If they did do it properly, then why are usernames even listed?
Because the username is an alias for the person being sued, the IP address is not. The names could just as easily have been "John Doe #1," "John Doe #2," etc. When a subpoena against "John Doe" is granted, it doesn't mean that everyone named John Doe is being chharged. Names are not identifiers to a person, since many people can have the same name and anyone can chhange their name at anytime.
I don't think there is a single person who is too stupid to perform a job.
What job can a newborn baby perform?
I can think of lots of jobs that stupid people can do.
OK, now try to think of a job that stupid people can do but computers can't. You'll come up with a bunch of "artificial intelligence" problems, but at some point it seems to me that artificial intelligence will exceed the low end of human intelligence.
Sure, but someone has to maintain the computers. I mean, at some point maybe the computers could do everything. Then there aren't any problems, because there are no jobs. We just take our power source from the sun and let the computers do the rest. Creative jobs would still exist, but we wouldn't really need to compensate those people monetarily. But before it gets to that point the computers will have replaced only the unskilled labor. Smart people will still have to work, while dumb people won't be able to. Of course, people will just pretend to be dumb, and they will have no incentive to educate themselves at this point. I don't see how capitalism could survive.
Just because the file name is called "Metallica - Enter Sandman" for example, does not necessarily mean that the file contains a recording of that song.
And more than that, it certainly doesn't mean that it contains a recording made by an RIAA record company. It could be a bootleg, which may violate the copyright on the song, and might violate laws against bootlegging, but the copyright on the recording is owned by whoever made the bootleg, not the record company.
However, when that kid gets displaced by some robot, I'm sure he'll find some other means to buy himself that rice-burner.
At some point that might not be true. At some point artificial intelligence might exceed the intelligence of the average kid. That's not a bad thing, but it is something which the economy would have to adapt to.
What if someone is just too stupid to get a job? Right now that threshold only excludes a very small percentage of the population, but in the future it could reach much higher numbers. Three solutions come to mind. Artificially create jobs for these people, give these people some sort of welfare/disability, and let these people just die. None of the solutions are particularly good. It'll be a brand new problem which requires an ingenious solution. But maybe we'll be able to build a robot to figure out the solution for us.
I don't like interacting with fast food employees. They can't possibly screw up my order as much as fast food employees have. Seriously, at McDonalds my expectation of getting what I want on my cheeseburger is about 50%.
A local chain convenience store around here (Wawa for those of you familiar with the Philadelphia area) is switching to using kiosks to take their hoagie (grinder, sub, whatever you want to call it) orders. I find it much more convenient to use than telling someone behind the counter and then watching them to make sure they don't forget that I only wanted a little bit of oil, and that I wanted lettuce but no tomatoes.
As a parent of small children, I plan on addressing this by equipping them with cell phones with GPS receivers and requiring that they answer that phone any time it rings, and that I can receive their GPS coords at any time.
I'd just turn off the phone, and tell you that I was out of the service area.
Thats odd, I seem to be unable to remove the various types of tags that are in the books I buy without destroying the cover of the book (stuck to the inside of my paperbacks) or destroying the binding (hardbacks with the long metallic strip woven into the binding).
With enough money you could certainly do it. I never said the manufacturer makes it easy, but it is possible, and you of course have the choice to buy or not buy that product anyway.
I don't know if these really count as "RFID", and theoretically they are disabled when you buy them (since they don't set off the alarm when I leave the store). But if real RFID tags are anything like these, its entirely possible for them to be attached in such a way to make removal impossible without destroying or damaging the product.
And this is entirely possible for WozNet devices as well.
There certainly was at one point. And there was something being used to destroy all the results of natural human progress. The war was used to keep people stupid.
As for inner party members requiring 2-way TV's... I believe that our publicly elected officials SHOULD be monitored *by the public*. Even in the home? Probably not. But full webcam w/ audio in the office? Yup.
Well, I most certainly disagree with that. Elected officials have just as much of a right to privacy as us proles.
When I'm elected, I promise to implement it in my office!:-)
With ideas like that, I have to hope that never happens:).
I wonder if this could be included on firefighter equipment to track firefighters inside a burning building. How expensive are the receivers? Surely $25/tag isn't too much for a department to spend. But maybe the receiver would cost too much. How well do they work indoors? I'd imagine the GPS part is useless indoors.
You're also ignoring something here: We CONSENT to having these tags placed on something, and only what we want them placed on. No surprises here, and nothing's being tracked that we don't want tracked.
I don't see how that's a difference. The owner of the store item consents to having the RFID tags placed on the item they buy. If the consumer doesn't want the RFID on the item he purchased, he can either take it off or buy a product without one in the first place. There is no removal of choice.
RFID tags are applied by a retailer or manufacturer. The consumer has no choice in the matter, and may not be able to remove them.
Once the consumer has purchased the product they can do whatever they want with them.
The WOZ tags, on the other hand, will presumably be bought by individuals who will be able to decide for themselves which items to track, and which to simply ignore.
Woz has proposed a perfectly legitimate use for tracking technology.
Which one was that?
If the government ever proposes tracking us with it, THEN we can start an uproar.
When I read that it could be used for "notifying the owner by phone or e-mail message when a child arrives at school," I assumed the government would be involved in that one. They may not be tracking me, but then again, neither were the Nazi Germans.
The technology isn't bad, but if the government ever starts forcing people (that includes school children) to use it, that is bad.
To my mind, there were only 1 problem with big brother:
The information was not universal.
Well, there was the whole constant war thing, the mandatory minutes of hate, and the fact that the inner party had to have two-way TVs in their houses in the first place, but you're right that the main problem was lack of information. The constant changing of records, the reductionism of the language, the suppression of dissent.
Your location and activities ARE WHO YOU ARE. I don't believe that the government should have access to that information - I believe everyone should [unless your in a private place, say your own home, then just your location should be available:-]
I'm sure this will be forced upon school children at some point. Considering that Woz is a teacher that was probably a large part of his inspiration. School is mandatory and public schools are funded by the government. School children may have lesser rights in some instances, but they do have rights.
Take that one (not very big) step further - it will become an absolute treasure trove for those lazy students who can't be bothered to do their own work and just blatantly plagiarise.
Of course that works both ways. It will be very easy for teachers to perform a search to see if a certain phrase has been plagiarized. And most teachers can figure which quotes aren't from the students themselves, they just can't prove it without such a search tool. When a student starts making references to Dublin, for instance.
Whether people are prepared to admit it or not, the availability of everything as raw data (ie. text) and the cut/paste mentality has been creating a real problem; more so at university level, but it is certainly filtering down.
How is it a problem? Learning to plagiarize successfully is an important skill for the working world.
Seriously though. Information can be used for bad, but it can be used for good too. I'm a big believer that humans tend to use open and free information more for the betterment of humanity than to its detriment. Sure, there are sometimes exceptions, but I don't see how this is one of them. Like I said, in addition to increasing potential plagiarism, it also increases potentially catching someone at plagiarism.
Slashdot Mirror
I am speechless about the idea of putting music fans in jail for downloading music.
Too bad MJ has totally misrepresented the RIAA. They aren't even suing downloaders, let alone putting them in jail.
I stopped buying around the time they shut down Napster.
I stopped around the time I started using Napster. Free music for everyone. Why pay for something when you can get it for free?
Why not say copyright infringement?
Simple. Because theft sounds worse. It's the same reason slashdot articles use the term "identity theft."
If they did do it properly, then why are usernames even listed?
Because the username is an alias for the person being sued, the IP address is not. The names could just as easily have been "John Doe #1," "John Doe #2," etc. When a subpoena against "John Doe" is granted, it doesn't mean that everyone named John Doe is being chharged. Names are not identifiers to a person, since many people can have the same name and anyone can chhange their name at anytime.
I don't think there is a single person who is too stupid to perform a job.
What job can a newborn baby perform?
I can think of lots of jobs that stupid people can do.
OK, now try to think of a job that stupid people can do but computers can't. You'll come up with a bunch of "artificial intelligence" problems, but at some point it seems to me that artificial intelligence will exceed the low end of human intelligence.
Sure, but someone has to maintain the computers. I mean, at some point maybe the computers could do everything. Then there aren't any problems, because there are no jobs. We just take our power source from the sun and let the computers do the rest. Creative jobs would still exist, but we wouldn't really need to compensate those people monetarily. But before it gets to that point the computers will have replaced only the unskilled labor. Smart people will still have to work, while dumb people won't be able to. Of course, people will just pretend to be dumb, and they will have no incentive to educate themselves at this point. I don't see how capitalism could survive.
Just because the file name is called "Metallica - Enter Sandman" for example, does not necessarily mean that the file contains a recording of that song.
And more than that, it certainly doesn't mean that it contains a recording made by an RIAA record company. It could be a bootleg, which may violate the copyright on the song, and might violate laws against bootlegging, but the copyright on the recording is owned by whoever made the bootleg, not the record company.
However, when that kid gets displaced by some robot, I'm sure he'll find some other means to buy himself that rice-burner.
At some point that might not be true. At some point artificial intelligence might exceed the intelligence of the average kid. That's not a bad thing, but it is something which the economy would have to adapt to.
What if someone is just too stupid to get a job? Right now that threshold only excludes a very small percentage of the population, but in the future it could reach much higher numbers. Three solutions come to mind. Artificially create jobs for these people, give these people some sort of welfare/disability, and let these people just die. None of the solutions are particularly good. It'll be a brand new problem which requires an ingenious solution. But maybe we'll be able to build a robot to figure out the solution for us.
completely robotic fast food restaurants in 2030 (which then unemploy 3.5 million people), etc.
3.5 million people won't have to work any more? And this is a bad thing how?
People don't like interacting with robots
I don't like interacting with fast food employees. They can't possibly screw up my order as much as fast food employees have. Seriously, at McDonalds my expectation of getting what I want on my cheeseburger is about 50%.
A local chain convenience store around here (Wawa for those of you familiar with the Philadelphia area) is switching to using kiosks to take their hoagie (grinder, sub, whatever you want to call it) orders. I find it much more convenient to use than telling someone behind the counter and then watching them to make sure they don't forget that I only wanted a little bit of oil, and that I wanted lettuce but no tomatoes.
Why do I need mail from Asia? I'd just block all Asian email.
I hope your kid runs away and joins the circus. Actually, I hope, and suspect, that you're trolling. HAND.
You could ask the store.
Please stop taking attendance, it violates my right to something according to geeks at slashdot.
That would be the right to be secure against unreasonable seizures. The government should not be able to force children to go to school.
As a parent of small children, I plan on addressing this by equipping them with cell phones with GPS receivers and requiring that they answer that phone any time it rings, and that I can receive their GPS coords at any time.
I'd just turn off the phone, and tell you that I was out of the service area.
Thats odd, I seem to be unable to remove the various types of tags that are in the books I buy without destroying the cover of the book (stuck to the inside of my paperbacks) or destroying the binding (hardbacks with the long metallic strip woven into the binding).
With enough money you could certainly do it. I never said the manufacturer makes it easy, but it is possible, and you of course have the choice to buy or not buy that product anyway.
I don't know if these really count as "RFID", and theoretically they are disabled when you buy them (since they don't set off the alarm when I leave the store). But if real RFID tags are anything like these, its entirely possible for them to be attached in such a way to make removal impossible without destroying or damaging the product.
And this is entirely possible for WozNet devices as well.
Was there really a war?
There certainly was at one point. And there was something being used to destroy all the results of natural human progress. The war was used to keep people stupid.
As for inner party members requiring 2-way TV's... I believe that our publicly elected officials SHOULD be monitored *by the public*. Even in the home? Probably not. But full webcam w/ audio in the office? Yup.
Well, I most certainly disagree with that. Elected officials have just as much of a right to privacy as us proles.
When I'm elected, I promise to implement it in my office! :-)
With ideas like that, I have to hope that never happens :).
I wonder if this could be included on firefighter equipment to track firefighters inside a burning building. How expensive are the receivers? Surely $25/tag isn't too much for a department to spend. But maybe the receiver would cost too much. How well do they work indoors? I'd imagine the GPS part is useless indoors.
You're also ignoring something here: We CONSENT to having these tags placed on something, and only what we want them placed on. No surprises here, and nothing's being tracked that we don't want tracked.
I don't see how that's a difference. The owner of the store item consents to having the RFID tags placed on the item they buy. If the consumer doesn't want the RFID on the item he purchased, he can either take it off or buy a product without one in the first place. There is no removal of choice.
RFID tags are applied by a retailer or manufacturer. The consumer has no choice in the matter, and may not be able to remove them.
Once the consumer has purchased the product they can do whatever they want with them.
The WOZ tags, on the other hand, will presumably be bought by individuals who will be able to decide for themselves which items to track, and which to simply ignore.
I don't see why you presume that.
If Paul Allen bought a wi-fi company would it be under Microsoft?
Sure, why not?
Woz has proposed a perfectly legitimate use for tracking technology.
Which one was that?
If the government ever proposes tracking us with it, THEN we can start an uproar.
When I read that it could be used for "notifying the owner by phone or e-mail message when a child arrives at school," I assumed the government would be involved in that one. They may not be tracking me, but then again, neither were the Nazi Germans.
The technology isn't bad, but if the government ever starts forcing people (that includes school children) to use it, that is bad.
To my mind, there were only 1 problem with big brother: The information was not universal.
Well, there was the whole constant war thing, the mandatory minutes of hate, and the fact that the inner party had to have two-way TVs in their houses in the first place, but you're right that the main problem was lack of information. The constant changing of records, the reductionism of the language, the suppression of dissent.
Your location and activities ARE WHO YOU ARE. I don't believe that the government should have access to that information - I believe everyone should [unless your in a private place, say your own home, then just your location should be available :-]
I'm sure this will be forced upon school children at some point. Considering that Woz is a teacher that was probably a large part of his inspiration. School is mandatory and public schools are funded by the government. School children may have lesser rights in some instances, but they do have rights.
Since when did the terms "convinence" and "Big Brother" get so confusing for people?
Since 1984 was written.
Take that one (not very big) step further - it will become an absolute treasure trove for those lazy students who can't be bothered to do their own work and just blatantly plagiarise.
Of course that works both ways. It will be very easy for teachers to perform a search to see if a certain phrase has been plagiarized. And most teachers can figure which quotes aren't from the students themselves, they just can't prove it without such a search tool. When a student starts making references to Dublin, for instance.
Whether people are prepared to admit it or not, the availability of everything as raw data (ie. text) and the cut/paste mentality has been creating a real problem; more so at university level, but it is certainly filtering down.
How is it a problem? Learning to plagiarize successfully is an important skill for the working world.
Seriously though. Information can be used for bad, but it can be used for good too. I'm a big believer that humans tend to use open and free information more for the betterment of humanity than to its detriment. Sure, there are sometimes exceptions, but I don't see how this is one of them. Like I said, in addition to increasing potential plagiarism, it also increases potentially catching someone at plagiarism.