Well, we may agree on some things -- I haven't heard you argue that court should be kept private.
I don't think we agree on principles: you appear to want restrictions set by bureaucrats and information made somewhat more difficult to get. I do not. I do not see any benefit in throttling information that is public anyways, and I very much doubt that bureaucrats could even do this effectively.
One reason "The List" is such a stigma is that it is unusual information that has been difficult/expensive to obtain in the past. I can see no benefit in allowing "The Rich" to do background checks on anyone they wish while it is expensive/difficult for everyone else. Let everyone see everything they want _easily_. The cure for over-reacting to information is a flood. Certainly more than just "sex" offenders however they might be classified.
A further unfortunate disagreement is over pragmatism: you appear to want justifications for release, while I want justification for withholding. Your position would be strong _except_ the data is already public
Only proved tachypsyche is not cognitive
on
Can Time Slow Down?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
... this experiment has to be the dumbest ever. Made without a shred of preliminary investigation. "Tachypsyche" produces tunnel vision under extreme fight stress. It is well known to martial artists and some gunfighters. It probably should be research, but not with counterproductive tools.
Second, I wasn't referring to alcohol, drugs and automobiles in combination. Each is dangerous all by itself. Each also has benefits. Individuals must judge their own circumstances.
Third, we could be doing _far_ more to prevent wrongdoing: cameras everywhere, breathalyser interlocks on automobiles, RFID, auto blackbox dowloading, required reporting, etc. We don't because the costs of prior restraint far outweigh benefits. Why restrain info that is already public?
The small number of vigilante killings hardly warrents a major change in freedoms.
Sorry for the slow reply. I don't know what happened to my first (grrrr...)
Many people make mistakes: the legislators in classifying, and the accused in accepting facile guilty pleas. One key is the DB has to have a reasonable amount of data, including the convicts name, DOB, date of offense, charge, plea and sentence. Less would be a lie-of-omission.
A scarlet letter is an unwilling push which is extremely different from any sort of even automated pull.
As for punishment, I believe that incarceration is actually more burdensome and privatious today than 100 years ago, mostly because society has evolved far more interesting activities "outside". "Doing time" is harder, and this is probably a factor that has enabled the reduction in capital punishment. The punishment of a criminal record was extremely high in agrarian society and only fell with the aononymity of urbanization for industrialization. But the cost has been increasing rapidly over the past 40 years with infotech. Perhaps there will be more interest in revising expunction laws.
Oh, dear. Not the elitist "public is helpless, we must save them" argument again. This applies just as much to information like convictions as it does to firearms, alcohol, tobacco, sex, automobiles, drugs, etc.
Yes, some people will abuse anything. That is their problem and their culpability. Not the tools'. Nor is this abuse any justification to reduce non-abuser's access. Either you have an open society which punishes abusers or you have a closed society which tries to prevent any abuse. Prior restraint gone wild!
No, anonymity was more a feature of industrialized society and urbanization. It is vanishing in the information age. Nor was it much present in the agrarian age -- if you had a fire, you definitely wouldn't move away from friends or extended family. And there was enough of a social network that people would check up on stories and describe strangers. Perhaps over months or years. "The truth will out" was a common plot device in old novels.
As for expiry, the DB should contain the convicts name & DOB, date of offense, charge, plea and sentence. Any less risks being a lie-of-omission. People then decide for themselves. You cannot stop people from doing stupid but legal things. There might be more interest in states modifying their expungement laws.
Bureaucrats are far too well-insulated to worry about liability. They are worried about criticism, especially of errors under their control. And while I'm sure being approached by police with drawn (pointed?) guns was harrowing, you _are_ here to talk about it. Yes, accidental shootings happen. Far more people die in car crashes.
When people get wrongly convicted, that is a problem in and of itself. A serious one with the media induced hysteria. Punishment should not be reduced because conviction is uncertain.
Who ever said there was a right to "start over"? There never was in the historical past because people weren't very mobile and pasts followed people around. Somebody always knew somebody and would write for gossip. The only [partial] exception was frontier territory. After a number of years, you can get convictions expunged in many states.
Certainly there are problems with classification, and that is where listing all crimes would help by diluting the borderline. Furthermore, the American practice of overcharging suspects and plea-bargaining is pure corruption. Be nice to me or I will hit you harder. It might slow if guilty pleas weren't as saleable. Do you think Sen.Craig would have pled out if he knew it would become public? He was defrauded.
As I said elsewhere, bigger and more important DBs also get correspondingly more attention at correction. I do not have a paranoid view of the bureaucracy. I've seen inside, and mostly these people follow the rules. They'll work great for you if you follow their rules too! But don't try to push because the organization is hardened against just that.
Ever since 1779, the United States government has exerted jurisidiction over exports from the United States. At issue in those days was pine logs that could be made into masts & spars for the Royal Navy (UK, enemgy of the day).
This has grown into an incredible plethora of resulations under several Departments, chiefly DoState administering ITAR (International Arm traffic) and DoCommerce administering EAR (non-weapons, including "horses by sea").
I'm not at all surprised Iran got the computers. It is very hard to make a tight embargo without physical blockade. In this case, a French company could have ordered the CPUs, found that sales did not materialize and surplussed a bunch, perhaps to Russian merchants. The Iranians are not idiots: they know who will sell to them and who cannot. They won't waste their time shopping in the wrong stores.
I find "need to know" a very controlling, "Big Brother" sort of attitude. Who decides? The issue is "right to know", and I have a right to know all public knowledge. Including court proceedings and findings. Obscurity is no security.
Of course mistakes happen. The more familiar we are with them, the more likely we are to be on the look-out.
But stupidity is a US constitutional right and will find a way of expressing itself. Don't blame the tool, blame the user.
I'm sorry, but a searchable DB isn't the same thing as a Big Red "A". One is "pull" data, the other push. Anyone who was interested in that small town could find out about Hester. And people were suspicious of strangers from other towns. They were often seen as fugitives from something.
A criminal record is one of the punishments inherent in any conviction. Sometimes you can get it removed "expunged".
I _am_ arguing for a more-encompassing DB. All offenses. Ideally court records and pleadings would be available on-line. They too are public and you can get them.
What is the matter with the DB? It merely compiles and retrieves data that is public anyways. Why rely on someone with a long memory? I do not understand why _all_ criminal convictions (and why not misdemenors) are not in publicly accessible DBs. Court is and must be public. Not "private".
People may well be prejudiced. However stupid, that is their right except where limited by law. A bigger problem is differential privacy, where some people can hide things and others cannot. A boss might be less inclined to go after a gay employee if his own divorces and DUIs were equally public. Likewise for the cop.
Numerically speaking, MSFT's greatest competition in selling OSes and even Office Suites is themselves, specifically their older versions.
They have not been able to add compelling enough features, and customers get very angry at incompatibilities such as MS-Word has seen.
So they have to resort to targetted obsolescence, cajolery and legalistic tactics such as trying to tie the OS the the machine it was first licenced for. I'm not sure if those portions of the EULA violating ":first sale" have been upheld.
The NYT might well not like ISPs decisions. They think certain freedoms are important and others must enforce them. However, the NYT is not always so liberal and supports gun control even though it is unconstitutional in the US. Obviously, the NYT doesn't think gun freedom important.
This becomes a question of values, and how far to exert extraterritoriality. What freedoms are truly unalienable? Freedom from torture likely is, gun freedom likely is not. In between there is an area for individual and national discretion.
Like jail, I think that breakups and size limits are very counterproductive but occasionally necessary for "bad" market actors. The problem is cablecos have never been given proper discipline and indeed allowed to illegally expand their monopoly vertically (selling content).
While monopoly of "the last mile" might not be easily fixeable, the vertical expansion easily is and has been done in a number of cases. End the cableco's ability to sell any content beyond basic OTA. "premium" and PPV channels are sold by subsciption by unrelated others (in competition) and the content merely carried (billed, gated) on cable (at a regulated cost).
Actually, I used both latent and English after some thought: Latent because the different attitudes towards government are present but not directly visible.
English because I don't believe the Scots, Welsh nor Manx have the trait to the same extent. At least not more than the French. The N.Irish do and are more like the English.
I may well have been unclear: everybody worries about the actions of their governments. Americans doubt the legitimacy of their own govt. And this is not new with G.Bush but has existed to approximately the same extent since the Revolution. This gave rise to the the checks-and-balances and designed gridlock.
The Commonweath with it's Parlementary system has none such. The PM is an elected dictator. I was utterly astounded at Labour Tony Blair supporting the US in Iraq. And his ability to put down multiple revolts in his own party. Something's seriously wrong...
Whether a 7 pass or 35 pass wipe is good enough has to depend on exactly how data can be recovered. Does anyone have a good reference on current technological capabilities?
I suspect that even after a single zero pass, the disk has to be mounted in some sort of electron microscope. Maybe it can stay mounted but the heads have to have analog circuitry attached. In either case, the question is over magnetism remaining after overwriting. I suspect that three good [uncracked] pseudorandom passes is more than sufficient. But perhaps not if more than 10% magnetism remains after over-write (which I doubt because the BER would then be beyond ECC).
It is the American way to be mistrustful of all governments, even/especially our own. This is common among all parties, although the Dems worry about different govt actions than the Rs. And the Libs and others worry about still different ones.
This is a major latent difference between Americans and the English and much of RoW who accept the legitimacy of government even though they frequently complain about certain implementation details and effects.
Once upon a time (10+ years ago), credit cards were sent through the mail "active", and no calling in was necessary. I received many this way.
Legally, I believe the account is open when the paperwork is signed. It has to be closed using appropriate measures.
"Activation" procedures are just added by the issuers to reduce fraud and other losses. "CC protection" may be expensive, but it's not fraud. Activation only applies to the card sent, not to the account.
Yes, boyz'n'grlls spin-up kills hard-disks. And worse with Unix and other Linux-like OSes since they modify the directory entries each time a file is accessed (even from cache), updating the 'atime' entry. AFAIK, MS-ntfs has no such entry. Yet:)
This is a well-known performance-killer (imagine a newspool), so disks should be mount'd with the `noatime` and `nodiratime` options if at all possible. This can be done automagically by replacing 'defaults' with 'noatime,nodiratime' in/etc/fstab.
While Hydrogen has production efficiency, handling, and environmental (temp & pres make NOx & O3) problems, it has wonderful combustion properties. High flame speed and ultra-wide flammability range improve flame stability and make higher altitude operations practical. This reduces drag and improves economy.
Won't help SouthWest Airlines up&down flights very much, but would be a big help in the long-haul across the [Big] Pond.
There are always problems with perfect causal proof. Some people get CT without computer use. Some people who heavily use computers don't get CT. So the linkage is far from perfect. And the lawyers lawyer.
But what appears undeniable is that if someone is sensitive or already suffering from CT, then some computer use can aggravate it. Especially mouse use from poorly designed programs. Some are just have horrible ergo, and my wrists will ache after an hours' use. Normally, I can type all day long.
This is certainly a clever idea for small amounts of swap (~256 MB). But to make it work well, you'd have to find the GPU commands for block moves from main RAM to vidRAM. That's the only way to activate the AGPx2 and higher modes.
But there is a fundamental problem: vidRAM is optimized for writes from main RAM. Not reads. In many cases, reading vidram is extremely slow because the raster generator is busy reading it. Writes are buffered. Reads cannot be.
If you're responsible for the response time of some webpages, then you've got to do your job! First test a simple static webpage for a baseline.
Then every added feature has to be justified -- perceived added value versus cost-to-load. Sure, the artsies won't like you. But it isn't your decision or theirs. Management must decide.
For greater sophistication, you can measure your dl rates by file to see how much is in users caches. And decide whether these are also not a cause of slowness!
Slashdot Mirror
Well, we may agree on some things -- I haven't heard you argue that court should be kept private.
I don't think we agree on principles: you appear to want restrictions set by bureaucrats and information made somewhat more difficult to get. I do not. I do not see any benefit in throttling information that is public anyways, and I very much doubt that bureaucrats could even do this effectively.
One reason "The List" is such a stigma is that it is unusual information that has been difficult/expensive to obtain in the past. I can see no benefit in allowing "The Rich" to do background checks on anyone they wish while it is expensive/difficult for everyone else. Let everyone see everything they want _easily_. The cure for over-reacting to information is a flood. Certainly more than just "sex" offenders however they might be classified.
A further unfortunate disagreement is over pragmatism: you appear to want justifications for release, while I want justification for withholding. Your position would be strong _except_ the data is already public
Second, I wasn't referring to alcohol, drugs and automobiles in combination. Each is dangerous all by itself. Each also has benefits. Individuals must judge their own circumstances.
Third, we could be doing _far_ more to prevent wrongdoing: cameras everywhere, breathalyser interlocks on automobiles, RFID, auto blackbox dowloading, required reporting, etc. We don't because the costs of prior restraint far outweigh benefits. Why restrain info that is already public?
The small number of vigilante killings hardly warrents a major change in freedoms.
Many people make mistakes: the legislators in classifying, and the accused in accepting facile guilty pleas. One key is the DB has to have a reasonable amount of data, including the convicts name, DOB, date of offense, charge, plea and sentence. Less would be a lie-of-omission.
A scarlet letter is an unwilling push which is extremely different from any sort of even automated pull.
As for punishment, I believe that incarceration is actually more burdensome and privatious today than 100 years ago, mostly because society has evolved far more interesting activities "outside". "Doing time" is harder, and this is probably a factor that has enabled the reduction in capital punishment. The punishment of a criminal record was extremely high in agrarian society and only fell with the aononymity of urbanization for industrialization. But the cost has been increasing rapidly over the past 40 years with infotech. Perhaps there will be more interest in revising expunction laws.
Yes, some people will abuse anything. That is their problem and their culpability. Not the tools'. Nor is this abuse any justification to reduce non-abuser's access. Either you have an open society which punishes abusers or you have a closed society which tries to prevent any abuse. Prior restraint gone wild!
As for expiry, the DB should contain the convicts name & DOB, date of offense, charge, plea and sentence. Any less risks being a lie-of-omission. People then decide for themselves. You cannot stop people from doing stupid but legal things. There might be more interest in states modifying their expungement laws.
Bureaucrats are far too well-insulated to worry about liability. They are worried about criticism, especially of errors under their control. And while I'm sure being approached by police with drawn (pointed?) guns was harrowing, you _are_ here to talk about it. Yes, accidental shootings happen. Far more people die in car crashes.
Who ever said there was a right to "start over"? There never was in the historical past because people weren't very mobile and pasts followed people around. Somebody always knew somebody and would write for gossip. The only [partial] exception was frontier territory. After a number of years, you can get convictions expunged in many states.
Certainly there are problems with classification, and that is where listing all crimes would help by diluting the borderline. Furthermore, the American practice of overcharging suspects and plea-bargaining is pure corruption. Be nice to me or I will hit you harder. It might slow if guilty pleas weren't as saleable. Do you think Sen.Craig would have pled out if he knew it would become public? He was defrauded.
As I said elsewhere, bigger and more important DBs also get correspondingly more attention at correction. I do not have a paranoid view of the bureaucracy. I've seen inside, and mostly these people follow the rules. They'll work great for you if you follow their rules too! But don't try to push because the organization is hardened against just that.
This has grown into an incredible plethora of resulations under several Departments, chiefly DoState administering ITAR (International Arm traffic) and DoCommerce administering EAR (non-weapons, including "horses by sea").
I'm not at all surprised Iran got the computers. It is very hard to make a tight embargo without physical blockade. In this case, a French company could have ordered the CPUs, found that sales did not materialize and surplussed a bunch, perhaps to Russian merchants. The Iranians are not idiots: they know who will sell to them and who cannot. They won't waste their time shopping in the wrong stores.
But stupidity is a US constitutional right and will find a way of expressing itself. Don't blame the tool, blame the user.
I'm sorry, but a searchable DB isn't the same thing as a Big Red "A". One is "pull" data, the other push. Anyone who was interested in that small town could find out about Hester. And people were suspicious of strangers from other towns. They were often seen as fugitives from something.
A criminal record is one of the punishments inherent in any conviction. Sometimes you can get it removed "expunged".
Insurance co? Sure! They have the data anyways.
People may well be prejudiced. However stupid, that is their right except where limited by law. A bigger problem is differential privacy, where some people can hide things and others cannot. A boss might be less inclined to go after a gay employee if his own divorces and DUIs were equally public. Likewise for the cop.
They have not been able to add compelling enough features, and customers get very angry at incompatibilities such as MS-Word has seen.
So they have to resort to targetted obsolescence, cajolery and legalistic tactics such as trying to tie the OS the the machine it was first licenced for. I'm not sure if those portions of the EULA violating ":first sale" have been upheld.
This becomes a question of values, and how far to exert extraterritoriality. What freedoms are truly unalienable? Freedom from torture likely is, gun freedom likely is not. In between there is an area for individual and national discretion.
While monopoly of "the last mile" might not be easily fixeable, the vertical expansion easily is and has been done in a number of cases. End the cableco's ability to sell any content beyond basic OTA. "premium" and PPV channels are sold by subsciption by unrelated others (in competition) and the content merely carried (billed, gated) on cable (at a regulated cost).
English because I don't believe the Scots, Welsh nor Manx have the trait to the same extent. At least not more than the French. The N.Irish do and are more like the English.
I may well have been unclear: everybody worries about the actions of their governments. Americans doubt the legitimacy of their own govt. And this is not new with G.Bush but has existed to approximately the same extent since the Revolution. This gave rise to the the checks-and-balances and designed gridlock.
The Commonweath with it's Parlementary system has none such. The PM is an elected dictator. I was utterly astounded at Labour Tony Blair supporting the US in Iraq. And his ability to put down multiple revolts in his own party. Something's seriously wrong
I suspect that even after a single zero pass, the disk has to be mounted in some sort of electron microscope. Maybe it can stay mounted but the heads have to have analog circuitry attached. In either case, the question is over magnetism remaining after overwriting. I suspect that three good [uncracked] pseudorandom passes is more than sufficient. But perhaps not if more than 10% magnetism remains after over-write (which I doubt because the BER would then be beyond ECC).
This is a major latent difference between Americans and the English and much of RoW who accept the legitimacy of government even though they frequently complain about certain implementation details and effects.
Legally, I believe the account is open when the paperwork is signed. It has to be closed using appropriate measures.
"Activation" procedures are just added by the issuers to reduce fraud and other losses. "CC protection" may be expensive, but it's not fraud. Activation only applies to the card sent, not to the account.
Nothingto see here, move along.
This is a well-known performance-killer (imagine a newspool), so disks should be mount'd with the `noatime` and `nodiratime` options if at all possible. This can be done automagically by replacing 'defaults' with 'noatime,nodiratime' in
Won't help SouthWest Airlines up&down flights very much, but would be a big help in the long-haul across the [Big] Pond.
But what appears undeniable is that if someone is sensitive or already suffering from CT, then some computer use can aggravate it. Especially mouse use from poorly designed programs. Some are just have horrible ergo, and my wrists will ache after an hours' use. Normally, I can type all day long.
But there is a fundamental problem: vidRAM is optimized for writes from main RAM. Not reads. In many cases, reading vidram is extremely slow because the raster generator is busy reading it. Writes are buffered. Reads cannot be.
Then every added feature has to be justified -- perceived added value versus cost-to-load. Sure, the artsies won't like you. But it isn't your decision or theirs. Management must decide.
For greater sophistication, you can measure your dl rates by file to see how much is in users caches. And decide whether these are also not a cause of slowness!