I'm not going to be called paranoid now when I assert that the government has a social media strategy, and that they know how to play on people's vanities in order to manufacture consent.
They do, but you will, for the same reasons you mentioned earlier. At the end of the day though, all the wailing and anxiety caused by Snowden's revelations will not lead to much immediate change. Maybe congress will decide its a bad idea to give the executive office this much power. Maybe some European trade agreements will fall through.
The more important changes will be long term. The next time there's a European ICANN reform proposal, the US will not have a leg to stand on. The next time you submit a cloud proposal to an international company, don't be surprised when they shitcan any US cloud provider on principal alone.
Now that everyone knows the US government has been abusing its priviledged position and violating the principals of the US Constitution, the real reform will come in the form of behavior changes of the world's internet users. I know I'm shopping around for a gmail replacement, closing my facebook, and purchasing no more Apple computers. The rest of the world is doing the same thing.
That is why you would rely on a standard interface, like Bluetooth or USB, for connecting devices. Don't replicate what you think people want, give them a way to put what they actually want on the screen, job done!
Give me an 3.5mm audio line in on the dash and I would be happy. No patent licensing required. Why are auto makers so incompetent when it comes to providing basic features like this?
Even Apple has prior art on this. On the iPod HiFi they had a dual input audio port. You could either use a standard 3.5mm audio cable or an optical audio cable in the same port. Is there no penalty for filing a bogus patent like this?
The foregoing description has broad application. For example, while examples disclosed herein may focus on an input port for receiving a USB plug and a SD card, it should be appreciated that the concepts disclosed herein may equally apply to connectors and plugs. Similarly, although the input port may be discussed with respect to a computer, the devices and techniques disclosed herein are equally applicable to any type of device including an external connector for transferring data and/or power.
That description fits my travel power adapter. You can plug practically any power plug into its port. Rubber stamp for ridiculous obvious patent in 3... 2...
I didn't RTFA (this IS slashdot), but I would say the iOS defenders are the ones missing the point. Apple loves to tout Android fragmentation as a huge shortcoming. They love to tout ease of use of iOS vs Android. They love to tout their designs and build quality. None of that matters. It didn't matter in the Mac vs PC debate. It doesn't matter now.
Apple is losing marketshare rapidly. They will soon be in the < 10% range, just as they are with Mac. Developers are abandoning the platform, just as they did with Mac. Apple's hardware is chronically underpowered, again. Apple is using a custom processor instead of what everyone else in the industry is using, again. Apple is going to be a niche player AGAIN because they made all the same mistakes they did before.
At least Android is based on Linux, unlike Windows before it. Face it. Apple has already lost.
Don't just limit this to set top boxes, include gaming consoles and make a big fucking red blinking light mandatory on devices like Glass.
Why no blinking lights on security cameras? You expect no one is filming you without your knowledge in public? If glass makes you uncomfortable, I suggest you look up occasionally.
I'm taking you to the polling station. You're gonna get one ballot and an ink pen. When you are done marking your selections, you take a picture of it with your smartphone OR ELSE.
Yeah, you're right. Nobody could possibly be coerced now. They have a curtain after all.
Mark the ballot as expected and take a picture. Then add another mark that makes it invalid. As I said, votes against your camp: 0.
Exif tells me you spent several extra seconds after you took the picture in the booth. That tells me you were making additional marks on your ballot. I'm beating you within an inch of your life for this infraction.... See how clever you are? You just earned yourself a beating. Now that you have missing teeth and broken ribs, that vote seems pretty insignificant doesn't it? I bet you won't do THAT again.
Besides, your current system allows the same process of forced voting which you describe via absentee ballots. I still believe you are simply setting the bar much higher for online voting than it is set in the current system.
Now how do you garanty that there will be no interference from familly members, particularly from conservative families...
You're setting the bar higher for online voting than the current system. How do you guarantee no interference from family members now? I know you don't vote the right way. I'm not driving you to the polling station. I'll lock you in your room and monitor you until the election is over.
That results in a family member not voting, whereas Internet voting allows you to force that member to vote against his camp. It also means locking up that member for the whole election day whereas Internet voting usually does not allow you to change your vote so you don't need to lock him up after you've coerced him to vote.
I'm taking you to the polling station. You're gonna get one ballot and an ink pen. When you are done marking your selections, you take a picture of it with your smartphone OR ELSE.
Yeah, you're right. Nobody could possibly be coerced now. They have a curtain after all.
Let's assume the infrastructure for online voting is "perfect", open source, reviewed code, yada yada...
Now how do you garanty that there will be no interference from familly members, particularly from conservative families...
You're setting the bar higher for online voting than the current system. How do you gaurantee no interference from family members now? I know you don't vote the right way. I'm not driving you to the polling station. I'll lock you in your room and monitor you until the election is over.
How do you fight vote buying when it is easy to put a screen copy tool at work to ensure "correct" voting...
It's just as easy to modify the html in a page so it only looks like you voted a certain way. There's also photoshop. What fool is going to pay for a vote with a screenshot as proof? I can sell my vote to every interested party by that logic.
How do you fight disenfranchising when a well aimed pickaxe can cut off a couple of high rises long enough to lower their vote and short enough to make it difficult for the oposition to protest.
That's not even realistic. Some places in the states already allow voting as early as 50 days before the election. What are you gonna do, take out my internet, at home and work, for two months... with a pick axe? Good luck knocking out my 4G.
And then assuming that you succeeded in getting an open source solution (any other solution is just a way to give the vote to the software editor, of course the current electronic vote solutions do exactly that) how do you protect tampering at the data transmission point, since you do not need, and actually cannot really use teams of supervisers from oponing parties, it is enough to corrupt a small group of officials so that they ignore the real vote and send what ever is convenient...
lrn2crypto
The core issue of "modern voting" is that most important votes end up being between two very close candidates, and in most cases the differences between the number of voters is smaller than the margin of errors in the pre-election pools.
Additionally we let the cost of election run amock so unless the "winner" is proven to actually eat little babies for breakfast, even if nobody in his or her right mind can believe that the vote is "correct" redoing the whole shebang seems too expensive.
The whole point of online voting is to make it fast and cheap.
So "online voting" cannot work, moreover it "solves" a problem that does not exist, if not enough people can be bothered to show up to do a manual count, you got a problem that no voting technology can ever solve, and if they do come, then you do not need electronic voting systems.
There are challenges, but nothing you mentioned says "impossible" to me.
What happened to information wants to be free? Perhaps that virgin forest might be a shitty resource for the type of activity planned for it. Knowledge of the soil can prevent mismanagement of the land.
And unless I'm mistaken, miners typically dig around in rock, not dirt. A soil survey tells you whether you're standing on a mollisol or an oxisol. It doesn't tell you squat about the bedrock beneath that soil. Good luck getting a soil auger throught that stuff.
This will go nowhere. The DOD is freaked out about China spying on them. Do you think they would be any happier with the FBI looking over their shoulders? And, of course, good luck enforcing that on Linux. What are they going to do? Outlaw open source? Idiots.
A new game. Few or none of the people here are doing that.
Yes, right. That's why the second response to my post was this. I don't even have to look beyond this thread to see people doing that.
If 400ppm CO2 is causing global warming, then can someone please explain to me how the Earth's climate was cooler during the late Ordovician period [geocraft.com] when CO2 was about 4400ppm?
I've seen that. But what I haven't seen is how they determined the solar output was lower. Everything I've seen seems to focus on how CO2 was lower than 4400ppm. That it was actually only 3000ppm.
BTW, I find it interesting that they blame the sun, since the sun is beyond man's control. The sun was very active in the 90s. We had high temperatures then. Then solar activity declined for about a decade, and 1998 stayed the hottest year in recent records.
The sun cooled. The warming retreated. I merely point that out, then I'm a denialist. When AGW believers point to the sun as the answer to this particular conundrum, then of course that is it! Accepted without question.
I'll take it on faith that you asked that question in all seriousness. However there are denialists who keep raising the same objections year after year, and most of them were legitimate objections at one time, but they ignore the explanations that have since been found for them.
Denialists? You mean skeptics, right? The only people who use that term are people interested in provoking flame wars. I don't waste my time on the mouth breathers who use that term in a discussion about climate.
Now, let's all play 'Call me a denier for asking a question.' (AKA Appeal to ridicule) Let's assume for a moment that a rise in atmospheric CO2 is attributable to man. Let's assume our current atmospheric CO2 is close to 400ppm. If 400ppm CO2 is causing global warming, then can someone please explain to me how the Earth's climate was cooler during the late Ordovician period when CO2 was about 4400ppm?
...cannot be trusted to use a revision control system without causing a mess that somebody else will have to clean up
One has to wonder what sort of code he's capable of producing if he can't even do that.
It makes me wonder how that company is managing their source repo. From what I've seen, mismanaging a repo is pretty easy. There are also revision control systems that just make me want to gouge someone's eyes out.
While I agree with the Senator, I believe we must act with comprehensive reform. Laser printers are being used to print counterfeit money. Those too should be regulated and tracked just as strictly as 3d printers. All printer owners should be tracked, registered, and of course, pay a government tax to cover all this tracking.
Goddamn, I'm good at this political bullshit. Block something I don't want under the guise of "comprehensive reform." Being a greasy politician is easy.
Patent licences are administered by a licensing authority (LA), which creates a standard set of terms for licensing. These terms always include a list of features that the manufacturers may not implement (for example, you may not add a "save to hard drive" feature to a DVD player)
How long do you think we have until the back button and close window button are disabled for video ads online?
3000ppm is still nearly an order of magnitude greater than current CO2 levels. That link doesn't answer my fundamental question. If 350ppm is "the trigger" then how could there be an ice age with CO2 levels that high?
I'd like to see them expand the initiative to include every federal law on the books. All laws should be on github. And they should modify those laws the same way we programmers do. There's no reason a legislator should be given a 500 page bill when when only 2 pages worth have been modified. They should be able to look at a diff and see what is being slipped in behind everyone's back.
Slashdot Mirror
Since JavaScript is so damn lacking, those libraries are ESSENTIAL for anything beyond the smallest JavaScript app.
That's why I use the one true library: Vanilla JS Just look at those benchmarks! You're a fool if you use any other library!
I'm not going to be called paranoid now when I assert that the government has a social media strategy, and that they know how to play on people's vanities in order to manufacture consent.
They do, but you will, for the same reasons you mentioned earlier. At the end of the day though, all the wailing and anxiety caused by Snowden's revelations will not lead to much immediate change. Maybe congress will decide its a bad idea to give the executive office this much power. Maybe some European trade agreements will fall through.
The more important changes will be long term. The next time there's a European ICANN reform proposal, the US will not have a leg to stand on. The next time you submit a cloud proposal to an international company, don't be surprised when they shitcan any US cloud provider on principal alone.
Now that everyone knows the US government has been abusing its priviledged position and violating the principals of the US Constitution, the real reform will come in the form of behavior changes of the world's internet users. I know I'm shopping around for a gmail replacement, closing my facebook, and purchasing no more Apple computers. The rest of the world is doing the same thing.
That is why you would rely on a standard interface, like Bluetooth or USB, for connecting devices. Don't replicate what you think people want, give them a way to put what they actually want on the screen, job done!
Give me an 3.5mm audio line in on the dash and I would be happy. No patent licensing required. Why are auto makers so incompetent when it comes to providing basic features like this?
Or a thousand New York police officers doing the same with cheek swabs.
Even Apple has prior art on this. On the iPod HiFi they had a dual input audio port. You could either use a standard 3.5mm audio cable or an optical audio cable in the same port. Is there no penalty for filing a bogus patent like this?
That description fits my travel power adapter. You can plug practically any power plug into its port. Rubber stamp for ridiculous obvious patent in 3... 2...
Fuck you Apple.
The article misses the point entirely.
I didn't RTFA (this IS slashdot), but I would say the iOS defenders are the ones missing the point. Apple loves to tout Android fragmentation as a huge shortcoming. They love to tout ease of use of iOS vs Android. They love to tout their designs and build quality. None of that matters. It didn't matter in the Mac vs PC debate. It doesn't matter now.
Apple is losing marketshare rapidly. They will soon be in the < 10% range, just as they are with Mac. Developers are abandoning the platform, just as they did with Mac. Apple's hardware is chronically underpowered, again. Apple is using a custom processor instead of what everyone else in the industry is using, again. Apple is going to be a niche player AGAIN because they made all the same mistakes they did before.
At least Android is based on Linux, unlike Windows before it. Face it. Apple has already lost.
Security cams also dump their footage to DVR systems
Nope. I can find unsecured security cams all day long on google. Quick. Hide. I might be watching you!!
Don't just limit this to set top boxes, include gaming consoles and make a big fucking red blinking light mandatory on devices like Glass.
Why no blinking lights on security cameras? You expect no one is filming you without your knowledge in public? If glass makes you uncomfortable, I suggest you look up occasionally.
I'm taking you to the polling station. You're gonna get one ballot and an ink pen. When you are done marking your selections, you take a picture of it with your smartphone OR ELSE.
Yeah, you're right. Nobody could possibly be coerced now. They have a curtain after all.
Mark the ballot as expected and take a picture. Then add another mark that makes it invalid. As I said, votes against your camp: 0.
Exif tells me you spent several extra seconds after you took the picture in the booth. That tells me you were making additional marks on your ballot. I'm beating you within an inch of your life for this infraction.... See how clever you are? You just earned yourself a beating. Now that you have missing teeth and broken ribs, that vote seems pretty insignificant doesn't it? I bet you won't do THAT again.
Besides, your current system allows the same process of forced voting which you describe via absentee ballots. I still believe you are simply setting the bar much higher for online voting than it is set in the current system.
Now how do you garanty that there will be no interference from familly members, particularly from conservative families...
You're setting the bar higher for online voting than the current system. How do you guarantee no interference from family members now? I know you don't vote the right way. I'm not driving you to the polling station. I'll lock you in your room and monitor you until the election is over.
That results in a family member not voting, whereas Internet voting allows you to force that member to vote against his camp. It also means locking up that member for the whole election day whereas Internet voting usually does not allow you to change your vote so you don't need to lock him up after you've coerced him to vote.
I'm taking you to the polling station. You're gonna get one ballot and an ink pen. When you are done marking your selections, you take a picture of it with your smartphone OR ELSE.
Yeah, you're right. Nobody could possibly be coerced now. They have a curtain after all.
Let's assume the infrastructure for online voting is "perfect", open source, reviewed code, yada yada ...
Now how do you garanty that there will be no interference from familly members, particularly from conservative families...
You're setting the bar higher for online voting than the current system. How do you gaurantee no interference from family members now? I know you don't vote the right way. I'm not driving you to the polling station. I'll lock you in your room and monitor you until the election is over.
How do you fight vote buying when it is easy to put a screen copy tool at work to ensure "correct" voting...
It's just as easy to modify the html in a page so it only looks like you voted a certain way. There's also photoshop. What fool is going to pay for a vote with a screenshot as proof? I can sell my vote to every interested party by that logic.
How do you fight disenfranchising when a well aimed pickaxe can cut off a couple of high rises long enough to lower their vote and short enough to make it difficult for the oposition to protest.
That's not even realistic. Some places in the states already allow voting as early as 50 days before the election. What are you gonna do, take out my internet, at home and work, for two months... with a pick axe? Good luck knocking out my 4G.
And then assuming that you succeeded in getting an open source solution (any other solution is just a way to give the vote to the software editor, of course the current electronic vote solutions do exactly that) how do you protect tampering at the data transmission point, since you do not need, and actually cannot really use teams of supervisers from oponing parties, it is enough to corrupt a small group of officials so that they ignore the real vote and send what ever is convenient...
lrn2crypto
The core issue of "modern voting" is that most important votes end up being between two very close candidates, and in most cases the differences between the number of voters is smaller than the margin of errors in the pre-election pools. Additionally we let the cost of election run amock so unless the "winner" is proven to actually eat little babies for breakfast, even if nobody in his or her right mind can believe that the vote is "correct" redoing the whole shebang seems too expensive.
The whole point of online voting is to make it fast and cheap.
So "online voting" cannot work, moreover it "solves" a problem that does not exist, if not enough people can be bothered to show up to do a manual count, you got a problem that no voting technology can ever solve, and if they do come, then you do not need electronic voting systems.
There are challenges, but nothing you mentioned says "impossible" to me.
What happened to information wants to be free? Perhaps that virgin forest might be a shitty resource for the type of activity planned for it. Knowledge of the soil can prevent mismanagement of the land.
And unless I'm mistaken, miners typically dig around in rock, not dirt. A soil survey tells you whether you're standing on a mollisol or an oxisol. It doesn't tell you squat about the bedrock beneath that soil. Good luck getting a soil auger throught that stuff.
This will go nowhere. The DOD is freaked out about China spying on them. Do you think they would be any happier with the FBI looking over their shoulders? And, of course, good luck enforcing that on Linux. What are they going to do? Outlaw open source? Idiots.
Call me a denier for asking a question.
A new game. Few or none of the people here are doing that.
Yes, right. That's why the second response to my post was this. I don't even have to look beyond this thread to see people doing that.
If 400ppm CO2 is causing global warming, then can someone please explain to me how the Earth's climate was cooler during the late Ordovician period [geocraft.com] when CO2 was about 4400ppm?
See here.
I've seen that. But what I haven't seen is how they determined the solar output was lower. Everything I've seen seems to focus on how CO2 was lower than 4400ppm. That it was actually only 3000ppm.
BTW, I find it interesting that they blame the sun, since the sun is beyond man's control. The sun was very active in the 90s. We had high temperatures then. Then solar activity declined for about a decade, and 1998 stayed the hottest year in recent records.
The sun cooled. The warming retreated. I merely point that out, then I'm a denialist. When AGW believers point to the sun as the answer to this particular conundrum, then of course that is it! Accepted without question.
I'll take it on faith that you asked that question in all seriousness. However there are denialists who keep raising the same objections year after year, and most of them were legitimate objections at one time, but they ignore the explanations that have since been found for them.
Denialists? You mean skeptics, right? The only people who use that term are people interested in provoking flame wars. I don't waste my time on the mouth breathers who use that term in a discussion about climate.
Thank you. Also known as appeal to belief. 98% of Americans believe in God. Therefore, God must exist.
Now, let's all play 'Call me a denier for asking a question.' (AKA Appeal to ridicule) Let's assume for a moment that a rise in atmospheric CO2 is attributable to man. Let's assume our current atmospheric CO2 is close to 400ppm. If 400ppm CO2 is causing global warming, then can someone please explain to me how the Earth's climate was cooler during the late Ordovician period when CO2 was about 4400ppm?
...cannot be trusted to use a revision control system without causing a mess that somebody else will have to clean up
One has to wonder what sort of code he's capable of producing if he can't even do that.
It makes me wonder how that company is managing their source repo. From what I've seen, mismanaging a repo is pretty easy. There are also revision control systems that just make me want to gouge someone's eyes out.
While I agree with the Senator, I believe we must act with comprehensive reform. Laser printers are being used to print counterfeit money. Those too should be regulated and tracked just as strictly as 3d printers. All printer owners should be tracked, registered, and of course, pay a government tax to cover all this tracking.
Goddamn, I'm good at this political bullshit. Block something I don't want under the guise of "comprehensive reform." Being a greasy politician is easy.
Plenty of sub $100 androids already available, but don't let that stop you from plugging Nokia. http://www.pacebutler.com/blog/android-mobile-phones-under-100/
Fuck. You.
What I wish Tim Berners Lee^W^W^W W3C understood about DRM.
How long do you think we have until the back button and close window button are disabled for video ads online?
3000ppm is still nearly an order of magnitude greater than current CO2 levels. That link doesn't answer my fundamental question. If 350ppm is "the trigger" then how could there be an ice age with CO2 levels that high?
I'd like to see them expand the initiative to include every federal law on the books. All laws should be on github. And they should modify those laws the same way we programmers do. There's no reason a legislator should be given a 500 page bill when when only 2 pages worth have been modified. They should be able to look at a diff and see what is being slipped in behind everyone's back.
Earth's climate was cooler in the late Ordovician period with atmospheric CO2 ~4400ppm. How did that happen if 350ppm is the trigger for global warming?
Yes, now if they could just implement a single html5 form element.
The element is part of the HTML5 spec. Microsoft is holding back the industry by refusing to implement it.