Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter
In the good 'ol days, they just shot revenooers and other government busybodies. Remember what Lazarus Long once said, "Beware strong drink, it can make you shoot at tax collectors... and miss." Now we can just sling a few drones after them and go back to our booze.
BTW would I have to list my car/computer as a drive on my insurance policy? Does it get a license and can it accumulate points and get suspended? Maybe the points can go directly to the developer's license....
If google is working on AI and a human really did crash the car, I hope that person has a really good attorney......
Doesn't work that way. I'm no lawyer, but I am a software developer, and I work on some fairly mission-critical stuff. So yes, I did consult an attorney regarding my own personal liability. What it comes down to (in the U.S. at least) is that the company takes on that liability. Unless, of course, you do something criminal like sabotage a control program or something... but your employer assumes the normal costs and risks of doing business. If you are just doing your job you generally can't be held liable for something like that. Any lawyers out there feel free to correct me: if I'm wrong believe me I'd like to know about it!
The corporation has to pay. And, when all is said and done, if their behavior was especially egregious they'll pay a lot. That's just the way it is. And yes, it does take time and money. If it were any other way, nobody would ever be an engineer, nobody would ever build anything of consequence, because going to jail for doing your job is just not a worthwhile risk for most people.
Concorde was killed off for many other reasons unrelated to the crash, most critically, it was a money and fuel sponge.
Nuclear, though, I agree. Apparently coal and it's hundreds to thousands of deaths is ok because we've had it since man first sent child into a mine shaft to play in the dirt. Nuclear though, GAAH! MUTANT THREE EYED FISH!!!!
Yes, and what's tragironic about that is that many coal fields are naturally radioactive, and we (as in "pretty much everyone on the planet") have been breathing thorium dust for over a century now. Thorium that would have been better of staying in the ground. The unfortunate reality is that some number of people die every year just from that particular aspect of our use of coal for power. Well-designed nuclear power facilities (and no, I don't mean obsolescent junk like what lit off in Japan recently, and please don't bring up Chernobyl: that dirty bomb on steroids had no business ever being built... leave it to the Russians to nuke themselves) does a *HELL* of a lot better job of keeping radioactive particulates out of our atmosphere. But you can't tell that to some people because they've already up their minds. Like it or not, coal power has a very definite, very predictable, and very real cost in human life.
Coal burning has a number of nasty biological effects unrelated to radioactivity, but that's another issue. More people have already died from coal-fired power plants than will ever die from nuclear fission. You can't tell that to some people either.
Where the fuck is the 'report blatant spammer' button so we can weed out accounts like this douche ourselves without having to mod them down on every story they post too?
For all we know, he's paying Slashdot for some extra ad space.
they're treated as being relatively (though not wholly) benign.
True. On the other hand, any industry that thinks it's ethically acceptable to have some private-sector organization determine if my Internet connection should be terminated, without any involvement of the courts or law enforcement, merely upon their say-so, does not qualify as benign.
Furthermore, anyone who takes a usb stick or other media and plugs it into a secure C&C system needs to be fired also, as a matter of fact such systems should probably be designed with little to no access to external media and any actually required access points should be as secured as possible.
I know nothing about prison control systems, but I've spent a couple of decades in industry (okay, maybe a little more than that.) It is astounding the difference in security procedures you see across different organizations. I've seen some outfits that have completely electrically separate engineering/process and business networks, with all communication between those networks (if any!) being pinholed and heavily monitored, and other outfits that just run one big fiber loop around their facility and hook everything into it, PLCs, accounting, engineering, mainframes, database servers, workstations, you-name-it. Some places I have to beg for permission in advance to connect my lap to their network in order to perform necessary maintenance (much less plug in a thumbdrive.) They'll usually insist on running a maware scan on it anyway. Other outfits just point out the nearest network jack, or give me the password to their company Wi-Fi.
I concur with the overpriced hardware for most PLC vendors. I think AB/Rockwell is probably the most pricey.
The Software costs and Maintenance for software is also outrageous.
But when you look at DCS costs the PLC seems cheap.
The list price of this hardware was $100,000 and it was nothing special. (Claims of Apple being over priced are nothing compared to PLC manufacturers).
Hm... a hundred K seems a bit high, but you're right that the stuff isn't cheap. On the other hand, nobody in his right mind would use an Apple product to run valve & pump control for an oil refinery or some other critical process (although I'm sure there are people that try.) There are substantial liability issues with which manufacturers of industrial controllers have to contend that commercial vendors do not.
That's not how it is supposed to work: having a copyright simply means that you have the right to seek redress: it was not supposed to mean that the United States Federal Government will seek to destroy people and companies on your behalf.
Well put, sir!
Thank you. I vote that every prevarication issuing from the throat of an RIAA/MPAA mouthpiece be henceforth known as a "Valenti", in honor of the man himself.
Here's a perfect example: "The entertainment industry is losing thousands of billions of dollars to piracy" (ejaculated by the media company representative at the recent EG8 conference.) Matter of fact, that's what I call a "big Valenti" since it's damn near Biblical in scope.
The best thing that can happen to the open source / free software movement is that enforceable / unbreakable DRM exists - so idiots like you who think convenience justifies pirating content can't play your pirated games or movies any more. (This also goes for Office, Windows etc)
Of course, there are still idiots like you that continue to use incorrect terminology. That dilutes whatever message you may think you have (especially here on Slashdot) and, if anything, makes you appear like a media company shill. That's the facts, jack. If you're an American (and I accept that you may not be) you should read up on what our law considers the definition of "piracy" to be. Hint: it's not the GP grabbing a couple of torrents. Using the attempted re-definition of legal language that the media companies are using to promote their twisted definition of copyright does not help matters at all, no matter what side of the fence you're sitting upon. Outright lies, fabrications and untruths (something that big media is absolutely famous for spewing forth at regular intervals) rarely improve any situation, and make any form of reasonable compromise impossible. More fact: these little pricks put themselves into the situation they're in today, by demonstrating a depth of vision flatter than a sheet of Reynold's Wrap. Luddites and modern technology rarely get along well, especially when you toss in a sprinkling of sociopathy.
What I think you fail to understand are a couple of important things. One: this is not directly about money. I think it's pretty clear at this point that copyright infringement, even on the scale afforded by the Internet, is not lowering industry profits overall, in fact, it's probably the opposite. Two: what these conglomerates want is to regain control of content distribution, like they had prior to the rise of peer-to-peer. Three: that gives them control not only of consumers (who then have little choice but to "enjoy" whatever pablum those bastards decide to dole out at any given time) but, just as importantly, control of the artists, who then have no place to go to sell their works except through "approved" channels. Why do you think the record labels hate iTunes so much? Because they effectively ceded control of their entire music distribution network to Steve Jobs, who is just as big a control freak as they are. Well, I told you they aren't particularly intelligent.
Sorry buddy, that is simply not the social contract that the Constitution granted Congress the power to make between business and the public domain. It just isn't, and when you add into the mix the insanely extended copyrights (also not exactly Constitutional) any sympathy I might have for the big copyright holders just evaporated. Time to get a reality check: you are not supporting artists with your attitude, you are not supporting the public domain, you are not supporting what is best for your own society. You are, instead, taking the side of several criminal gangs who have successfully corrupted our legal system and spent quite a bit of money conscripting the Federal government to enforce copyright. That's not how it is supposed to work: having a copyright simply means that you have the right to seek redress: it was not supposed to mean that the United States Federal Government will seek to destroy people and companies on your behalf.
Europeans are not as obsessed with god and religion as americans are
You must not know very many Americans to make a comment like that: this opinion of many Europeans that Americans are all religious nut jobs is a media artifact, nothing more, and about as valid as the "Americans are all crazed about guns" meme. What you see on TV are the noisy bastards that make an effort to get airtime, whereas the rest of us couldn't care less. Ask yourself how you would like it if we judged your culture by what your media broadcasts to the world. And you know what? Europeans are just as obsessed with religion as anyone else. So far as I'm concerned, if you believe in some universe-spanning being that directs and influences our lives... you're obsessed. Period. Face a few facts here: the Universe is a lot bigger than it was when we first invented religion, and when you begin to grasp just how vast it really is, the idea of an immanent God just starts to seem ridiculous.
In any event, the reality is quite different from what you seem to think. Church enrollments have been declining for decades, and many of those that do participate in organized religion do so out of social needs or simple tradition more than anything else. Furthermore, the number of so-called "Christians" I've encountered in my life who go to church every Sunday, pray to their particular variant of God, and then turn around and violate all of the Ten Commandments that they can get away with is unnerving. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool atheist myself, but I've encountered a few of what I would call "good" Christians along the way: those who truly do live their lives as they believe their God would wish them to. I may not be able to agree with their belief in a supreme being, but I can respect them for how they behave towards others.
Slashdot Mirror
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter
In the good 'ol days, they just shot revenooers and other government busybodies. Remember what Lazarus Long once said, "Beware strong drink, it can make you shoot at tax collectors ... and miss." Now we can just sling a few drones after them and go back to our booze.
BTW would I have to list my car/computer as a drive on my insurance policy? Does it get a license and can it accumulate points and get suspended? Maybe the points can go directly to the developer's license.... If google is working on AI and a human really did crash the car, I hope that person has a really good attorney......
Doesn't work that way. I'm no lawyer, but I am a software developer, and I work on some fairly mission-critical stuff. So yes, I did consult an attorney regarding my own personal liability. What it comes down to (in the U.S. at least) is that the company takes on that liability. Unless, of course, you do something criminal like sabotage a control program or something ... but your employer assumes the normal costs and risks of doing business. If you are just doing your job you generally can't be held liable for something like that. Any lawyers out there feel free to correct me: if I'm wrong believe me I'd like to know about it!
Who do we get to punish!?
The corporation has to pay. And, when all is said and done, if their behavior was especially egregious they'll pay a lot. That's just the way it is. And yes, it does take time and money. If it were any other way, nobody would ever be an engineer, nobody would ever build anything of consequence, because going to jail for doing your job is just not a worthwhile risk for most people.
Concorde was killed off for many other reasons unrelated to the crash, most critically, it was a money and fuel sponge.
Nuclear, though, I agree. Apparently coal and it's hundreds to thousands of deaths is ok because we've had it since man first sent child into a mine shaft to play in the dirt. Nuclear though, GAAH! MUTANT THREE EYED FISH!!!!
Yes, and what's tragironic about that is that many coal fields are naturally radioactive, and we (as in "pretty much everyone on the planet") have been breathing thorium dust for over a century now. Thorium that would have been better of staying in the ground. The unfortunate reality is that some number of people die every year just from that particular aspect of our use of coal for power. Well-designed nuclear power facilities (and no, I don't mean obsolescent junk like what lit off in Japan recently, and please don't bring up Chernobyl: that dirty bomb on steroids had no business ever being built ... leave it to the Russians to nuke themselves) does a *HELL* of a lot better job of keeping radioactive particulates out of our atmosphere. But you can't tell that to some people because they've already up their minds. Like it or not, coal power has a very definite, very predictable, and very real cost in human life.
Coal burning has a number of nasty biological effects unrelated to radioactivity, but that's another issue. More people have already died from coal-fired power plants than will ever die from nuclear fission. You can't tell that to some people either.
Now I've got to worry about some suit banging on my door?
Not if the drone gets him first.
Dear slashdot,
Where the fuck is the 'report blatant spammer' button so we can weed out accounts like this douche ourselves without having to mod them down on every story they post too?
For all we know, he's paying Slashdot for some extra ad space.
Sorry you got modded down, this is pretty fucking funny.
Yeah. Well, at least we know that residents of Mississippi and Alabama read Slashdot.
Autonomous Arial Vehicle (UAV)
I think you meant Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.
How is it different from an RC plane or helicopter? Those are used all the time for commercial arial photography and videography.
Oh, right, it's News Corp.... so it must be evil.
Yes. Precisely. Now you're getting it. Fact is, Newscorp poses a much greater threat to the general public than any number of camera drones.
Otherwise, copying a file from one folder to another would be a performance of it. And that's absurd.
I don't see a problem with that.
Yours truly,
J. Valenti
they're treated as being relatively (though not wholly) benign.
True. On the other hand, any industry that thinks it's ethically acceptable to have some private-sector organization determine if my Internet connection should be terminated, without any involvement of the courts or law enforcement, merely upon their say-so, does not qualify as benign.
a bunch of former RIAA lawyers (five so far) elected to positions in the Obama Administration...
You mean "appointed and confirmed" to positions in the Obama Administration.
Correct, but not actually an improvement.
Then when they become "legit", they cook the books (hollywood accounting), and join organizations that condone slavery and treason (Scientology).
Yes. Tom Cruise, I'm lookin' at you.
Alternate reading of the title: hackers could open convicts' cellphones and send their voice mail to some enterprising news organization.
"enterprising news organization." That's hilarious.
Furthermore, anyone who takes a usb stick or other media and plugs it into a secure C&C system needs to be fired also, as a matter of fact such systems should probably be designed with little to no access to external media and any actually required access points should be as secured as possible.
I know nothing about prison control systems, but I've spent a couple of decades in industry (okay, maybe a little more than that.) It is astounding the difference in security procedures you see across different organizations. I've seen some outfits that have completely electrically separate engineering/process and business networks, with all communication between those networks (if any!) being pinholed and heavily monitored, and other outfits that just run one big fiber loop around their facility and hook everything into it, PLCs, accounting, engineering, mainframes, database servers, workstations, you-name-it. Some places I have to beg for permission in advance to connect my lap to their network in order to perform necessary maintenance (much less plug in a thumbdrive.) They'll usually insist on running a maware scan on it anyway. Other outfits just point out the nearest network jack, or give me the password to their company Wi-Fi.
I concur with the overpriced hardware for most PLC vendors. I think AB/Rockwell is probably the most pricey. The Software costs and Maintenance for software is also outrageous.
But when you look at DCS costs the PLC seems cheap.
Yeah. Honeywell, I'm looking at you.
The list price of this hardware was $100,000 and it was nothing special. (Claims of Apple being over priced are nothing compared to PLC manufacturers).
Hm ... a hundred K seems a bit high, but you're right that the stuff isn't cheap. On the other hand, nobody in his right mind would use an Apple product to run valve & pump control for an oil refinery or some other critical process (although I'm sure there are people that try.) There are substantial liability issues with which manufacturers of industrial controllers have to contend that commercial vendors do not.
That's not how it is supposed to work: having a copyright simply means that you have the right to seek redress: it was not supposed to mean that the United States Federal Government will seek to destroy people and companies on your behalf.
Well put, sir!
Thank you. I vote that every prevarication issuing from the throat of an RIAA/MPAA mouthpiece be henceforth known as a "Valenti", in honor of the man himself.
Here's a perfect example: "The entertainment industry is losing thousands of billions of dollars to piracy" (ejaculated by the media company representative at the recent EG8 conference.) Matter of fact, that's what I call a "big Valenti" since it's damn near Biblical in scope.
The best thing that can happen to the open source / free software movement is that enforceable / unbreakable DRM exists - so idiots like you who think convenience justifies pirating content can't play your pirated games or movies any more. (This also goes for Office, Windows etc)
Of course, there are still idiots like you that continue to use incorrect terminology. That dilutes whatever message you may think you have (especially here on Slashdot) and, if anything, makes you appear like a media company shill. That's the facts, jack. If you're an American (and I accept that you may not be) you should read up on what our law considers the definition of "piracy" to be. Hint: it's not the GP grabbing a couple of torrents. Using the attempted re-definition of legal language that the media companies are using to promote their twisted definition of copyright does not help matters at all, no matter what side of the fence you're sitting upon. Outright lies, fabrications and untruths (something that big media is absolutely famous for spewing forth at regular intervals) rarely improve any situation, and make any form of reasonable compromise impossible. More fact: these little pricks put themselves into the situation they're in today, by demonstrating a depth of vision flatter than a sheet of Reynold's Wrap. Luddites and modern technology rarely get along well, especially when you toss in a sprinkling of sociopathy.
What I think you fail to understand are a couple of important things. One: this is not directly about money. I think it's pretty clear at this point that copyright infringement, even on the scale afforded by the Internet, is not lowering industry profits overall, in fact, it's probably the opposite. Two: what these conglomerates want is to regain control of content distribution, like they had prior to the rise of peer-to-peer. Three: that gives them control not only of consumers (who then have little choice but to "enjoy" whatever pablum those bastards decide to dole out at any given time) but, just as importantly, control of the artists, who then have no place to go to sell their works except through "approved" channels. Why do you think the record labels hate iTunes so much? Because they effectively ceded control of their entire music distribution network to Steve Jobs, who is just as big a control freak as they are. Well, I told you they aren't particularly intelligent.
Sorry buddy, that is simply not the social contract that the Constitution granted Congress the power to make between business and the public domain. It just isn't, and when you add into the mix the insanely extended copyrights (also not exactly Constitutional) any sympathy I might have for the big copyright holders just evaporated. Time to get a reality check: you are not supporting artists with your attitude, you are not supporting the public domain, you are not supporting what is best for your own society. You are, instead, taking the side of several criminal gangs who have successfully corrupted our legal system and spent quite a bit of money conscripting the Federal government to enforce copyright. That's not how it is supposed to work: having a copyright simply means that you have the right to seek redress: it was not supposed to mean that the United States Federal Government will seek to destroy people and companies on your behalf.
I ask you: is that a good thing?
the world is slowly going all fascist.
why don't we just put everyone in jail and be done with it already.
if you want to do, see or say anything you have to apply in writing. you will be let out of your cell only if your activities are pre-approved.
Living under a totalitarian state can be considered a form of imprisonment.
I hope that extra 15% certainty didn't cost millions in research grants; as a blind guess has 50% chance of being right.
Besides, all they've done by publishing this is give people wanting to fake their gender some good pointers on how to do it.
standing up to continued scrutiny by critical and qualified people makes something science.
Even more importantly, the work must be reproducible. If it isn't, then it has problems.
Europeans are not as obsessed with god and religion as americans are
You must not know very many Americans to make a comment like that: this opinion of many Europeans that Americans are all religious nut jobs is a media artifact, nothing more, and about as valid as the "Americans are all crazed about guns" meme. What you see on TV are the noisy bastards that make an effort to get airtime, whereas the rest of us couldn't care less. Ask yourself how you would like it if we judged your culture by what your media broadcasts to the world. And you know what? Europeans are just as obsessed with religion as anyone else. So far as I'm concerned, if you believe in some universe-spanning being that directs and influences our lives ... you're obsessed. Period. Face a few facts here: the Universe is a lot bigger than it was when we first invented religion, and when you begin to grasp just how vast it really is, the idea of an immanent God just starts to seem ridiculous.
In any event, the reality is quite different from what you seem to think. Church enrollments have been declining for decades, and many of those that do participate in organized religion do so out of social needs or simple tradition more than anything else. Furthermore, the number of so-called "Christians" I've encountered in my life who go to church every Sunday, pray to their particular variant of God, and then turn around and violate all of the Ten Commandments that they can get away with is unnerving. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool atheist myself, but I've encountered a few of what I would call "good" Christians along the way: those who truly do live their lives as they believe their God would wish them to. I may not be able to agree with their belief in a supreme being, but I can respect them for how they behave towards others.
In the end, that is what really matters.
Global warming probably is real... it's just not cause by the carbon dioxide. Which means there's nothing we can do, we're doomed to burn. :(
Not necessarily all of us ... but a lot of us will be moving away from the equator.
Computer models were based on the data. Apparently, they were based on insufficient data.
Or the algorithms used in the models were wrong. Or both.