I'm thinking particularly of all those jobs that now issue a company phone as standard equipment, and what would happen if they could be conclusively shown to do harm. Sure, the legislation is attempting to pass asbestos reform, which is aimed not merely at asbestos tort cases, but also at class action suits... With asbestos, the lawsuits went after the companies who made it, and then when those went bankrupt, the companies which used it. It has gotten so out of hand that the suits are going after factories which had buildings in which it was used, but the workers suing didn't work in those, they oworked in plants that had none- and are suing over being scared, ten years into retirement, that they might have been exposed to it.
So what happens when the entire country has a good case that they've been unwillingly (in some cases) exposed to dangerous radiation, and 'deceived' into using a dangerous device? (There's wisdom in the adage that says that if you don't know how dangerous new technology is, a little prudence- how does it go? Oh, right- something about an ounce of prevention being worth a pound of cure...)
Well, it's simple, unfortunately. Since those suits would bankrupt the nation (except for the lawyers), regardless of how justified some of the suits might be, most people are going to find that they
a.) have been banned from suing by 'reformative' legislation,
b.) have already been represented in an 'opt-out' class lawsuit that they may have known nothing about and may not be able to collect from, or can collect a five-dollar coupon from, or
c.) are told by the courts that they had the choice to not use the technology, and vote at a town meeting about whether to put the tower up.
On the other hand, they would still have to change the technology. And does anyone remember the big stir about police officers getting testicular cancer from holding the early radar guns on their lap while they waited at speed traps? while i wouldn't say that anyone 'deserves' to have it, i would say that there are times when illnesses can be a bit... ironic. Like if the tumours from cell phone use tend to take out the speech center...
I would like to see more on those, too. I don't mind the 'leftist" views of the stories. Republicans are not freaks of nature or madmen just because they are republicans, neither are democrats baby-killing commies just because they are democrats. And i just don't see that getting these stories more press is a bad thing: when undr-reporting is the problem, over-reporting will result in people making up their own minds (we hope.) If the story is way off-base, then the story will be seen that way by more of the viewing public. Not all american consumers are blind followers, and while mainstream media tends to show the same news in the same slant most of the time, i's because they frequently get their news from the same place. More news equals more chance to ask questions, for some of us... I'm glad to see the story on slashdot, even if it means that people will rant against the left yet again. You don't have to read the story, you don't have to read or post the rants, but it's all there in case you want to, which is i think real point. No sarcasm in my gladness to see the story and people replying to it.
My brother, bless his wicked little heart, works for a university. And one of his first things to do on the job was to fill out the paperwork regarding how they were going to get rid of the old computers, to be included in the req (that's requisition) forms for the new equipment. (Wreck forms, that's where we're heading with this.) He wrote down that they intended to weed out the old computers through a strategic defenestration program. It almost got signed! At the last possible moment, the page was sent to the department of large words and syllables (also know as, "Hey! you work for the English department, don't you?? GEt in here! What does this mean??") The UNfunny part was him almost getting his first written warning on his first week at the job. The FUNNY part, well... it's not the first time that he's had to go to his union rep and say, er- you don't understand, we're not trying to get me out of this one. I really did this!
Nor, in retrospect, was it his last...
He figures any meeting that begins with the words, "Do you realise that i almost SIGNED this??" means he hasn't lost his job (yet)....
Standing for half an hour is easier than walking for half an hour. Especially if the standing for half an hour gets you farther than the walking would. It's not viable for people who can't get around at all, but for people who just wear out quicker than normal, it makes more sense. Anyway, it costs too much for me to buy out of pocket yet, and my odds of convincing my health coverage to shell out for it are negligible... for now it's girl on foot or girl in chair... so in the meantime, anybody wanna downhill race? *grin*
These are machines that can provide a small amount of fun and ease for most people, and a LOT of extra function and ease for a small segment of the population. For most, a hike up a mountain is a lot of good exercise. For me, it's impossible. So my two cents says that field tests like this are incredibly important to people in that minority. Like me. I watch for stuff like this.
I have a wheelchair. I can walk just fine- for distances of a mile and a half or less. Any more and my joints can't take it, the inflammation gets too bad and i'm out of commission. So i can get through my workday, but i have the wheelchair for group adventures where it's more fun if i can keep up. Great for museums, but more difficult outside, especially on hills. My arms aren't any better than my legs, so it needs to be pushed, rather than wheeled by me. It works out great, we all take turns, and while i can't push anyone in it, everybody gets a chance to ride and that way i can walk for a little of it and still be part of the adventure. For them it's novel and fun; for me, it's my chance to take part in these excursions. Without it, i'd miss out on a lot.
A segway would be a great thing to have, but before i spend that kind of money on it, i need to know how it does in real-world operation, with real-world surroundings like dirt and tree branches and so on. So i watch for things like this. It's not a wheelchair and it's not a walker and it's not a little red wagon to be pulled in- it's a scooter that you don't have to propel on your own. Believe me, the energy it saves will be put to use elsewhere. I would love to be able to keep up on a hike!!!
OT Packie as in package store
on
Dotcom Era Fads
·
· Score: 1
In MA, however, you can't make a packie run on sunday, as it's closed, except with special holiday permits. And they're legally required to put the stuff in some form of packaging (the case counts) so you're not allowed to wander out holding a vodka bottle in one hand sans wrapper.
In vermont, on the other hand, the gas stations sold single beers and i was allowed to work in a microbrewery at the age of 18. Go figure!
to reset the win-loss record of players suspected of cheating
So... is there any word on what recourse a player has who is 'suspected' of cheating but wasn't, or is this Homeland Security for Virtual HomeLands? I know that this has been going on for years, and i know that the host company has the right to change scores as it sees fit. However- is there any posting in the game that explains how they will determine cheating, etc.?
I'm guessing that regardless of the validity of click-through contracting, there are going to be more lawsuits. Lawsuits get brought in a lot faster when money is on the line, and someone who plays for long periods of time only to lose said money is going to want a method to get it back.
I'm a pessimist, i suppose, but i can see this eventually opening up into another huge money pit- 'gaming insurance,' 'virtual lawyers,' and 'third-party player advocates,' who get paid solely to witness the game. MAybe even the development of the personal game log, which follows you around logging everything that you do in the game so that it can be presented as evidence that your 'suspected cheating,' was not cheating but was legitimate gameplay.
On the other hand, maybe a third-party player advocate/ game log might not be an entirely bad thing, if the user had the ability to turn it off and on, knowing that only actions logged in a continuous series of play would be admissable, and if the user got to control how it was used- for example, a game log that the user could turn on and that the user could store but not open (which would require some form of regular reportage, to ensure that it was working properly) but could turn over if there was a dispute and then get it back again???
On the other hand, if the hosts weren't so unwilling to pay attention, none of this would be necessary...
Seriously- i worked at one place where the woman near me wore perfume that made my eyes water and my athsma go off... her kid had bought it for her, so she wore it every day until i finally convinced her to stop by threatening to go to HR and discuss with them that i'd already gone over my medical issues with the woman and was having to use my inhaler several times just to get through the mornings that she came to work.
Also, don't transact personal business on the telephone unless you REALLY want the whole office to know about it. That goes for making appointments, calling friends, the works. Sound carries well, and people tend to talk louder when they're on the phone with people they know well, because they're more comfortable.
Don't listen to music without headphones, don't pop popcorn and bring it to your cubby, and remember that anything you put on your wall may be seen by anyone at anytime.
that said, personalising your cubby can make you feel more comfortable. Even hanging colth on the walls is oke in some places, so get a good set of guidelines put out for what IS acceptable as well as what isn't. Offer, if possible, several types of whiteboards, corkboards, whatever, so that people feel that they can customise it at least a little.
The QUESTION was about PAPER, not about FOOD. Is there a good way to sort out all those receipts in a storable format (which then leads to the question about the long-term viability of compact discs...)
Not about whether the food allergies and intolerances that nearly led to my death are 'imaginary.' So if you've got a good, technical solution, i'd love to hear it. Incidentally, I'm not allergic to peanuts. And before i suddenly ended up having a reaction- which in turn triggered an autoimmune response that has already damaged organs- i wasn't sure that food allergies were all they were cracked up to be, either. May you not find out the hard way, stranger.
so much that it becomes ridiculous to try laminating things...
it goes like this. I have a lot of out-of-pocket health costs, so much so that they up my income tax rebate by enough to make it VERY much worth saving my receipts. Especially my grocery receipts, since the diet that i'm limited to is unreasonably expensive, and i'm permitted to claim the difference on my taxes. Which means keeping every grocery receipt. Well, i keep them. And they fade out fast. GOd knows what will happen if i'm ever audited. What should i do, scan all of them and keep them on cd? Ideas welcome!
As a singer, i have a comment. And that's that one reason why people can get turned off a song is if the voice sounds wrong- and one of the reasons that a voice can sound wrong is that if you iron the wrinkles out of it, it's going to register as something other than a human voice, just as they're finding with video games and physical movements- if the movements are just like a human's except for a few things missing, the result is that one moment the viewer is very comfortable with what they're seeing, and then suddenly, often without conscious awareness of why, the character seems completely lifeless and alien.
Tuning equipment for recording has been around for awhile... and I can't help but think that they are fueling the indie music biz, where musicians frequently release their music raw, and play it without benefit of corrective technology on a regular basis because of the places that they play. A lot of folks are finding that there's a big welcome for their sound because the sound is unique, and you get that uniqueness by keeping the faults. Voices frequently waver, often hitting near but not perfect pitch, and that's not just part of the value of the recording, it's one of the ways that we recognise human voices versus machine voices. What the increase in tuning technology means is that it will be a lot easier to make machine-quality sound- which, unfortunately, sounds a lot like machine-quality sound.
This is an interesting theing to debate. On the one hand, it's technically conveivable, if not necessarily viable yet. (Who's going to go back and deal with all the cars on the roads that aren't new?)
If this were happening in the US, the question would be whether companies who would find this the most useful, such as companies who have fleets of drivers, would find it worth the public outcry. It also brings up the question- is this the direction in which we want to go? There are certainly arguments in favour- lives saved is one of them. Drunk driving is another. But from there we go back to civil liberties again. Do we have the right to unmonitored transport? Do we have the right to make our own driving choices?
More important than either of those, this runs straight into a question of, is it right to have a fine issued without human intervention? Because some of the problems then become... what if my car was stolen? What if I'm speeding because there's a woman having a baby in the backseat? If a cop stops the car in those situations, they can offer support by recognising your car and being witness to who was driving, or in the latter case, calling an ambulance, and frequently the fine will be waived. Human crises do tend to get some laxity where the low is concerned, because other people tend to acknowledge them.
Here's another interesting note, even beyond the question of whether a device that reports on speeding and yellow lines can report on your location under the Patriot Act.... In Vermont, at least when i lived there two years ago, it was not illegal to cross a double yellow line unless there was a posted restriction saying so. The rest of the time, the cop might get you for recless endangerment, but the yellow lines officially meant, "Passing is not recommended in this area."
Point being, the states have enough law changes that some of those reported issues will not be applicale. Do they then get turned off? I'm treating all this as a hypothetical question, of course, and will look for the same story elsewhere before i treat it as otherwise. It reminds me of the debate over automatic-track cars, the ones which do the driving for you over an electric strip, etc. The question then was- if your car can automatically go where it's told, can there be stops to which you can't go? to which no one can go but a few select people? It was interesting then, and it's interesting now. Not enough to make me put together a tinfoil hat, but interesting nonetheless.
She's on the right track, but it's not enough. She only has to find one way to do it in order to win.
However, there are countless creative and intelligent folks out there who would probably find other ways to do it. Moreover, if they're dumb enough to publish the hole(s) etc that she finds, this will only concentrate efforts to find other ways to do it. There are many other ways that they could do this, such as
letting everyone have a go and paying a bounty for every successful attempt;
putting them into colleges and envcouraging community attempts;
(least advisable) wait for election day to find out what the problems are!!!
It's good that this is happening, but not very useful unless subsequent challengers are also all owed to give it a try. Everyone has a different approach, and since we have no idea how many exploitable weaknesses it has, and she only need find one to be successful, i sure hope they aren't dumb enough to think that the system will then be secur... oh, wait, these are politicians, right? Damn. Waittress! Another round, we're screwed here and need a drink if we're gonna have to watch this!!
Take it from someone who went through a not-alike but similar adventure: tell him ot to leave school, whatever he does. He can get a night job (which will also get him out of the house) he can wait till he's 18 and tell his mum that either she makes a decision about da or deals with it on her own (Tough to say and harder to follow through with) or he can wait it out and try to get by- but the economy is on the skids, and if he doesn't get that diploma he's gonna have a real hard time with the GED instead, and they don't usually let you get a GED until your class graduates anyway.
working your way in high school is a tough thing to do, i did it and barely graduated- but it beats working INSTEAD of high school. If he has any hope of making his life better over the next three years, dropping out of school is one of the worst things to do. It will be hard for him to stop gaming to work nights; he'll need to make some hard decisions no matter how this goes.
Back on topic; i think that i have to agree that this guy's gaming addiction didn't save them- he saved them in spite of the gaming addiction. The fact that he had a late night sleep pattern was a factor, but it could have been from any late night activity. If he'd been an astronomy student, for example, he would have noticed the light from the fire very quickly. If he'd been reading he would have been awake, too. Does anybody else see the potential for a Sims: Catastrophe game in this? watch your sims deal with hurricanes, tornadoe, fires, carjackings, and ebola...
Bush Misuses Science Data, Report Says
By CHRISTOPHER MARQUIS
ASHINGTON, Aug. 7 -- The Bush administration persistently manipulates scientific data to serve its ideology and protect the interests of its political supporters, a report by the minority staff of the House Committee on Government Reform says.
The 40-page report, which was prepared for Representative Henry A. Waxman, the committee's ranking Democrat, accused the administration of compromising the scientific integrity of federal institutions that monitor food and medicine, conduct health research, control disease and protect the environment.
On many topics, including global warming and sex education, the administration "has manipulated the scientific process and distorted or suppressed scientific findings," the report said.
"The administration's political interference with science has led to misleading statements by the president, inaccurate responses to Congress, altered Web sites, suppressed agency reports, erroneous international communications and the gagging of scientists," the report added.
The White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, dismissed the report. He contended that its sponsor, Mr. Waxman, who is widely known for his aggressive inquiry into the tobacco industry, was seeking to score political points.
"This administration looks at the facts, and reviews the best available science based on what's right for the American people," Mr. McClellan said. "The only one who is playing politics about science is Congressman Waxman. His report is riddled with distortion, inaccuracies and omissions."
Some of the examples from the report's 21 subject areas have already been reported in the media. They include the Environmental Protection Agency's decision last year to delete a section on global warming in its comprehensive report on the state of the environment and President Bush's overstatement of the number of stem cell lines available for research under controls imposed by the administration.
The report's authors say federal agencies have jeopardized scientific integrity in many ways, including stacking scientific advisory committees with unqualified officials or industry representatives, blocking publication of findings that could harm corporate interests and defending controversial decisions with misleading information.
With respect to sex education, the report said, the Bush administration has advanced what the report described as an unproven "abstinence only" agenda and abolished an initiative at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that listed scientifically validated safe-sex techniques that included using condoms.
On agricultural pollution, the Agriculture Department has issued tight controls on government scientists seeking to publish information that could have an adverse impact on industry, the report said. It cited the case of a microbiologist, James Zahn, who was denied permission to publish findings on the dangers of antibiotic-resistant bacteria near hog farms in the Midwest.
On the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the report said that Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton, a firm advocate of drilling for oil in the region, misrepresented to Congress her agency's scientific opinion on how drilling would affect the region's caribou population. She told lawmakers most of the caribou calving occurred outside the refuge; her scientists said the opposite was true.
They also deal with a number of other types of account info, including debit cards, in some cases. Banking firms use these giants for all kinds of info collection. Which means that averagecitizen out there may find no money in their account one morning and not know it till they get denied at a point-of-service for insufficient funds- AND the recipient may have things like work address, paycheck data, and so on. This is a bad news nightmare, and the biggest problem is that unless the company takes responsibility, it may take a lawsuit to force them to do so when a person loses money. It can take years just to clear bad credit issues; there's little to no recourse in the case of outright theft unless they catch they guy who did it. Hopefully, with that many accounts, he might be dumb enough to use them. If he's not, and simply posts or sells them, they may be flagged in the transaction by someone paying attention.
What a mess. I wonder what their E&O insurance is going to look like after this little nightmare?
this is a divisive subject, pitting the market against itself. ISPs want to be abke to charge for bandwidth on a tiered basis, media companies want to own all the content, and both are having to deal with regulatory issues.
I don't see it working. AOL is 'working,' except that consumers will create options. It's happened every time. Don't want cable? Go for satellite. Don't want satellite? Go for online broadcasts. Don't want either? Turn to another medium. In this case, though, i can see roll-your-own companies making a MAJOR profit.
My thought runs this way. Right now, i don't watch much tv. I pay for cable, but only if i can have access to interesting, relatively obscure channels. THe internet is different- it runs two-way. They want to have the content and the line, something equal to owning the phone AND tv companies at once. If they want to do it that way, underground networks are going to start. At least, i hope so. THe proliferation of mini-napsters seems to indicate that netfolk are willing to go to some length to establish the market that they want- in this case, free as in beer. Why should we pay for internet content when we can MAKE internet content?
This gives me optimism and hope, although i'm certainly interested in watching the regulatory issues play out. I feel good about the fact that we're finally reaching the point where it's easier to reach out and find like-minded individuals, and i feel fairly confident that backyard broadcasts will be un-quashable as the media moguls pick up steam. The RIAA is even having to learn that they can't stop every consumer. Who was it that said that there's no stopping an idea whose time has come? That's about how i feel about the net. Half the stuff on it might be useless- but i'm not going to see ads AND pay for content. AOL can keep there 1400 free hours (1400 free hours in the first month? Doesn't anybody sleep?) and the Comcast i use occasionally tries to reset my homepage, but i'll keep switching it back and writing them letters every time that they do. When they make it so that i can't, or so that i have to pay just to have a look at a page as a rule rather than an exception- I'm switching over to whatever's friendlier, no matter how much i have to learn to be able to do it.... just my tuppence in the jar. (The other $.98, i'm going to go give to the EFF.)
And I thinjk that the RIAA absolutely SHOULD have to answer. But asking might not do it. What might get a response, a few ideas of where to start, would be to...
Petition your lawmakers. Specifically, address that list of questions and explain that you want them answered so that you can understand the actual scope of the law, and thus avoid breaking it.
Publish that list. There are a lot of magazines on and off-line to whom that list might be cc'd, and be sure that you put the list of them on your letter to lawmakers.
And your ISP, since they have a stake in the filesharing debate.
Despite the criticism being offered, this is a very valid set of questions. I don't care about what music you want to listen to- it IS important that the music industry has never clarified this and is now citing illegal efforts without specifying what's still legal. This gives them the chance to scare people into the most restrictive set of possibilities without doing so in writing. If people are too scared to do anything when they buy a cd but listen to it on one device, ever, then the RIAA has won huge ground without ever having to specify. I would like to know the answers to these, and so i'd say please let us know if you succeed in getting a response. In the meantime, the more attention you call to that set of questions, the better the odds that media pressure will force the RIAA to answer. Remember that they're facing a congressional inquiry- and therefore this is the perfect time to get that to your lawmakers. HEll, i think you could reasonably email it to the subcommittee themselves even if your district isn't directly represented in it, because we will certainly be affected by the results.
I moved, mid-senior-year, to the same highschool that my mum went to. The same one that she was the reason for the writing of the rule book at. (Bless my mum, she somehow managed to get kicked out of school four times on the same day.)Now, i wasn't a great student. Working nights illegally, trying to support myself as i lived with an alcoholic relative, and going to high school during the day. No time for homework, and no time for sleep. I used to cut drawing class at the end of the day just to take a nap.
I had a 'study period,' third class block of the day, which i also attended diligently- they'd wake me up when the bell rang. To get the tone of this tale completely, you have to know that this school had the same administration that it did in my mum's day.
I got called into the vice-principal's office midway through the year. They'd finally gotten past my different last name and figured out where they'd seen a teenaged girl who looked like me before.
"We've got you," he says, leaning back in his chair. Me (confused) : What??? Him: "we've got you cutting class. I knew we'd catch you on something; that's it. You're out." Me: What????? Him: "I've got a pile of cut slips tis high- " indicating with hands- "sixth period, study with Mrs. (name i'd never heard before.)" Me: You're kidding, right? Me: I DON'T EVEN HAVE THAT STUDY. HIim: "Yes, you do, I've got it right here, and there's a cut slip for every day this year." Me: Sixth period was Psych for the first half of the year. Sociology for the second half the year. It's a class that i love, i've attended it every day even when i was sick, and it's the only reason that i haven't dropped the hell OUT of your school yet!!!! him: (leaning back weakly)"...what?" Me, on rampage: I have attended every DAY. I have study third period and i've attended that, too. Go check. You want to suspend me for this, you go ahead and try- I wasn't. I graduated, late but for real. His speech didn't exactly put the fire in me to stay, but i figured that it would be worth it to not have to go for a GED later on. (It was.) I went on to have my own rule in the book that my mum was the initiative for (she said, "how can you hold me to it if you haven't written it down?" and her family backed her up through the ensuing battle. They ended up having to write down the rules.) but i didn't end up getting thrown out or quitting.
Now, this makes me wonder what would have happened if they'd had the computer work on it.
a) they would have figured it out sooner, and known (maybe) that i couldn't be in two classes at once,
b) they might have been more worried about me quitting, what with the poor grades, etc.
c) they might have thrown me out, leaving me to bring them to court in an attempt to appeal based on computer error. They might even claim that i tampered with the system, who knows. But as long as there are people around who are looking to make examples, looking to abuse the system (he should have warned me after the first incident, and the whole interview could have been avoided from the start), there will be problems with any system.
The most important- to my mind- part of this is that they have to tell you what info they're collecting. This tells a lot about a company.
My browser is not set up to block cookies. My browser is set to notify me, however, & pops up a privacy notice everytime one gets sent, and gives me the option to block them. You know that AOL ad with the screen full of pop-ups? I was astounded, when i tested, to see how many sites such as MSN will send you. Including the ones for ad servers that deliver popups. My brother laughed and called me paranoid, but i'm not. This is how i learned about computers in the first place, by observing and playing with them, and my HTML started by staring at page source, and now my info about security and so on is coming from watching what brushes up against my computer. Ten websites produced more than 50 cookies. The lowest was zero, the highest was fifteen. (and the site was kind enough to reset my home page for me, d*it)
For those of use who need to use the net at work, it would be beautiful to have a choice in an environment where we can't see or play with things. Besides, eith phone calls they have to tell you if you're being recorded, so i think that both public cameras AND net cookies AND any other such info-recording system should be required to let you know that you're in the lens. If they want my info, they can ask. (set your firewall to make windows only able to connect when YOU want it to, and see how annoyed it gets!)
Six nifty little letters. Nope, not OMMMMM, but "ADA" and "RLS."
Which is to say... this sure won't fly everywhere else. I've got RLS. It's hard enough for me to sit still at a desk. Active Yoga is out for other physical reasons; seated meditation is out because of the Restless Limb issues. I guess my biggest question is: are employees going to be offered other options??? And if not, how long until the lawsuit (The Other American Pastime) hits? I wouldn't bother to make a big deal out of it, but then, my employer would never do this. But it becomes a burden for the people picking up the work while everyone's at yoga. So what happens when the employee decides that they don't like having an extra-stressful workplace but no equivalent chance to relax?
Personally, I think there would be more benefit to offering a free health club membership, with the option to take one hour of the day to go. People could take part in whatever was most appropriate for them, and the company would end up footing a lower average health insurance premium per employee. Me, i'd be willing to take the last hour of the day to do what i could in a gym rather than in an employer-sited group activity, because i would have people there who knew about my physical limits, no being singled out in a workplace setting, and a variety of activities available depending on how i'm feeling. But then, there are a lot of changes i'd push for if i ran the zoo. My $.02 to share...
I have two brothers. One of them went walkabout here in the states, but wasn't as stable and reliable as would have made this a reasonable act... In fact, he simply dropped off the map suddenly, and we were very concerned.
Fortunately for us, he's dramatic- and doesn't read headers. Our other brother was the one who got his terrible goth poem by email, from a free account, and we seem to have narrowly averted disaster- he was out in Arkansas, it turned out, having a breakdown. (The brother who got the email sat down and found out where he sent it from, and checked in with the rest of us to let us know that the kid was alive. We'd called the police and the police were spectacularly unhelpful, we had to call them back and tell them where he was. "How do you know?" they asked us.) If he hadn't been traceable, he might have been dead by the time we got to him.
I have accounts that i use regularly that are free accounts, yes. And I'd resent them being read by strangers (Do we really think that the government are the only ones who want us all to be visible on the map? See my journal entry today on microchip implants in mexico... how long till your email ID is on your chip?) but i was thankful, that once, that anonymous doesn't always mean anonymous. Mixed feelings on this one... i wouldn't want my phone tapped, but i do want 911 to be able to see where i am. There's a differene, but only in degree.
Here in Boston, we race them, and i know that this happens in other states, too (the KenDucky Derby being one of them) usually they are held as fundraisers for nonprofit organisations. Here in Boston the ducky theme's been prevalent ever since Make Way For Ducklings, so nobody's surprised to see duckies washing down the Charles River with numbers painted on the sides...
They string nets right across the top of the river, though, so that the duckies can't escape. (And the duckies are actually rented most of the time, which really makes it bizarre... So i guess it's time for another ocean duckie race!!! quick, somebody head out there and number the ducks...
Slashdot Mirror
So what happens when the entire country has a good case that they've been unwillingly (in some cases) exposed to dangerous radiation, and 'deceived' into using a dangerous device? (There's wisdom in the adage that says that if you don't know how dangerous new technology is, a little prudence- how does it go? Oh, right- something about an ounce of prevention being worth a pound of cure...)
Well, it's simple, unfortunately. Since those suits would bankrupt the nation (except for the lawyers), regardless of how justified some of the suits might be, most people are going to find that they
a.) have been banned from suing by 'reformative' legislation,
b.) have already been represented in an 'opt-out' class lawsuit that they may have known nothing about and may not be able to collect from, or can collect a five-dollar coupon from, or
c.) are told by the courts that they had the choice to not use the technology, and vote at a town meeting about whether to put the tower up.
On the other hand, they would still have to change the technology. And does anyone remember the big stir about police officers getting testicular cancer from holding the early radar guns on their lap while they waited at speed traps? while i wouldn't say that anyone 'deserves' to have it, i would say that there are times when illnesses can be a bit... ironic. Like if the tumours from cell phone use tend to take out the speech center...
I would like to see more on those, too. I don't mind the 'leftist" views of the stories. Republicans are not freaks of nature or madmen just because they are republicans, neither are democrats baby-killing commies just because they are democrats. And i just don't see that getting these stories more press is a bad thing: when undr-reporting is the problem, over-reporting will result in people making up their own minds (we hope.) If the story is way off-base, then the story will be seen that way by more of the viewing public. Not all american consumers are blind followers, and while mainstream media tends to show the same news in the same slant most of the time, i's because they frequently get their news from the same place. More news equals more chance to ask questions, for some of us... I'm glad to see the story on slashdot, even if it means that people will rant against the left yet again. You don't have to read the story, you don't have to read or post the rants, but it's all there in case you want to, which is i think real point. No sarcasm in my gladness to see the story and people replying to it.
Nor, in retrospect, was it his last...
He figures any meeting that begins with the words, "Do you realise that i almost SIGNED this??" means he hasn't lost his job (yet)....
Standing for half an hour is easier than walking for half an hour. Especially if the standing for half an hour gets you farther than the walking would. It's not viable for people who can't get around at all, but for people who just wear out quicker than normal, it makes more sense. Anyway, it costs too much for me to buy out of pocket yet, and my odds of convincing my health coverage to shell out for it are negligible... for now it's girl on foot or girl in chair... so in the meantime, anybody wanna downhill race? *grin*
I have a wheelchair. I can walk just fine- for distances of a mile and a half or less. Any more and my joints can't take it, the inflammation gets too bad and i'm out of commission. So i can get through my workday, but i have the wheelchair for group adventures where it's more fun if i can keep up. Great for museums, but more difficult outside, especially on hills. My arms aren't any better than my legs, so it needs to be pushed, rather than wheeled by me. It works out great, we all take turns, and while i can't push anyone in it, everybody gets a chance to ride and that way i can walk for a little of it and still be part of the adventure. For them it's novel and fun; for me, it's my chance to take part in these excursions. Without it, i'd miss out on a lot.
A segway would be a great thing to have, but before i spend that kind of money on it, i need to know how it does in real-world operation, with real-world surroundings like dirt and tree branches and so on. So i watch for things like this. It's not a wheelchair and it's not a walker and it's not a little red wagon to be pulled in- it's a scooter that you don't have to propel on your own. Believe me, the energy it saves will be put to use elsewhere. I would love to be able to keep up on a hike!!!
In vermont, on the other hand, the gas stations sold single beers and i was allowed to work in a microbrewery at the age of 18. Go figure!
So... is there any word on what recourse a player has who is 'suspected' of cheating but wasn't, or is this Homeland Security for Virtual HomeLands? I know that this has been going on for years, and i know that the host company has the right to change scores as it sees fit. However- is there any posting in the game that explains how they will determine cheating, etc.?
I'm guessing that regardless of the validity of click-through contracting, there are going to be more lawsuits. Lawsuits get brought in a lot faster when money is on the line, and someone who plays for long periods of time only to lose said money is going to want a method to get it back.
I'm a pessimist, i suppose, but i can see this eventually opening up into another huge money pit- 'gaming insurance,' 'virtual lawyers,' and 'third-party player advocates,' who get paid solely to witness the game. MAybe even the development of the personal game log, which follows you around logging everything that you do in the game so that it can be presented as evidence that your 'suspected cheating,' was not cheating but was legitimate gameplay.
On the other hand, maybe a third-party player advocate/ game log might not be an entirely bad thing, if the user had the ability to turn it off and on, knowing that only actions logged in a continuous series of play would be admissable, and if the user got to control how it was used- for example, a game log that the user could turn on and that the user could store but not open (which would require some form of regular reportage, to ensure that it was working properly) but could turn over if there was a dispute and then get it back again???
On the other hand, if the hosts weren't so unwilling to pay attention, none of this would be necessary...
Also, don't transact personal business on the telephone unless you REALLY want the whole office to know about it. That goes for making appointments, calling friends, the works. Sound carries well, and people tend to talk louder when they're on the phone with people they know well, because they're more comfortable.
Don't listen to music without headphones, don't pop popcorn and bring it to your cubby, and remember that anything you put on your wall may be seen by anyone at anytime.
that said, personalising your cubby can make you feel more comfortable. Even hanging colth on the walls is oke in some places, so get a good set of guidelines put out for what IS acceptable as well as what isn't. Offer, if possible, several types of whiteboards, corkboards, whatever, so that people feel that they can customise it at least a little.
Not about whether the food allergies and intolerances that nearly led to my death are 'imaginary.' So if you've got a good, technical solution, i'd love to hear it. Incidentally, I'm not allergic to peanuts. And before i suddenly ended up having a reaction- which in turn triggered an autoimmune response that has already damaged organs- i wasn't sure that food allergies were all they were cracked up to be, either. May you not find out the hard way, stranger.
it goes like this. I have a lot of out-of-pocket health costs, so much so that they up my income tax rebate by enough to make it VERY much worth saving my receipts. Especially my grocery receipts, since the diet that i'm limited to is unreasonably expensive, and i'm permitted to claim the difference on my taxes. Which means keeping every grocery receipt. Well, i keep them. And they fade out fast. GOd knows what will happen if i'm ever audited. What should i do, scan all of them and keep them on cd? Ideas welcome!
Tuning equipment for recording has been around for awhile... and I can't help but think that they are fueling the indie music biz, where musicians frequently release their music raw, and play it without benefit of corrective technology on a regular basis because of the places that they play. A lot of folks are finding that there's a big welcome for their sound because the sound is unique, and you get that uniqueness by keeping the faults. Voices frequently waver, often hitting near but not perfect pitch, and that's not just part of the value of the recording, it's one of the ways that we recognise human voices versus machine voices. What the increase in tuning technology means is that it will be a lot easier to make machine-quality sound- which, unfortunately, sounds a lot like machine-quality sound.
Just my $ .02.
If this were happening in the US, the question would be whether companies who would find this the most useful, such as companies who have fleets of drivers, would find it worth the public outcry. It also brings up the question- is this the direction in which we want to go? There are certainly arguments in favour- lives saved is one of them. Drunk driving is another. But from there we go back to civil liberties again. Do we have the right to unmonitored transport? Do we have the right to make our own driving choices?
More important than either of those, this runs straight into a question of, is it right to have a fine issued without human intervention? Because some of the problems then become... what if my car was stolen? What if I'm speeding because there's a woman having a baby in the backseat? If a cop stops the car in those situations, they can offer support by recognising your car and being witness to who was driving, or in the latter case, calling an ambulance, and frequently the fine will be waived. Human crises do tend to get some laxity where the low is concerned, because other people tend to acknowledge them.
Here's another interesting note, even beyond the question of whether a device that reports on speeding and yellow lines can report on your location under the Patriot Act.... In Vermont, at least when i lived there two years ago, it was not illegal to cross a double yellow line unless there was a posted restriction saying so. The rest of the time, the cop might get you for recless endangerment, but the yellow lines officially meant, "Passing is not recommended in this area."
Point being, the states have enough law changes that some of those reported issues will not be applicale. Do they then get turned off? I'm treating all this as a hypothetical question, of course, and will look for the same story elsewhere before i treat it as otherwise. It reminds me of the debate over automatic-track cars, the ones which do the driving for you over an electric strip, etc. The question then was- if your car can automatically go where it's told, can there be stops to which you can't go? to which no one can go but a few select people? It was interesting then, and it's interesting now. Not enough to make me put together a tinfoil hat, but interesting nonetheless.
Since it's Britain, I would assume MOT to mean, "Ministry of Transportation."
However, there are countless creative and intelligent folks out there who would probably find other ways to do it. Moreover, if they're dumb enough to publish the hole(s) etc that she finds, this will only concentrate efforts to find other ways to do it. There are many other ways that they could do this, such as
letting everyone have a go and paying a bounty for every successful attempt;
putting them into colleges and envcouraging community attempts;
(least advisable) wait for election day to find out what the problems are!!!
It's good that this is happening, but not very useful unless subsequent challengers are also all owed to give it a try. Everyone has a different approach, and since we have no idea how many exploitable weaknesses it has, and she only need find one to be successful, i sure hope they aren't dumb enough to think that the system will then be secur... oh, wait, these are politicians, right? Damn. Waittress! Another round, we're screwed here and need a drink if we're gonna have to watch this!!
working your way in high school is a tough thing to do, i did it and barely graduated- but it beats working INSTEAD of high school. If he has any hope of making his life better over the next three years, dropping out of school is one of the worst things to do. It will be hard for him to stop gaming to work nights; he'll need to make some hard decisions no matter how this goes.
Back on topic; i think that i have to agree that this guy's gaming addiction didn't save them- he saved them in spite of the gaming addiction. The fact that he had a late night sleep pattern was a factor, but it could have been from any late night activity. If he'd been an astronomy student, for example, he would have noticed the light from the fire very quickly. If he'd been reading he would have been awake, too. Does anybody else see the potential for a Sims: Catastrophe game in this? watch your sims deal with hurricanes, tornadoe, fires, carjackings, and ebola...
Our cable scrambled a bit and there was a flicker, but we're oke in the suagus/revere to boston strip...
ASHINGTON, Aug. 7 -- The Bush administration persistently manipulates scientific data to serve its ideology and protect the interests of its political supporters, a report by the minority staff of the House Committee on Government Reform says.
The 40-page report, which was prepared for Representative Henry A. Waxman, the committee's ranking Democrat, accused the administration of compromising the scientific integrity of federal institutions that monitor food and medicine, conduct health research, control disease and protect the environment.
On many topics, including global warming and sex education, the administration "has manipulated the scientific process and distorted or suppressed scientific findings," the report said.
"The administration's political interference with science has led to misleading statements by the president, inaccurate responses to Congress, altered Web sites, suppressed agency reports, erroneous international communications and the gagging of scientists," the report added.
The White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, dismissed the report. He contended that its sponsor, Mr. Waxman, who is widely known for his aggressive inquiry into the tobacco industry, was seeking to score political points.
"This administration looks at the facts, and reviews the best available science based on what's right for the American people," Mr. McClellan said. "The only one who is playing politics about science is Congressman Waxman. His report is riddled with distortion, inaccuracies and omissions."
Some of the examples from the report's 21 subject areas have already been reported in the media. They include the Environmental Protection Agency's decision last year to delete a section on global warming in its comprehensive report on the state of the environment and President Bush's overstatement of the number of stem cell lines available for research under controls imposed by the administration.
The report's authors say federal agencies have jeopardized scientific integrity in many ways, including stacking scientific advisory committees with unqualified officials or industry representatives, blocking publication of findings that could harm corporate interests and defending controversial decisions with misleading information.
With respect to sex education, the report said, the Bush administration has advanced what the report described as an unproven "abstinence only" agenda and abolished an initiative at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that listed scientifically validated safe-sex techniques that included using condoms.
On agricultural pollution, the Agriculture Department has issued tight controls on government scientists seeking to publish information that could have an adverse impact on industry, the report said. It cited the case of a microbiologist, James Zahn, who was denied permission to publish findings on the dangers of antibiotic-resistant bacteria near hog farms in the Midwest.
On the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the report said that Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton, a firm advocate of drilling for oil in the region, misrepresented to Congress her agency's scientific opinion on how drilling would affect the region's caribou population. She told lawmakers most of the caribou calving occurred outside the refuge; her scientists said the opposite was true.
What a mess. I wonder what their E&O insurance is going to look like after this little nightmare?
I don't see it working. AOL is 'working,' except that consumers will create options. It's happened every time. Don't want cable? Go for satellite. Don't want satellite? Go for online broadcasts. Don't want either? Turn to another medium. In this case, though, i can see roll-your-own companies making a MAJOR profit.
My thought runs this way. Right now, i don't watch much tv. I pay for cable, but only if i can have access to interesting, relatively obscure channels. THe internet is different- it runs two-way. They want to have the content and the line, something equal to owning the phone AND tv companies at once. If they want to do it that way, underground networks are going to start. At least, i hope so. THe proliferation of mini-napsters seems to indicate that netfolk are willing to go to some length to establish the market that they want- in this case, free as in beer. Why should we pay for internet content when we can MAKE internet content?
This gives me optimism and hope, although i'm certainly interested in watching the regulatory issues play out. I feel good about the fact that we're finally reaching the point where it's easier to reach out and find like-minded individuals, and i feel fairly confident that backyard broadcasts will be un-quashable as the media moguls pick up steam. The RIAA is even having to learn that they can't stop every consumer. Who was it that said that there's no stopping an idea whose time has come? That's about how i feel about the net. Half the stuff on it might be useless- but i'm not going to see ads AND pay for content. AOL can keep there 1400 free hours (1400 free hours in the first month? Doesn't anybody sleep?) and the Comcast i use occasionally tries to reset my homepage, but i'll keep switching it back and writing them letters every time that they do. When they make it so that i can't, or so that i have to pay just to have a look at a page as a rule rather than an exception- I'm switching over to whatever's friendlier, no matter how much i have to learn to be able to do it.... just my tuppence in the jar. (The other $.98, i'm going to go give to the EFF.)
Petition your lawmakers. Specifically, address that list of questions and explain that you want them answered so that you can understand the actual scope of the law, and thus avoid breaking it.
Publish that list. There are a lot of magazines on and off-line to whom that list might be cc'd, and be sure that you put the list of them on your letter to lawmakers.
And your ISP, since they have a stake in the filesharing debate.
Despite the criticism being offered, this is a very valid set of questions. I don't care about what music you want to listen to- it IS important that the music industry has never clarified this and is now citing illegal efforts without specifying what's still legal. This gives them the chance to scare people into the most restrictive set of possibilities without doing so in writing. If people are too scared to do anything when they buy a cd but listen to it on one device, ever, then the RIAA has won huge ground without ever having to specify. I would like to know the answers to these, and so i'd say please let us know if you succeed in getting a response. In the meantime, the more attention you call to that set of questions, the better the odds that media pressure will force the RIAA to answer. Remember that they're facing a congressional inquiry- and therefore this is the perfect time to get that to your lawmakers. HEll, i think you could reasonably email it to the subcommittee themselves even if your district isn't directly represented in it, because we will certainly be affected by the results.
Keep us posted? thanks.
I had a 'study period,' third class block of the day, which i also attended diligently- they'd wake me up when the bell rang. To get the tone of this tale completely, you have to know that this school had the same administration that it did in my mum's day.
I got called into the vice-principal's office midway through the year. They'd finally gotten past my different last name and figured out where they'd seen a teenaged girl who looked like me before.
"We've got you," he says, leaning back in his chair.
Me (confused) : What???
Him: "we've got you cutting class. I knew we'd catch you on something; that's it. You're out."
Me: What?????
Him: "I've got a pile of cut slips tis high- " indicating with hands- "sixth period, study with Mrs. (name i'd never heard before.)"
Me: You're kidding, right? Me: I DON'T EVEN HAVE THAT STUDY.
HIim: "Yes, you do, I've got it right here, and there's a cut slip for every day this year."
Me: Sixth period was Psych for the first half of the year. Sociology for the second half the year. It's a class that i love, i've attended it every day even when i was sick, and it's the only reason that i haven't dropped the hell OUT of your school yet!!!!
him: (leaning back weakly)"...what?"
Me, on rampage: I have attended every DAY. I have study third period and i've attended that, too. Go check. You want to suspend me for this, you go ahead and try- I wasn't. I graduated, late but for real. His speech didn't exactly put the fire in me to stay, but i figured that it would be worth it to not have to go for a GED later on. (It was.) I went on to have my own rule in the book that my mum was the initiative for (she said, "how can you hold me to it if you haven't written it down?" and her family backed her up through the ensuing battle. They ended up having to write down the rules.) but i didn't end up getting thrown out or quitting.
Now, this makes me wonder what would have happened if they'd had the computer work on it.
a) they would have figured it out sooner, and known (maybe) that i couldn't be in two classes at once,
b) they might have been more worried about me quitting, what with the poor grades, etc.
c) they might have thrown me out, leaving me to bring them to court in an attempt to appeal based on computer error. They might even claim that i tampered with the system, who knows. But as long as there are people around who are looking to make examples, looking to abuse the system (he should have warned me after the first incident, and the whole interview could have been avoided from the start), there will be problems with any system.
just my tuppence worth thrown in.
My browser is not set up to block cookies. My browser is set to notify me, however, & pops up a privacy notice everytime one gets sent, and gives me the option to block them. You know that AOL ad with the screen full of pop-ups? I was astounded, when i tested, to see how many sites such as MSN will send you. Including the ones for ad servers that deliver popups. My brother laughed and called me paranoid, but i'm not. This is how i learned about computers in the first place, by observing and playing with them, and my HTML started by staring at page source, and now my info about security and so on is coming from watching what brushes up against my computer. Ten websites produced more than 50 cookies. The lowest was zero, the highest was fifteen. (and the site was kind enough to reset my home page for me, d*it)
For those of use who need to use the net at work, it would be beautiful to have a choice in an environment where we can't see or play with things. Besides, eith phone calls they have to tell you if you're being recorded, so i think that both public cameras AND net cookies AND any other such info-recording system should be required to let you know that you're in the lens. If they want my info, they can ask. (set your firewall to make windows only able to connect when YOU want it to, and see how annoyed it gets!)
Which is to say... this sure won't fly everywhere else. I've got RLS. It's hard enough for me to sit still at a desk. Active Yoga is out for other physical reasons; seated meditation is out because of the Restless Limb issues. I guess my biggest question is: are employees going to be offered other options??? And if not, how long until the lawsuit (The Other American Pastime) hits? I wouldn't bother to make a big deal out of it, but then, my employer would never do this. But it becomes a burden for the people picking up the work while everyone's at yoga. So what happens when the employee decides that they don't like having an extra-stressful workplace but no equivalent chance to relax?
Personally, I think there would be more benefit to offering a free health club membership, with the option to take one hour of the day to go. People could take part in whatever was most appropriate for them, and the company would end up footing a lower average health insurance premium per employee. Me, i'd be willing to take the last hour of the day to do what i could in a gym rather than in an employer-sited group activity, because i would have people there who knew about my physical limits, no being singled out in a workplace setting, and a variety of activities available depending on how i'm feeling. But then, there are a lot of changes i'd push for if i ran the zoo. My $.02 to share...
Fortunately for us, he's dramatic- and doesn't read headers. Our other brother was the one who got his terrible goth poem by email, from a free account, and we seem to have narrowly averted disaster- he was out in Arkansas, it turned out, having a breakdown. (The brother who got the email sat down and found out where he sent it from, and checked in with the rest of us to let us know that the kid was alive. We'd called the police and the police were spectacularly unhelpful, we had to call them back and tell them where he was. "How do you know?" they asked us.) If he hadn't been traceable, he might have been dead by the time we got to him.
I have accounts that i use regularly that are free accounts, yes. And I'd resent them being read by strangers (Do we really think that the government are the only ones who want us all to be visible on the map? See my journal entry today on microchip implants in mexico... how long till your email ID is on your chip?) but i was thankful, that once, that anonymous doesn't always mean anonymous. Mixed feelings on this one... i wouldn't want my phone tapped, but i do want 911 to be able to see where i am. There's a differene, but only in degree.
They string nets right across the top of the river, though, so that the duckies can't escape. (And the duckies are actually rented most of the time, which really makes it bizarre... So i guess it's time for another ocean duckie race!!! quick, somebody head out there and number the ducks...