuclides that have the right properties for making a nuclear bomb.
If you want to include fusion, then using anything other than hydrogen in the mix is real challenging .
As a person who has seen SAIC product, I am less than thrilled with SAIC. I am not suprised that they had such a poor security arrangment with their own data.
Can I get money for just looking at it? Pain and sufferring due to bad art. Give me the blue duck!
You make the assertion that it is not "remotely the same thing" and that view is what is being eroded by various legislative actions, both in the US and in the EU. Why is that assertion true? What makes intellectual property different than physical property? Is that reason immutable?
My view is that IP rights should be limited--but I am a scientist by nature and science usually progresses by building on the works of others. Others have different views. I particularly don't like how Congress chips away at what the US Constitution states in Section 8, Clause 8 by incrementally extending copyrights. Bring the issue through the front door by amending the Constitution.
Consider the following example, lets say your parents bought a house in Northern Virginia 40-50 years ago for $100,000 and that home is now worth $1,000,000. Your parents pass away and you inherit the property. Would you want that property to become public property 28 years after your parents passed away? The very concept is absurd because most societies have a well defined concept of physical property rights.
Is the right answer perpetual copyrights? I don't know. Should a piece of land be able to be passed down from generation to generation?
Actually, I think there is more tech in SpikeTV than G4.
vomit
I hope you are right, but I really do not see that happening. Lenovo didn't buy the PC division for the quality, they bought the name and access--and they get the name for only five years. It will take a radical paradigm shift for Lenovo to adopt IBM's design practices, particularly when it was those expensive practices that motivated IBM to sell its PC division.
Argh. I fear that the Thinkpads are going to become more like the Dells (which IMHO feel pretty flimsy). Every Thinkpad I've used has been rock solid and reliable. Every Dell I've had feels flimsy in comparison. I knew I should have gotten an X40 when I had the chance--I guess it is time to look at Apple.
I was not making anything up--I was following your point about the irrelevancy of senior leadership. You were making baseless assertions about the utility of senior leadership. Show me one Fortune 500 company that is functioning without any senior leadership. I will give you one relatively recent example where the senior leadership changed the direction of a company: Steve Jobs and Apple. My point is that every component of a company is important.
I would like to point out that the mark of a successful organizational head is if the organization functions correctly in their absence.
If anybody is working under less than legal circumstances (e.g. being forced to work unpaid overtime) they have only themselves to blame--I doubt they are that ignorant of the law. Correct the situation (which may involve suing them) or quit.
As for young people being coerced--where to begin with that one. That is like saying students are being coerced to study in order to get an "A." Most young people I know who work extra do it because they want stand out. If you had your own business, who would you promote--the person who puts in exactly 40 hours/week or the person that puts in extra hours and produces more? I know the answer--promote the person with more seniority. A young person has very little "capital" to expend in the work place--time is usually their only choice.
As for unions--they are rapidly making themselves obsolete. They have done hardly anything constructive recently except establish a hostile relationship with business. The only idea they have vocalized about stopping the outsourcing of jobs is to punish business.