I've always thought this would be a cool application: if someone cut you off in traffic, point at them and give them an "asshole point." If someone got enough asshole points, they could get a ticket or some other penalty. This technology looks like it could make that possible.
Of course there would have to be abuse safeguards. (Like X points available to give out per month, adn you couldn't give the same person more than n points per year, etc...) But this looks like it makes "asshole points" a reality.
So you can write what is kind of like a reverse grammar, where you associate structural patterns with what you can think of almost as TeX descriptions of how to represent the patterns graphically. What you see on the screen has been generated from this pattern matching. So we can, on a user chosen basis, turn various program structures into all kinds of visual representations.
I have yet to install a utility on Solaris, SuSE, RedHat, Mandrake, WinXP, Win2K, or WinNT that did not allow me to specify the location of my JRE.
True, but then you try to use a JRE installed by another app, you can get into JRE version issues, installation of standard extensions, and other environment setup nightmares. Before you dismiss this issue as "nonsense" go educate yourself at jpackage.org. They've been working on this for a while.
Then start contributing. It's an open source project.:)
Each application that wants to use Java recommends you install their bundled version of Java
This is Sun's fault. The folks at jpackage have been trying for quite some time to create freely distributable RPMs of JREs and SDKs. THe technical issues are surmountable, but Sun won't let you distribute a JRE unless it's bundled with a application, for the specific purpose of being used with that app and no other.
Religion and Science are not as different as both sides like to think. They are both predicated on logical systems built up from fundemental "facts" which have to be taken as faith.
Ah, but the nature of that "faith" in both systems is different.
In science, that faith can always be questioned, and the process for redefining your assumptions is formally defined. In religion, there is no process (within the system) for redefining your base assumptions. The change must come from outside the system. (i.e. social and environmental events and pressures)
That's not to say change only comes to the base assumptions of science from science itself. In fact, it's historically been more likely to come from outside. But, at least in the orthodox religions, there is too much resistance to change and no formal mechanism for change in the first place.
If I receive a hand-written letter from someone, it means a bit more than an email. I find it to be more sincere form of communication.
Despite my earlier post on this thread, I agree with you.:) I just took issue with the person quoted in the article who seemed to think that one couldn't cherish an e-mail message. I keep a handwritten journal, myself. I don't switch to a typed journal because I like the experience of writing.
"The truth is, boys and girls, even if you write a lot of e-mail on the computer, you will always need to write things down on paper at some point in your life," Boell says. "The letters you write to people are beautiful, and they'll cherish them forever. Have any of you ever received an e-mail that you cherished?"
I find this attitude strange. I have years of old e-mails saved. I cherish many of them, and rereading them brings back memories. I have the first e-mails I got from my girlfriend (going to be my wife soon) and they're saved in my USB keychain. (We met online, too!)
I know that's hokey, sentimental stuff, but it's true. You can have an emotional attachment to an e-mail. In the end, it's not the media, but (to coin a cliche) it's the thought that counts.
Now, people read this and they just jump ahead and assume that a retailer, however big, is ready to pay millions and millions of dollars for infrastructure in their warehouses, distribution centers and ultimately stores, to track trillions of product instances. Wake-up call: no they're not, and no they will never be.
Oh, wake up call for you...Fifty years ago would the average Joe think that now we'd have a full credit report for every adult in the country? Even the CEO of IBM thought that we'd only need six or seven computers in the entire world.
So, never say never.
I hope people start focusing on the promise of RFIDs: instant checkouts, instant inventories, instant customer feedback to the retailer
So now, for the $2 in savings, I've got to burn $2 in gas just to get there. I've got to spend 5 minutes finding a parking space, 5 walking from the lot into the store, another 5 trying to find the section and get there, another 5-10 waiting in line...so on etc. That's 'better'?
Are you a handicapped Hummer driver?:)
If you want to make a good argument, don't rely on hyperbole. It only makes you look silly. Save the extreme rhetorical tactics for when your opponent is off balance.
I've been reading the comments and watching the moderation of this story for the past ten minutes.
I'm really amazed by all of the posts belittling the potential danger of RFID's. Also, many comments talking about RFID abuses, or even asking sane questions about them, have been moderated down. Then comments like this one are moderated up.
However, the only real way to relieve privacy concerns is to come up with some way for the chip to PERMANENTLY disable itself when the item is purchased
Good thought, though. Since an RFID is powered by the detector, maybe it can be overpowered, or burned out, in a similar process.
From the article: For example, RFID could let a company add a boxful of goods to its inventory systems all at once, without having to unpack the carton and scan each piece separately.
They're talking about attaching the RFID tags to the products themselves.
An RFID system consists of an antenna or coil, a transceiver and a transponder or tag. A radio signal emitted by the antenna activates the tag allowing it to be read and in some instances have data written to it.
Truth be told, I fail to see the privacy issues the adoption of these things would raise. I assume that, once you've brought your item home, you're free to remove the offending tag.
Yes, and in about twenty years, unless the public is continually informed about the possible abuses of RFID, everyone will forget.
Or tags will be made too small to remove.
Or hundreds could be put on products to prevent removal.
Or people could "accidentally" ingest them.
You're just not imaginative enough, son...:)
Note the limited description of RFID
on
Walmart to Push RFID
·
· Score: 0, Insightful
From the article: Inventory management technology that uses wireless signals to track products from the factory to store shelves is set to win a major new ally next week: Wal-Mart.
Only "track products from the factory to store shelves," eh?
This is why we don't want the media controlled by large corporations. The idea that RFID's can be used beyond "the store shelves" can be suppressed if the media speaks with one voice.
From the article: Also, following its recent commitment to delaying software releases until it has ironed out all the bugs â" a marked departure from the companyâ(TM)s earlier practice â" Microsoft seems more than prepared to wait.
But, what was at the bottom of the ASP page?//=0 && parseFloat(navigator.appVersion.substr(navigator.a ppVersion.indexOf("MSIE ")+5))>=4 && parseFloat(navigator.appVersion.indexOf("MSN "))==-1) {document.write(' \n');document.write('on error resume next \n');document.write('g_bShowFlash = ( IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFla sh.4")))\n');document.write('');} if(g_bShowFlash == true){if(!g_OTPhasCookie('OTPFRQ')){var expiredate=new Date();expiredate.setHours(expiredate.getHours()+2 4);document.cookie="OTPFRQ=1; path=/; expires="+expiredate.toGMTString();if(g_OTPhasCook ie('OTPFRQ')){document.write('');}}}//]]>
Slashdot Mirror
Who's ya daddy?
My, you is a persistent AC, ain't ye?
FYAH
Until the Linux Community learns this very important lesson...
You are the Linux community.
Stop bitching and start coding.
I've always thought this would be a cool application: if someone cut you off in traffic, point at them and give them an "asshole point." If someone got enough asshole points, they could get a ticket or some other penalty. This technology looks like it could make that possible.
Of course there would have to be abuse safeguards. (Like X points available to give out per month, adn you couldn't give the same person more than n points per year, etc...) But this looks like it makes "asshole points" a reality.
Understanding has its own value.
:)
Yet another example of "geek words to live by."
So you can write what is kind of like a reverse grammar, where you associate structural patterns with what you can think of almost as TeX descriptions of how to represent the patterns graphically. What you see on the screen has been generated from this pattern matching. So we can, on a user chosen basis, turn various program structures into all kinds of visual representations.
:)
Why, methinks he's reinvented the Matrix.
I have yet to install a utility on Solaris, SuSE, RedHat, Mandrake, WinXP, Win2K, or WinNT that did not allow me to specify the location of my JRE.
:)
True, but then you try to use a JRE installed by another app, you can get into JRE version issues, installation of standard extensions, and other environment setup nightmares. Before you dismiss this issue as "nonsense" go educate yourself at jpackage.org. They've been working on this for a while.
Then start contributing. It's an open source project.
Each application that wants to use Java recommends you install their bundled version of Java
This is Sun's fault. The folks at jpackage have been trying for quite some time to create freely distributable RPMs of JREs and SDKs. THe technical issues are surmountable, but Sun won't let you distribute a JRE unless it's bundled with a application, for the specific purpose of being used with that app and no other.
This is a legal issue entirely of Sun's making.
Religion and Science are not as different as both sides like to think. They are both predicated on logical systems built up from fundemental "facts" which have to be taken as faith.
Ah, but the nature of that "faith" in both systems is different.
In science, that faith can always be questioned, and the process for redefining your assumptions is formally defined. In religion, there is no process (within the system) for redefining your base assumptions. The change must come from outside the system. (i.e. social and environmental events and pressures)
That's not to say change only comes to the base assumptions of science from science itself. In fact, it's historically been more likely to come from outside. But, at least in the orthodox religions, there is too much resistance to change and no formal mechanism for change in the first place.
I guess everyone with a sense of humour has left Slashdot
Nah. It's the lameness filter.
Ah, I member Natalie Portman well.
Want some hot grits?
If I receive a hand-written letter from someone, it means a bit more than an email. I find it to be more sincere form of communication.
:) I just took issue with the person quoted in the article who seemed to think that one couldn't cherish an e-mail message. I keep a handwritten journal, myself. I don't switch to a typed journal because I like the experience of writing.
Despite my earlier post on this thread, I agree with you.
From the article:
"The truth is, boys and girls, even if you write a lot of e-mail on the computer, you will always need to write things down on paper at some point in your life," Boell says. "The letters you write to people are beautiful, and they'll cherish them forever. Have any of you ever received an e-mail that you cherished?"
I find this attitude strange. I have years of old e-mails saved. I cherish many of them, and rereading them brings back memories. I have the first e-mails I got from my girlfriend (going to be my wife soon) and they're saved in my USB keychain. (We met online, too!)
I know that's hokey, sentimental stuff, but it's true. You can have an emotional attachment to an e-mail. In the end, it's not the media, but (to coin a cliche) it's the thought that counts.
Now, people read this and they just jump ahead and assume that a retailer, however big, is ready to pay millions and millions of dollars for infrastructure in their warehouses, distribution centers and ultimately stores, to track trillions of product instances. Wake-up call: no they're not, and no they will never be.
Oh, wake up call for you...Fifty years ago would the average Joe think that now we'd have a full credit report for every adult in the country? Even the CEO of IBM thought that we'd only need six or seven computers in the entire world.
So, never say never.
I hope people start focusing on the promise of RFIDs: instant checkouts, instant inventories, instant customer feedback to the retailer
Ah, spoken like a true retail systems consultant.
So now, for the $2 in savings, I've got to burn $2 in gas just to get there. I've got to spend 5 minutes finding a parking space, 5 walking from the lot into the store, another 5 trying to find the section and get there, another 5-10 waiting in line...so on etc. That's 'better'?
:)
Are you a handicapped Hummer driver?
If you want to make a good argument, don't rely on hyperbole. It only makes you look silly. Save the extreme rhetorical tactics for when your opponent is off balance.
waRFIDing
:P
I like it. You do have an imagination, kiddo.
I've been reading the comments and watching the moderation of this story for the past ten minutes.
I'm really amazed by all of the posts belittling the potential danger of RFID's. Also, many comments talking about RFID abuses, or even asking sane questions about them, have been moderated down. Then comments like this one are moderated up.
I find that odd.
However, the only real way to relieve privacy concerns is to come up with some way for the chip to PERMANENTLY disable itself when the item is purchased
Good thought, though. Since an RFID is powered by the detector, maybe it can be overpowered, or burned out, in a similar process.
From the article:
For example, RFID could let a company add a boxful of goods to its inventory systems all at once, without having to unpack the carton and scan each piece separately.
They're talking about attaching the RFID tags to the products themselves.
Read more carefully.
i mean, they can't track you down the street when you go into the strip club can they?
Sure they could. If there was an RFID detector in the door frame of the club, you'd get close enough for it to detect any RFID tag on you.
also, if you walk into a store, pick up a box, and walk around to shop some more, how does the store know who you are?
It doesn't, unless you have RFID tags on you that have already been correlated with you in a database.
i guess i'm a little confused... if rfid tags are a privacy concern, how do they track the individual anymore than a credit/debit card transaction?
Because a credit card transaction isn't attached to your body and detectable from a distance.
It is very unlikly these devices will come with a power supply that lasts much longer than the expected shelf life of the item being sold.
RFID tags need no power supply. They are powered by the reader. (From the radio waves emitted by it.)
From this page:
An RFID system consists of an antenna or coil, a transceiver and a transponder or tag. A radio signal emitted by the antenna activates the tag allowing it to be read and in some instances have data written to it.
Truth be told, I fail to see the privacy issues the adoption of these things would raise. I assume that, once you've brought your item home, you're free to remove the offending tag.
:)
Yes, and in about twenty years, unless the public is continually informed about the possible abuses of RFID, everyone will forget.
Or tags will be made too small to remove.
Or hundreds could be put on products to prevent removal.
Or people could "accidentally" ingest them.
You're just not imaginative enough, son...
From the article:
Inventory management technology that uses wireless signals to track products from the factory to store shelves is set to win a major new ally next week: Wal-Mart.
Only "track products from the factory to store shelves," eh?
This is why we don't want the media controlled by large corporations. The idea that RFID's can be used beyond "the store shelves" can be suppressed if the media speaks with one voice.
From the article: Also, following its recent commitment to delaying software releases until it has ironed out all the bugs â" a marked departure from the companyâ(TM)s earlier practice â" Microsoft seems more than prepared to wait.
//=0 && parseFloat(navigator.appVersion.substr(navigator.a ppVersion.indexOf("MSIE ")+5))>=4 && parseFloat(navigator.appVersion.indexOf("MSN "))==-1) {document.write(' \n');document.write('on error resume next \n');document.write('g_bShowFlash = ( IsObject(CreateObject("ShockwaveFlash.ShockwaveFla sh.4")))\n');document.write('');} if(g_bShowFlash == true){if(!g_OTPhasCookie('OTPFRQ')){var expiredate=new Date();expiredate.setHours(expiredate.getHours()+2 4);document.cookie="OTPFRQ=1; path=/; expires="+expiredate.toGMTString();if(g_OTPhasCook ie('OTPFRQ')){document.write('');}}} //]]>
But, what was at the bottom of the ASP page?