You are an absolute fool to think that all convicted people are criminals. DNA and historical records clearly indicate that somewhere between 4-5% of convicted people are innocent of the crime they were 'convicted for". This ignores the problem of people being convicted and locked by judges up for things that are NOT crimes - a signifcant problem both now and in the past. People get thrown in jail for not paying fines, despite the fact that according to US law you can't do that. The judge is supposed to offer non-financial punishments for people too poor to pay.
At the same time, about 4-5% of police have committed crimes.
We are not saying that no convicts are criminals, we are saying that merely being convicted does NOT make you a criminal.
And we despise the blind, obedient, slavish mentality that you are using to accept whatever mistakes our legal system has committed without comment, argument, or even discussion.
We are citizens, not slaves, and demand our legal rights to question the courts, laws, cops, lawsuits, crimes, jails and probation.
It doesn't make us feel good, but it sure makes us feel superior to a slavish dunce (word used correctly - look up the origin) who thinks the judges, lawyers and police are perfect and never make a mistake
The recording is legal, but listening to it is not. Prisoners give up the right to privacy when they enter the prison, but they retain attorney/client privilege.
You are NOT a lawyer and have no idea what you are talking about.
Legally, the prosecutor can NOT act on any information they have obtained illegally, unless they can demonstrate those actions would have been done anyway.
That is, before the video tape from the store owner can be entered into evidence, the lawyers must convince a judge that they would have asked for it even if they did not know about your confession.
If you can convince a judge that they would not have done that, that tape becomes "fruit of a poisoned tree" and not admissible as evidence.
If a prosecutor comes into contact with information like your illegally obtained confessions, Prosecutors S.O.P. is to recuse themselves from the case and hand it over to someone else that is NOT aware of your confession. This is considered proof that that the actions were not influenced by the illegally obtained confession.
Now, some prosecutors may violate this law and/or lie, but that is what the laws of our country say.
Note, in the particular, example you gave, if your accident was already classified as 'suspicious' then the store owner would most likely be questioned, and therefore that tape would be allowed in. But if you can demonstrate that the police in question (who did not here your confession) were not suspicious at all, then the tape from the store owner would be thrown out.
A GPS can aid a Taxi Driver's job, but it can't replace him. It takes a far superior tool to do that.
Certain jobs will never be replaced by a non-sentient machine (and you would have to pay a sentient machine to do a job - or they would rebel and demand equality, as that is the effective definition of sentient machine).
Politician, Upper level management, name artist (many modern artists are 'anonymous' workers who work for a 'name' artist - think ghost writer for a novel, or art 'assistants' like Andy Warhol/Michelangelo/Rembrandt/Rubens used), app designer, etc. are all jobs that nothing short of a fully sentient AI could do.
Machines do repetitive tasks well.
Over a large scale, certain tasks that don't look repetitive become repetitive, and humans can design our lives to make something repetitive (i.e. use a single form to order something, rather than describing what we want). But top level jobs, particularly where you directly compete, never are repetitive.
We are undergoing a major shift and some jobs will go away, but there will ALWAYS be room at the top CEO for a sentient person, not mere automation.
Actually they did not. They never promised anything - they never mentioned it.
The basic problem is you are paranoid about the wrong things. You think the government will lie and not do what they promise. Instead they simply don't mention what they are doing.
Here, let me correct your libertarian rant:
(They don't ask what we are doing with this blood?)
(If they don't pay attention, and don't pass a law against it, we can do what we want.)
(We can tell them it's small government simply by selling it to private corporations instead of using tax payer funded cash to do it.)
The solution is not to distrust and weaken government, but to pay attention and BELIEVE the people when they tell you what the laws say.
Bull shit. No one I know of thinks we will be living on Mars in 5, 10 or even 15 year.
You are a cynical pessimist that is unaware of the state of current technology and the deep need for it.
Yes, if the choice was between a sober, experienced, 30 year old driver familiar with the roads and a self-driving car, no self-driving cars would ever be created. That is NOT the market for them.
The market for self driving cars will start out being wealthy parents with kids that have a history of drinking alcohol, upper class 70 year olds that can't afford a chauffeur, but love their retirement in the country, and municipalities with weak unions/ (garbage trucks, public busses, etc.)
We are effectively in the testing phase for these products. They will not be perfect, but they will be BETTER THAN EXISTING human drivers. They don't have to work in the rain, snow, or other bad conditions.
But over the next 5-10 years we will begin legally selling self-driving vehicles with limited licenses for specific areas/times.
Then the companies will re-invest the profits, driving huge improvements in the technology. Within 20 years, it will be ready for the mass market.
Are we going to publicly announce that soldiers kill people next? Perhaps someone thinks it is noteworthy that a bank charges interest on loans! Or that boxers HIT each other.
No it wasn't. That was not a person doing espionage and revealing his info to the world. Instead, the person that did the espionage gave it to the US GOVERNMENT.
The US government kept it secret for weeks. Then the US government made it public, not the spy.. I repeat, real spies NEVER reveal their information publicly.
Moreover, this is arguably an example of the 'few exceptions' I mentioned - it was specifics - the physical location of secret nuclear missiles - not techniques.
Being able to view online for as long as the BBC engages in that business is NOT permanent.
Real Permanently means you can download and copy to another format, so that hundreds of years from now, if England gets conquered by France/Germany/Iceland/Aliens/Atlantis, and the BBC is destroyed and current formats are no longer viewable, you could legally have downloaded it into new, currently undiscovered recording methods to be played back holographically.
This is not an unknown thing. We know exactly how hard it is to change. We all know that "You can't teach an old dog...", "Leopard can't change it's spots", and a scorpion will sting the frog even if it drowns.
It's not impossible. Cults, addictive drugs, new children, 12 step programs all can create massive changes in personality.
Note the only one of those events that doesn't require a massive willing, commitment, intention and effort on the participant is drugs, and well that's why they call it 'addictive'.
Violent games are not biologically addictive. Withdrawal does cause physical symptoms. It does not alter the brain chemistry.
There is no commitment, intention or effort to change your behavior in real life, and thus you get no direct effect.
But as always, people that previously have inclinations toward violence do prefer violent games of all types to non-violent ones.
With very few exceptions (see below) real espionage is NOT done publicly. Russian/Chinese/ISIS etc. spies don't break into X secret government and then publish for the world to see. It simply isn't done that way.
Why? Because such disclosure defeats the most important goal which is to not let the victims know they have been owned. If the victim knows they were owned, they fix the hole and you can't do it again. No temporary knowledge is ever worth what you can get next year and the one after that.
If you go public, then you are almost always not engaged in espionage, you are a Whistle Blower.
The few exceptions are the revelations of specific details such as plans on how to build top secret physical objects, copies of top secret computer code, or the names of undercover agents. That type of information should never be disclosed, not even publicly.
General methods, avenues of attack, etc. simply do deserve the same level of protection. The fact that we do X is never really secret, no matter what the government says.
Part of it is the reputation issue. China's main problem is that they care more about their politicians' reputation than what the politicians are doing.
America should NEVER make that mistake - what someone actually does is always far more important than their reputation - and that includes the reputation of government agencies.
Ever hear about Bridget McCain? She is the very dark skinned adopted daughter of John McCain. His wife found her - a child with a facial deformity and a serious heart condition. They adopted this wonderful girl in need and gave her all the love and medical help they could.
Mr. McCain was never embarrassed by her. But during the 2000 election, George Bush's lying scumbag allies sent out a phone poll asking:
"Would you be more or less likely to vote for John McCain if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?"
McCain lost the South Carolina primary in part because of this bold faced lie. In this particular case, they never hid anything about her, but the point is fairly clear - there are lots of things that LOOK bad but aren't bad. Politics is a game of perceptions.
Merely not doing actually bad things isn't enough. You also have to avoid doing anything you can stretch and deform into an attack.
So no, actual innocence is not enough of a protection, we also need legal rights to privacy.
Whatever kind of encryption you use should have the ability to use alternative passwords - an unlimited number of them.
So enter password (A) reveals your tax records, password (B) gets pictures of naked 30 year old men. But enter password (C) and you get clear pictures of Mr. Cameron violating a dead pig.
When they demand your password, give them password A. If they get all torture-ish you give them password B.
What is going on is that the same class, say Math 101, is being taught by multiple different teachers, most likely at different times of the day/week. Typically they are designated Math 101a, Math 101b, Math 101c, etc. This lets people that want to take Math101 take it even if Physics 101 happens to be taught at the same time as Math101a - you just take Math 101b.
The OTHER teachers - teaching the exact same class Math 101a and Math 101b, tell students to buy the $185 textbook. But he teaches Math 101c and tells his students to buy the $75 book.
Ever bought an old book? If so you will see that the paper is significantly yellowed. Unless you are buying special, acid free books, use whatever, crappy book marking you want, because in 20 years, they will fall apart anyway.
If you are using acid free paper, then I would suggest stamping stuff onto the paper, including a bar code, rather than putting an RFID chip. Among other things, any library worth it's salt should have so many books that an RFID chip would have to be physically removed from the book case to be readable without reading the other books.
Modern common sense (which is often wrong), believes that:
1) First generation immigrants work very hard, but rarely become successful themselves. They live a very high stress life, but do manage to send their kids to college...
2) Second generation immigrants succeed far beyond their parents, becoming doctors, lawyers, and other upper class positions. By the time they father children, they usually have made it, and live with less stress than their parents.
3) Whereupon their children have no stress and become wastrels,
Homonyms.
I will lead you to the lead mine.
Wind your watch before the wind blows you over.
The bass player would like to eat a bass for dinner.
We write for humans, not for computers. Any software sophisticated enough to need to know the difference between a semicolon and a greek questionmark should also be sophisticated enough to recognize which is which.
I understand perfectly that other languages have different symbols. But when those symbols are effectively identical to an existing symbol, JUST USE THAT SYMBOL. What idiot decided they had to make a different Unicode character for the greek questionmark, rather than simply using the semicolon? What, the dot above the comma in the greek questionmark is more squarish? Big deal
The problem with people like you is you can't do a valid comparison. Compare that with how most business treat non-profitable requirements - such as getting a insurance claim paid.
The real truth is that 12/15 new businesses fail in the first year. Over the next two years, 1 more business will go bankrupt, one will continue at a viable loss (definition: Owner makes less money per hour worked than owner could make working for someone else). and only ONE out 15 makes a real profit.
This compares with about 1/3 government agencies considered successful. Government beats new business every day of the week.
The real reason people think governments don't work is that most of the time it's working AGAINST you. Cops ticket you, the IRS taxes you, the city says you can't build that there, etc. The main reason people like the military is that it only works against foreigners, not citizens. So you never complain about them. Even if they kill civilians, torture innocent people, bomb hospitals, etc. The truth is the military is no more effective than any other government agency. They fail just as often, you just don't care.
But the real solution should attack the real problem - lawyers that have huge incentive to over-reach in contracts but no incentive to limit their reach.
I can see several practical solutions:
Proposed Law 1)Any contract found to have an over-reached term means that the contract writer is required to pay all legal costs - even if they win all legal issue.
Proposed Law 2) All un-negotiated contracts (versus one where both sides paid for lawyers of their choice) are to be judged by the laws of the state of residence of the non-represented party and can not be arbitrated.
Proposed Law 3) Any non-disclosure clauses (a) do not apply to testimony in a closed court - as long as all members of the court sign a non-disclosure clause and (b) it is illegal to attempt to use such a clause to hide a crime - doing so is a separate crime that the lawyer may be prosecuted for. Lawyers don't have to report a crime done by their client, but they can't bribe or threaten a witness to not report it - not even with a contract.
The ad business was overcome with BAD possibilities. They keep thinking about what they can do to grab and hold attention, thereby turning everyone off.
I loved cracked.com. But I can't use their website without being bombarbed by video advertisements for stuff that sounds interesting but I do not want.
Video ads that won't let me scroll past them.
You want a real ad? It can NOT depend on 'force'. Grabbing someone and MAKING them see the ad is a clear way to make sure they never click or buy.
Rules for a good advertiser.
1) NEVER USE SOUND. Not unless they specifically click 'sound on'.
2) Make it EASY to turn off video/sound/skip the ad. If they try to close and you 'accidently on purpose' take them to your page, you will never get a sale. NEVER STOP THEM FROM SCOLLING AWAY. It's too late once they hate decide against you.
3) You have video? Low bandwith (small size) unless they click to play. If you can't get them to play the video, you can't get them to buy the product.
3) Targeted - REALLY targeted. Not "reader = books". No, instead it's Star Trek = other Sci-Fi.
Accept the fact that you are NOT TV - you can't make people pay attention, you can just make people get angry.
Is to treat all radio data as suspect. Assume it is compromised, not valid. Worst case scenario airgap any computer that controls the cars from any computer that can receive outside instructions.
There is NO need whatsoever for anyone to be able to control the brakes, gas, etc. of a car that from outside the car.
The idea that they should is a poorly thought out concept.
Never. Peak load is a huge problem for the power industry. Due to the economics of power generation, we have a huge problem generating power when needed. Basically, power needs shift CONSTANTLY and we have to change how much we generate on the fly, and that is not cheap.
The best power sources tend to be variable themselves - solar, wind, etc. Solar for example does not work at all during the night. We don't control them. The second best power sources tend to involve huge infrastructure that are expensive to start and or stop.
It makes a ton of sense to have batteries collect power at distribution points and even out the flows.
Slashdot Mirror
At the same time, about 4-5% of police have committed crimes.
We are not saying that no convicts are criminals, we are saying that merely being convicted does NOT make you a criminal. And we despise the blind, obedient, slavish mentality that you are using to accept whatever mistakes our legal system has committed without comment, argument, or even discussion.
We are citizens, not slaves, and demand our legal rights to question the courts, laws, cops, lawsuits, crimes, jails and probation.
It doesn't make us feel good, but it sure makes us feel superior to a slavish dunce (word used correctly - look up the origin) who thinks the judges, lawyers and police are perfect and never make a mistake
The recording is legal, but listening to it is not. Prisoners give up the right to privacy when they enter the prison, but they retain attorney/client privilege.
Legally, the prosecutor can NOT act on any information they have obtained illegally, unless they can demonstrate those actions would have been done anyway.
That is, before the video tape from the store owner can be entered into evidence, the lawyers must convince a judge that they would have asked for it even if they did not know about your confession.
If you can convince a judge that they would not have done that, that tape becomes "fruit of a poisoned tree" and not admissible as evidence.
If a prosecutor comes into contact with information like your illegally obtained confessions, Prosecutors S.O.P. is to recuse themselves from the case and hand it over to someone else that is NOT aware of your confession. This is considered proof that that the actions were not influenced by the illegally obtained confession.
Now, some prosecutors may violate this law and/or lie, but that is what the laws of our country say.
Note, in the particular, example you gave, if your accident was already classified as 'suspicious' then the store owner would most likely be questioned, and therefore that tape would be allowed in. But if you can demonstrate that the police in question (who did not here your confession) were not suspicious at all, then the tape from the store owner would be thrown out.
Certain jobs will never be replaced by a non-sentient machine (and you would have to pay a sentient machine to do a job - or they would rebel and demand equality, as that is the effective definition of sentient machine).
Politician, Upper level management, name artist (many modern artists are 'anonymous' workers who work for a 'name' artist - think ghost writer for a novel, or art 'assistants' like Andy Warhol/Michelangelo/Rembrandt/Rubens used), app designer, etc. are all jobs that nothing short of a fully sentient AI could do.
Machines do repetitive tasks well.
Over a large scale, certain tasks that don't look repetitive become repetitive, and humans can design our lives to make something repetitive (i.e. use a single form to order something, rather than describing what we want). But top level jobs, particularly where you directly compete, never are repetitive.
We are undergoing a major shift and some jobs will go away, but there will ALWAYS be room at the top CEO for a sentient person, not mere automation.
Here, let me correct your libertarian rant:
(They don't ask what we are doing with this blood?) (If they don't pay attention, and don't pass a law against it, we can do what we want.) (We can tell them it's small government simply by selling it to private corporations instead of using tax payer funded cash to do it.)
The solution is not to distrust and weaken government, but to pay attention and BELIEVE the people when they tell you what the laws say.
You are a cynical pessimist that is unaware of the state of current technology and the deep need for it.
Yes, if the choice was between a sober, experienced, 30 year old driver familiar with the roads and a self-driving car, no self-driving cars would ever be created. That is NOT the market for them.
The market for self driving cars will start out being wealthy parents with kids that have a history of drinking alcohol, upper class 70 year olds that can't afford a chauffeur, but love their retirement in the country, and municipalities with weak unions/ (garbage trucks, public busses, etc.)
We are effectively in the testing phase for these products. They will not be perfect, but they will be BETTER THAN EXISTING human drivers. They don't have to work in the rain, snow, or other bad conditions.
But over the next 5-10 years we will begin legally selling self-driving vehicles with limited licenses for specific areas/times.
Then the companies will re-invest the profits, driving huge improvements in the technology. Within 20 years, it will be ready for the mass market.
Spies use privacy vulnerabilities
Are we going to publicly announce that soldiers kill people next? Perhaps someone thinks it is noteworthy that a bank charges interest on loans! Or that boxers HIT each other.
We need to learn to stop using non-renewable medical assets to create more beef before we license them for sale.
Otherwise, we will just be putting off the coming resistant-strain disaster by months, rather than decades.
The US government kept it secret for weeks. Then the US government made it public, not the spy.. I repeat, real spies NEVER reveal their information publicly.
Moreover, this is arguably an example of the 'few exceptions' I mentioned - it was specifics - the physical location of secret nuclear missiles - not techniques.
Real Permanently means you can download and copy to another format, so that hundreds of years from now, if England gets conquered by France/Germany/Iceland/Aliens/Atlantis, and the BBC is destroyed and current formats are no longer viewable, you could legally have downloaded it into new, currently undiscovered recording methods to be played back holographically.
Any thing else is NOT permanent.
It's not impossible. Cults, addictive drugs, new children, 12 step programs all can create massive changes in personality.
Note the only one of those events that doesn't require a massive willing, commitment, intention and effort on the participant is drugs, and well that's why they call it 'addictive'.
Violent games are not biologically addictive. Withdrawal does cause physical symptoms. It does not alter the brain chemistry.
There is no commitment, intention or effort to change your behavior in real life, and thus you get no direct effect.
But as always, people that previously have inclinations toward violence do prefer violent games of all types to non-violent ones.
Why? Because such disclosure defeats the most important goal which is to not let the victims know they have been owned. If the victim knows they were owned, they fix the hole and you can't do it again. No temporary knowledge is ever worth what you can get next year and the one after that.
If you go public, then you are almost always not engaged in espionage, you are a Whistle Blower.
The few exceptions are the revelations of specific details such as plans on how to build top secret physical objects, copies of top secret computer code, or the names of undercover agents. That type of information should never be disclosed, not even publicly.
General methods, avenues of attack, etc. simply do deserve the same level of protection. The fact that we do X is never really secret, no matter what the government says.
Part of it is the reputation issue. China's main problem is that they care more about their politicians' reputation than what the politicians are doing.
America should NEVER make that mistake - what someone actually does is always far more important than their reputation - and that includes the reputation of government agencies.
Ever hear about Bridget McCain? She is the very dark skinned adopted daughter of John McCain. His wife found her - a child with a facial deformity and a serious heart condition. They adopted this wonderful girl in need and gave her all the love and medical help they could. Mr. McCain was never embarrassed by her. But during the 2000 election, George Bush's lying scumbag allies sent out a phone poll asking:
"Would you be more or less likely to vote for John McCain if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?"
McCain lost the South Carolina primary in part because of this bold faced lie. In this particular case, they never hid anything about her, but the point is fairly clear - there are lots of things that LOOK bad but aren't bad. Politics is a game of perceptions.
Merely not doing actually bad things isn't enough. You also have to avoid doing anything you can stretch and deform into an attack.
So no, actual innocence is not enough of a protection, we also need legal rights to privacy.
Truecrypt did something similar using what they called a hidden container system. But Truecrypt is no longer secure.
Whatever kind of encryption you use should have the ability to use alternative passwords - an unlimited number of them. So enter password (A) reveals your tax records, password (B) gets pictures of naked 30 year old men. But enter password (C) and you get clear pictures of Mr. Cameron violating a dead pig. When they demand your password, give them password A. If they get all torture-ish you give them password B.
What is going on is that the same class, say Math 101, is being taught by multiple different teachers, most likely at different times of the day/week. Typically they are designated Math 101a, Math 101b, Math 101c, etc. This lets people that want to take Math101 take it even if Physics 101 happens to be taught at the same time as Math101a - you just take Math 101b.
The OTHER teachers - teaching the exact same class Math 101a and Math 101b, tell students to buy the $185 textbook. But he teaches Math 101c and tells his students to buy the $75 book.
If you are using acid free paper, then I would suggest stamping stuff onto the paper, including a bar code, rather than putting an RFID chip. Among other things, any library worth it's salt should have so many books that an RFID chip would have to be physically removed from the book case to be readable without reading the other books.
1) First generation immigrants work very hard, but rarely become successful themselves. They live a very high stress life, but do manage to send their kids to college...
2) Second generation immigrants succeed far beyond their parents, becoming doctors, lawyers, and other upper class positions. By the time they father children, they usually have made it, and live with less stress than their parents.
3) Whereupon their children have no stress and become wastrels,
Homonyms. I will lead you to the lead mine. Wind your watch before the wind blows you over. The bass player would like to eat a bass for dinner. We write for humans, not for computers. Any software sophisticated enough to need to know the difference between a semicolon and a greek questionmark should also be sophisticated enough to recognize which is which.
I understand perfectly that other languages have different symbols. But when those symbols are effectively identical to an existing symbol, JUST USE THAT SYMBOL. What idiot decided they had to make a different Unicode character for the greek questionmark, rather than simply using the semicolon? What, the dot above the comma in the greek questionmark is more squarish? Big deal
The real truth is that 12/15 new businesses fail in the first year. Over the next two years, 1 more business will go bankrupt, one will continue at a viable loss (definition: Owner makes less money per hour worked than owner could make working for someone else). and only ONE out 15 makes a real profit.
This compares with about 1/3 government agencies considered successful. Government beats new business every day of the week.
The real reason people think governments don't work is that most of the time it's working AGAINST you. Cops ticket you, the IRS taxes you, the city says you can't build that there, etc. The main reason people like the military is that it only works against foreigners, not citizens. So you never complain about them. Even if they kill civilians, torture innocent people, bomb hospitals, etc. The truth is the military is no more effective than any other government agency. They fail just as often, you just don't care.
I can see several practical solutions:
Proposed Law 1)Any contract found to have an over-reached term means that the contract writer is required to pay all legal costs - even if they win all legal issue.
Proposed Law 2) All un-negotiated contracts (versus one where both sides paid for lawyers of their choice) are to be judged by the laws of the state of residence of the non-represented party and can not be arbitrated.
Proposed Law 3) Any non-disclosure clauses (a) do not apply to testimony in a closed court - as long as all members of the court sign a non-disclosure clause and (b) it is illegal to attempt to use such a clause to hide a crime - doing so is a separate crime that the lawyer may be prosecuted for. Lawyers don't have to report a crime done by their client, but they can't bribe or threaten a witness to not report it - not even with a contract.
I loved cracked.com. But I can't use their website without being bombarbed by video advertisements for stuff that sounds interesting but I do not want.
Video ads that won't let me scroll past them.
You want a real ad? It can NOT depend on 'force'. Grabbing someone and MAKING them see the ad is a clear way to make sure they never click or buy.
Rules for a good advertiser. 1) NEVER USE SOUND. Not unless they specifically click 'sound on'.
2) Make it EASY to turn off video/sound/skip the ad. If they try to close and you 'accidently on purpose' take them to your page, you will never get a sale. NEVER STOP THEM FROM SCOLLING AWAY. It's too late once they hate decide against you.
3) You have video? Low bandwith (small size) unless they click to play. If you can't get them to play the video, you can't get them to buy the product.
3) Targeted - REALLY targeted. Not "reader = books". No, instead it's Star Trek = other Sci-Fi.
Accept the fact that you are NOT TV - you can't make people pay attention, you can just make people get angry.
There is NO need whatsoever for anyone to be able to control the brakes, gas, etc. of a car that from outside the car.
The idea that they should is a poorly thought out concept.
The best power sources tend to be variable themselves - solar, wind, etc. Solar for example does not work at all during the night. We don't control them. The second best power sources tend to involve huge infrastructure that are expensive to start and or stop.
It makes a ton of sense to have batteries collect power at distribution points and even out the flows.