OR let them pass the law and when a gun stolen from a cop does NOT shoot the cop and the laws are upgraded from state law to national law.
I applaud your honesty and willingness to test your personal beliefs that are founded merely on your real world generic experience rather than actual studies relevant tot he issue.
But I deplore you arrogance and certainty that you are right.
More political evil is done by arrogant people 'SURE' they are right than by actually evil people.
The prime example is that more evil is done by people that are SURE that x racial/cultural group are evil than is actually done by evil groups.
I looked up some statistics for you - sex offenders are far LESS likely to re-offend (less than 20%) than non-sex criminals (50+).
They get the worst reputation and are punished twice, once by the courts and again by society at large.
Look, I am not saying that we shouldn't arrest and charge them. But I am saying we need to stop demonizing them.
Given a choice between trusting someone with a drug conviction or a child porn conviction, I would trust the child porn person far more.
They need the right to be forgotten AFTER they have served their time.
Embedded devices have no business connecting to the internet.
Yeah, I've heard all the crap about my fridge can email me that I am out of milk. Bull. No one really wants that.
The only embedded device people want to connect to the internet are camera phones.
If it doesn't connect to the internet than security is far less important.
If it does connect to the internet, it needs a constants stream of updates to maintain security. Because security is not a set and forget thing, but a constant job. And that means embedded devices should not connect to the internet.
Buy insurance for the cost of stuff and backup the data. Data can always be downloaded again Preferably from an off-site backup. Hardware can always be bought again.
But I guarantee you that any security system that actually prevents theft should cost you more money than reasonable insurance would cost. It should also cost more money than the thing you are protecting. You know those Storage Wars shows? When they find a safe, it it usually worth more than what is inside it.
If insurance costs more than the stuff is worth, than that means you live in a high crime area and should move someplace safer.
But in the USA or other stable country, under no circumstance should it ever be a cost effective to secure your home possessions. Insurance should always make more sense.
Look, there is no question that spying on people will reveal some crimes.
There is also no question that spying on people will damage our society. Some innocent people will have their non-criminal secrets revealed, damaging their lives beyond reason. Some innocent people will be falsely accused of crimes they did not commit - perhaps even going to jail or being killed by a drone. Certain people will become accustomed to violating the law for valid reasons and will start to violate it for personal reasons - the cases where US intelligence agents spied on ex-lovers are just the start.
The question is, is the damage done greater than the damage prevented. From the huge and vast history of spying, we also know that we can not simply take the government's word. Even if they start good, they too often end up going too far.
So we set up a system that is supposed to not only prevent the worst damage done by spying, but to prevent even the APPEARANCE that that damage might be occurring.
General Keith Alexander's article talks a lot about the damage the spying prevents. It totally ignores the massive damage he and his ilk does.
As such it is not convincing at all. It's like a gold miner talking about how much gold they are going to get out of the mountain without even mentioning the massive amounts of toxic materials he is dumping directly into the town's reservoir.
As others stated what you describe is what people think is pedophilia.
As I pointed out, the LAW totally disagrees with you.
I don't care about about what most people thing pedophilia is. I care about the many many innocent people that are falsely accused of pedophilia by the law, the media, the internet.
You on the other hand are quite willing to denounce me when I point out that the Law uses the wrong definition. The question is are you willing to admit that the Law is ignorant and denounce it?
Or are you just denouncing me for pointing out that the law disagrees with what most people (and you) think is true?
Are you thinking of a 19 year old boy who got a blow job from a 15 year old girl without knowing her age?
Are you thinking of a 16 year old buy with the naked picture of an 17 year old girl on his phone?
Because that is the typical example of men put on pedophile lists.
The media has lied to us about what pedophiles means. We think it means sick old perverts that repeatedly rape and abuse young children, likely killing them. Those cases are incredibly rare. Why? Because the truly strange and sick perversions are truly rare.
More importantly, those people tend to wind up in prison for the rest of their lives, never getting parole, if they are not killed outright.
On the other hand the number of teenagers/young adults that do things like pass around dirty pictures of their classmates and/or have sex with someone 5 years younger than them WITHOUT KNOWING THEIR AGE is actually fairly high.
Most cops are pretty lenient - if of course it is a 21 year old guy and a 16 year old girl. But let a 21 year old gay man unknowingly pick up a 17 year gay boy that snuck into a gay club with a fake ID because he can't get a date at high school....
As a result, the far majority of people put on sex offender lists as opposed to being put in jail are totally harmless people that have had their lives ruined.
Note I am not on any list, have never been to jail, and have never committed a sexual crime. I do however work for a law firm and have seen what gets prosecuted.
and be done with it.
That's how consumers view ISPs', so that's what we should make them.
Stop catering to their silly cries that they want to be something more. They aren't and will never be.
1) Partly negating is like saying "You know, that quality you like, while it does exist is not as good as I originally thought and I assume you made the same mistake I did." Hydrogen storage is lighter than current battery technology, QED.
2) Hydrogen is far easier to store and transport than electricity. Basically we can NOT store electricity very well, nor can we transport it very well. Both processes involve massive losses - over 50% for distances measured in miles and durations measured in minutes. This is why nuclear power plants are all distressingly close to populated areas. Hydrogen is in fact far easier and safer to store and transport than electricity - but we already have the infrastructure to store and transport electricity Which I mentioned in my original post.
1) Electric has established delivery infrastructure
2) Electric does not have the PR problem of the Hindenburg.
3) Hydrogen has everything else going for it. It is A) lighter, b) short refueling time, c) does not have recycling issues, d) does not have charge/discharge cycle limit d) zero energy loss from temperature (cold batteries lose energy).
Hydrogen is the objectively better system if we were designing from scratch. But the infrastructure advantage that electric battery cars have is huge - the hybrid cars just made that worse.
Does not work well against people.
1) Sometimes the people move to another country which basically negates the lawsuit.
2) Often they just ignore the court order. Easy to get a court order, hard to get the court to order someone put in jail for not obeying it.
3) Suing costs a lot of money. Emailing google to take it down is cheap.
4) Even if you successfully sue them, they can repeat the crime so you have to sue again. More money. If the counter is another email to google and the website, you can keep up with their crimes. But you can't keep suing them repeatedly without bankrupting yourself
People often ignore their non-programming skills.
Get fired from a manufacturing job? Learn to code and try to get a job coding the software that runs the machines that took your job. Your industry xp will be a plus.
Work as an orderly in a hospital? Code for medical machines.
They generally do NOT work if the person behind it is not an idiot.
In particular, if your ex is a foreigner and returns to their home country there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop them.
They routinely ignore court orders, for example.
To fix this problem we need to able to go after google and select abusers. It won't completely solve the problem, but it will make it liveable.
There are cases where a disgruntled X does nasty things - from posting nude photos of women to falsely claiming a man was arrested for molesting a child.
Not to mention numerous cases of old, bad information, such as bankruptcy, actual arrest records, etc.
Worst of all there are several companies who exist solely to blackmail individuals into paying to remove negative information. All totally legal in some jurisdictions.
This is a good law we need it.
P.S. Someone mentioned companies and/or other large organizations using it. They already get the same thing done by paying large amounts of money to lawyers to sue people for 'copyright' infringement over videos of them committing crimes.
So your DTV converter was designed for your specific TV?
I am talking about single products with built in electronics, not add on like your converter.
Also, how many DTV converters are being sold today? To get the no-fail situation you need a real market with real demands for performance.
It might take some time - a year or two of testing - to perfect it. You don't get six-sigma level quality immediately and you certainly don't get it for a throw away product designed to satisfy a short term problem.
But, how many times has your microwave oven failed to boot up? I assure you it does have a small PC in it. Same for most electric ovens, refrigerators, freezers, dishwashers, etc.
Guns already have safeties. If the safety breaks in the locked position, the gun won't fire.The question is, can we make smartgun technology more reliable than mechanical devices.
Fools look at software designed for PC's and think no.
I look at software built into home electronics and say yes.
The differences are simple:
1) PC's are designed to take any software, not just proprietary. So the OS may not work perfectly with the hardware and may not be tested on it, let alone designed for the hardware.
2) PC's are accessible - you can download things to it, plug USB devices into it, etc. That creates many potential problems - including but not limited to intentional hacking.
3)PC's are designed to do many, many things - they are general purpose devices. So they can never be tested for all possible conditions.
The concept of a smart gun is simple. It runs one program on hardware designed and tested for it with no possibility of changing the software or hardware. It won't be connected to the internet or easy to hack - at least not any easier to hack than it would be to remove the firing pin from a weapon.
Once it is proven to work once, it will work the same way FOREVER.
The only question is what to decide for the default position without any power - fireable or not fireable.
If you make it fireable without power than you have to lock the battery into the gun so it can't be removed or disconnected. If you make it not fireable than you can let the battery be easily removable and replaceable.
As I posted earlier, they are not a matter of time, they are a matter of already built. The USA may have no desire to build or use them, but South Korea sits on the border with North Korea and has built them and installed Super Aegis II armed robots on the border.
My understanding is that South Korea has robotic guns set up on the border with North Korea. While they can be human over-ridden, when fully activated, they fire at anything that attempts to cross the border.
The Super Aegis II has a 12.7 mm machine gun and a grenade launcher. laser and infrared sensors that see 3 km in the day, 2 at night. But the gun probably can't shoot that far - it just sees that far.
First, I do agree with the result - that consciousness is not definable via mathematical equations and algorithms.
That said:
1) Most memory researchers believe it IS lossy. Specifically each time you access a memory you change it, losing original information
2) Not all computers have to only use mathematical equations and algorithms. Specifically their are quantum computers that do not work that way. While I am not an expert on such things I highly doubt that the rather limited definition they are using for 'computer' includes all things we would consider a computer.
Slashdot Mirror
Boy, the GOP must LOVE this idea because it reduces the size of government and frees up police for more important jobs
I applaud your honesty and willingness to test your personal beliefs that are founded merely on your real world generic experience rather than actual studies relevant tot he issue.
But I deplore you arrogance and certainty that you are right.
More political evil is done by arrogant people 'SURE' they are right than by actually evil people.
The prime example is that more evil is done by people that are SURE that x racial/cultural group are evil than is actually done by evil groups.
I looked up some statistics for you - sex offenders are far LESS likely to re-offend (less than 20%) than non-sex criminals (50+). They get the worst reputation and are punished twice, once by the courts and again by society at large. Look, I am not saying that we shouldn't arrest and charge them. But I am saying we need to stop demonizing them. Given a choice between trusting someone with a drug conviction or a child porn conviction, I would trust the child porn person far more. They need the right to be forgotten AFTER they have served their time.
Did they tell you the age of the child porn? Because most of the stuff we deal with is 16-18 year old girls/boys, not pre-teens.
Yeah, I've heard all the crap about my fridge can email me that I am out of milk. Bull. No one really wants that.
The only embedded device people want to connect to the internet are camera phones.
If it doesn't connect to the internet than security is far less important.
If it does connect to the internet, it needs a constants stream of updates to maintain security. Because security is not a set and forget thing, but a constant job. And that means embedded devices should not connect to the internet.
That is what the lock on your home door is supposed to be. Anyone that enters illegally has already heard the message and ignored it.
But I guarantee you that any security system that actually prevents theft should cost you more money than reasonable insurance would cost. It should also cost more money than the thing you are protecting. You know those Storage Wars shows? When they find a safe, it it usually worth more than what is inside it.
If insurance costs more than the stuff is worth, than that means you live in a high crime area and should move someplace safer.
But in the USA or other stable country, under no circumstance should it ever be a cost effective to secure your home possessions. Insurance should always make more sense.
There is also no question that spying on people will damage our society. Some innocent people will have their non-criminal secrets revealed, damaging their lives beyond reason. Some innocent people will be falsely accused of crimes they did not commit - perhaps even going to jail or being killed by a drone. Certain people will become accustomed to violating the law for valid reasons and will start to violate it for personal reasons - the cases where US intelligence agents spied on ex-lovers are just the start.
The question is, is the damage done greater than the damage prevented. From the huge and vast history of spying, we also know that we can not simply take the government's word. Even if they start good, they too often end up going too far.
So we set up a system that is supposed to not only prevent the worst damage done by spying, but to prevent even the APPEARANCE that that damage might be occurring.
General Keith Alexander's article talks a lot about the damage the spying prevents. It totally ignores the massive damage he and his ilk does.
As such it is not convincing at all. It's like a gold miner talking about how much gold they are going to get out of the mountain without even mentioning the massive amounts of toxic materials he is dumping directly into the town's reservoir.
I don't care about about what most people thing pedophilia is. I care about the many many innocent people that are falsely accused of pedophilia by the law, the media, the internet.
You on the other hand are quite willing to denounce me when I point out that the Law uses the wrong definition. The question is are you willing to admit that the Law is ignorant and denounce it?
Or are you just denouncing me for pointing out that the law disagrees with what most people (and you) think is true?
Are you thinking of a 19 year old boy who got a blow job from a 15 year old girl without knowing her age?
Are you thinking of a 16 year old buy with the naked picture of an 17 year old girl on his phone?
Because that is the typical example of men put on pedophile lists.
The media has lied to us about what pedophiles means. We think it means sick old perverts that repeatedly rape and abuse young children, likely killing them. Those cases are incredibly rare. Why? Because the truly strange and sick perversions are truly rare.
More importantly, those people tend to wind up in prison for the rest of their lives, never getting parole, if they are not killed outright.
On the other hand the number of teenagers/young adults that do things like pass around dirty pictures of their classmates and/or have sex with someone 5 years younger than them WITHOUT KNOWING THEIR AGE is actually fairly high.
Most cops are pretty lenient - if of course it is a 21 year old guy and a 16 year old girl. But let a 21 year old gay man unknowingly pick up a 17 year gay boy that snuck into a gay club with a fake ID because he can't get a date at high school....
As a result, the far majority of people put on sex offender lists as opposed to being put in jail are totally harmless people that have had their lives ruined.
Note I am not on any list, have never been to jail, and have never committed a sexual crime. I do however work for a law firm and have seen what gets prosecuted.
Other metals do OK because we can melt them down and scrape off the slagg, effectively 'distilling' them.
All other recyclables are far less valuable because of the ton of work we need to do sorting garbage to get them back.
Plastics and organics on the other hand tend to be very hard to recycle because if you try to melt them, they burn.
One more 'recylcable' that requires a lot of sorting is pretty worthless, unless it has a quality like magnetic or distillable
and be done with it. That's how consumers view ISPs', so that's what we should make them. Stop catering to their silly cries that they want to be something more. They aren't and will never be.
2) Hydrogen is far easier to store and transport than electricity. Basically we can NOT store electricity very well, nor can we transport it very well. Both processes involve massive losses - over 50% for distances measured in miles and durations measured in minutes. This is why nuclear power plants are all distressingly close to populated areas. Hydrogen is in fact far easier and safer to store and transport than electricity - but we already have the infrastructure to store and transport electricity Which I mentioned in my original post.
2) Electric does not have the PR problem of the Hindenburg.
3) Hydrogen has everything else going for it. It is A) lighter, b) short refueling time, c) does not have recycling issues, d) does not have charge/discharge cycle limit d) zero energy loss from temperature (cold batteries lose energy). Hydrogen is the objectively better system if we were designing from scratch. But the infrastructure advantage that electric battery cars have is huge - the hybrid cars just made that worse.
Does not work well against people. 1) Sometimes the people move to another country which basically negates the lawsuit. 2) Often they just ignore the court order. Easy to get a court order, hard to get the court to order someone put in jail for not obeying it. 3) Suing costs a lot of money. Emailing google to take it down is cheap. 4) Even if you successfully sue them, they can repeat the crime so you have to sue again. More money. If the counter is another email to google and the website, you can keep up with their crimes. But you can't keep suing them repeatedly without bankrupting yourself
People often ignore their non-programming skills. Get fired from a manufacturing job? Learn to code and try to get a job coding the software that runs the machines that took your job. Your industry xp will be a plus. Work as an orderly in a hospital? Code for medical machines.
They generally do NOT work if the person behind it is not an idiot. In particular, if your ex is a foreigner and returns to their home country there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop them. They routinely ignore court orders, for example. To fix this problem we need to able to go after google and select abusers. It won't completely solve the problem, but it will make it liveable.
Not to mention numerous cases of old, bad information, such as bankruptcy, actual arrest records, etc.
Worst of all there are several companies who exist solely to blackmail individuals into paying to remove negative information. All totally legal in some jurisdictions.
This is a good law we need it.
P.S. Someone mentioned companies and/or other large organizations using it. They already get the same thing done by paying large amounts of money to lawyers to sue people for 'copyright' infringement over videos of them committing crimes.
The TV and fridge are interesting but please note they are not major issues.
The question is not will said electronic safety fail, but will it fail significantly.
For that it takes a comparison of regular guns. If they are well cared for, with normal ammo, the misfire rate is about 2 in every 100,000 shots.
That is not hard to beat. It is totally within reason for a gun lock to fail less often than that.
In the US alone, in 2010 there were over 600 unintentional gun deaths and thousands of unintentional gun shootings. If we stop half of them.
I am talking about single products with built in electronics, not add on like your converter.
Also, how many DTV converters are being sold today? To get the no-fail situation you need a real market with real demands for performance.
It might take some time - a year or two of testing - to perfect it. You don't get six-sigma level quality immediately and you certainly don't get it for a throw away product designed to satisfy a short term problem.
But, how many times has your microwave oven failed to boot up? I assure you it does have a small PC in it. Same for most electric ovens, refrigerators, freezers, dishwashers, etc.
Fools look at software designed for PC's and think no. I look at software built into home electronics and say yes.
The differences are simple: 1) PC's are designed to take any software, not just proprietary. So the OS may not work perfectly with the hardware and may not be tested on it, let alone designed for the hardware.
2) PC's are accessible - you can download things to it, plug USB devices into it, etc. That creates many potential problems - including but not limited to intentional hacking.
3)PC's are designed to do many, many things - they are general purpose devices. So they can never be tested for all possible conditions.
The concept of a smart gun is simple. It runs one program on hardware designed and tested for it with no possibility of changing the software or hardware. It won't be connected to the internet or easy to hack - at least not any easier to hack than it would be to remove the firing pin from a weapon.
Once it is proven to work once, it will work the same way FOREVER.
The only question is what to decide for the default position without any power - fireable or not fireable. If you make it fireable without power than you have to lock the battery into the gun so it can't be removed or disconnected. If you make it not fireable than you can let the battery be easily removable and replaceable.
As I posted earlier, they are not a matter of time, they are a matter of already built. The USA may have no desire to build or use them, but South Korea sits on the border with North Korea and has built them and installed Super Aegis II armed robots on the border.
The Super Aegis II has a 12.7 mm machine gun and a grenade launcher. laser and infrared sensors that see 3 km in the day, 2 at night. But the gun probably can't shoot that far - it just sees that far.
To my mind, the most pressing problem are caused by Moore's law (and similar effects). Whatever encryption is worthwhile now, is worthless in 5 years.
Not to mention the human sized holes in encryption caused by human limitations.
That said:
1) Most memory researchers believe it IS lossy. Specifically each time you access a memory you change it, losing original information
2) Not all computers have to only use mathematical equations and algorithms. Specifically their are quantum computers that do not work that way. While I am not an expert on such things I highly doubt that the rather limited definition they are using for 'computer' includes all things we would consider a computer.