I agree dead on with what you're saying. And judging from some of the other posts, it seems that the general oppinion around here is the same.
Slightly off-topic, I think that if you really believe in a company and the company really belives in you, then both sides should be looking into some kind of stock purchase plan.
If a techie doesn't want to climb management and have the "security" that comes with having power over people, then the said techie should look into OWNING a piece of the company and having a say in how the company operates.
Sure, just one person might not be sufficient, but what if the entire IT department owned enough real stock to make an impact in the company's decisions?
you're forgetting the "analog hole" of this problem... they may not have perfect technology for tracking WiFi, but they have cameras everywhere. Once they get a big enough case, they isolate the videos around the access point, track down the range of time, and start ID'ing and tracking down the individuals in those videos.
Not a perfect solution, but it has worked for other crimes such as kidnappings and burglaries. And physically moving around is not as easy as hopping electronic signals across the globe.
people ask questions to slashdot that should be directed to a lawyer all the time here. Why should teeth whitening be any different? I'm sure this affects just as many people, if not more, than some of those legal questions.
If we're going to apply standards for what gets posted to Ask Slashdot, we should do it uniformly, with well set rules.
For some reason, archery and swordfighting seems to draw a lot of nerds and geeks. The archery and kendo clubs at the University of Washington were over 50% science and engineering.
I highly recommend people try these. Archery (recurves, not compounds) is very relaxed physically, but requires discipline of the mind. Kendo is very structured as a martial art, and is more "search for perfection of technique" rather than the "sport" nature of western fencing.
I agree, but the world is unfortunately not so open minded. I think that if the person asking this question wants to work as a developer, engineer, or some other "front-line-grunt", then self-expression won't be a very big deal.
But, if that individual wants to advance into upper management, or have to talk to clients, then the sad fact is that first and surface impressions matter; and not only are those impressions tainted by stereo-types, but they can last for a very long time, further tainting everything else they perceive about you.
For example, say you were sent out to a big client to make the case for buying your company's Linux solution. Microsoft sends out their representative to sell an XP solution.
Even if you're wearing a suit, they see green hair and an ear-ring. The M$ guy is one of those Harvard B-school types with the expensive suite, clean hair, and over-zealous flamboyant voices, using way too many "power-words".
70% of the time, who do you think the client will lean towards, just at first glance? The visually clean M$ guy, or the camoflauged Linux punk that just wants to spread anarchy at their expense?
I, too, cannot understand the knee jerk reaction about privacy. We're not talking about black-boxes having wireless and making it mandatory to beam GPS info everywhere.
Here is a piece of technology that records data for the few moments leading up to a traumatic event. What's wrong with that?
That's NOT an invasion of privacy. It's a technological WITNESS to the TRUE occurrence of events! There's no privacy to be invaded here! The driver did what he did and the car behaved as dictated by physics, on a public road!
And honestly, there's no slippery slope here. Until we start getting threats of true privacy invading GPS data beaming, secret surveilence of the inside of your car type of stuff, there's no point getting all over-excited in conspiracy theories. And when such bills are proposed, its the job of citizens to voice their concerns, and vote appropriately.
But I've ranted for too long. Just wanted to lend my support to the parent poster!
I would have been suprised if somebody tried to write an acceptance speech which would have been in-character
you mean something totally obnoxious, uncreative, and unfunny like Eminem's "I got male I got male I got male I got male now you go now you go I got male I got male I got male....." ?
In terms of the workings of the legal system, I think that assigning blame to other things is simply the way things work. I am as mad as the next guy that video games is targetted, but the law requires lawyers to defend to their maximum legal ability; and it is the prosecutors' job to make sure there is no doubt in the guilt of the accused. Better this necessary evil, than holding people with no trial..... oh... wait...
Don't blame lawyers... they just use and interpret the law. Contact your lawmakers. They're the ones that make them. And since it's basically impossible to destroy all lawyers once and for all (like ridding humanity of violence), it's better to contact your lawmakers and get things done.
Having said that, though, this defense attorney, a "self-styled expert on the influence of violent video games on youths", sounds like he's using this case for his own self-righteous publicity.
Economically speaking, it's true. Though I will admit I have no hard numbers to give you.
People have a marginal value for driving dangerously, which is balanced by the marginal cost of that action. Where the two meet (marginal cost -vs- marginal value curve), is how people behave (or drive in this case).
In comes a safety feature. That safety feature reduces the marginal cost of driving dangerously. Thus, the driver is able to "afford" more dangerous driving. ie the equilibrium point where marginal value and marginal cost meets has shifted higher towards dangerous driving.
Thus, in economics theory, the driver will drive more dangerously with additional safety features.
The opposite effect, in the original poster's example, of having a spike come out greatly increases the marginal cost. Thus, the "affordable" point shifts far down towards much safer driving.
Of course... this is fundamental microeconomics, and I'm no expert in economics.
And it's amazing these same people aren't more vocal about the war on Iraq the US just underwent. If anything, that more than any video-game teaches that problems are solved by violence.
Now I'm not saying Saddam wasn't a bad guy or that the Iraqi people didn't suffer.
But let's call it for what it is. One month in and no signs of WMD. Problem solved? well, I guess you could say that. But what's the lesson learned? It's okay to solve things by violence.
Just like it was okay for those boys at Columbine to solve their problem of being bullied by using violence.
They have no real reps to talk to. I had cel service with them, and twice they disconnected my phone because of billing errors. Then, when you try to talk to them, you get their virtual representative. Basically, it's Clippy for your cel phone. i.e. useless. And when you talk to someone real, they charge you money for it.
Uhmm... wait... don't answer that last question. I figured it out on my own.
This is exactly why we need this bill. Because by your argument, we shouldn't have the DMCA. All those things are better covered by existing laws. But the DMCA exists. We need to be a little more realistic and support laws like this to gain some ground.
Yes, laws Should make sense, but they don't; so we need to play the political game.
They also conveniently don't count back in compensating income designed to offset these "losses", like the RIAA CDR tax. Seeing as how they haven't really paid any of that tax back to the artists, I'm guessing that's quite a deep source of income for the RIAA.
Anyone got numbers for the amount they collect via CDR tax?
Intel has always held a very conservative line regarding research into far-out new technologies. The vast majority of Intel's research money goes into fab/mount/production technologies.
For stuff like nano-tubes and quantum computing, Intel usually helps fund academia to let them take the high-risk endeavors. And then take the benefits as they are produced.
I'm not sure what Intel's current plan is now, but it seems that they're putting more R&D dollars into the mobile/ubiquitous computing market, to try and branch out their chip options, instead of being forever racing against Moore's Law.
Intel-research.net, for some info on Intel and partnerships with academia on this type of research.
Yes! I've seen them in some malls where you can pay some amount of cash to get a quick water-jet massage.
There was one here in Metrotown, Burnaby, BC, Canada. I think it was around $10 for 5-10 minutes or something. Can't remember exactly.
But this also raises the question... if you look at exercise machines, a major selling point is how convenient it is to put away and be out-of-sight. A true massaging machine would require some amount of bulk to provide a fair level of pressure. Would people actually want to place such machines in their home, should they become affordable?
Or will people continue to go to "beauty salons" for that kind of stuff?
From the title, you would think there is some technical flaw in palladium, but the article just goes on about some thing about not having control of your PC etc...
I'd say that the owner not having control of their own keys is a major technical flaw of "trusted computing".
Before we go too far into the MS bashing, or Other-Big-Like-Evil-Company(TM) bashing for caste mentality division in the workforce, remember that we have a similar problem in the OSS world.
Anti-noob and RTFM mentality is a serious obstacle for the heavily geek-driven projects in the OSS world. Both on the side of new developers and new users. These are important people and a valuable resource for renewing project growth, ideas, and direction.
That still doesn't make it right. The internet is a different medium than business cards. I agree that some effort should have been made to protect that person's identity. Atleast until that person has given permission for the full name and contact to be disclosed.
And the fact that we can argue about "solid rights" is what Patriot II is trying to take away! It's really amazing how ball-sy this legislation is...
calls for the creation of a terrorist DNA database; eases laws pertaining to search, seizure and admissible evidence; and would allow the attorney general to revoke the citizenship of any resident who provides "material support" to terrorist groups.
That last part is what scares me, because under the current trojan horse conditions, they're labelling everything as terrorist related. And then they make you a non-citizen, and you disappear. Is it just me or do those tactics sound like something Red China or Soviet Russie would do?
I know that many people will contend that programming is not as mindless as working at McDonalds. But being a software developer myself (out of work), I must point out the painful truth of what an abundant commodity programmers are.
The bottom line is that no one owns a monopoly on innovation, knowledge, or education. It reminds me of some old StarTrek TNG episode where the 12 year old boy exclaims that he doesn't want to go to calculus class.
As China, India, and other countries catch up with us by heavily investing in education and research, our value as a human resource will only continue to fall. And companies will continue to outsource.
Cry all we want, but that's just the way it is. And without a unified voice to speak for us, we won't get the same tarrif protection the auto-industry gets.
Let's face it, common shoes are no longer made in North America. And in a decades time, common software and software components will no longer be made in North America. Sure there will be some exceptions. But that's the sad truth... exceptions.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree dead on with what you're saying. And judging from some of the other posts, it seems that the general oppinion around here is the same.
Slightly off-topic, I think that if you really believe in a company and the company really belives in you, then both sides should be looking into some kind of stock purchase plan.
If a techie doesn't want to climb management and have the "security" that comes with having power over people, then the said techie should look into OWNING a piece of the company and having a say in how the company operates.
Sure, just one person might not be sufficient, but what if the entire IT department owned enough real stock to make an impact in the company's decisions?
you're forgetting the "analog hole" of this problem... they may not have perfect technology for tracking WiFi, but they have cameras everywhere. Once they get a big enough case, they isolate the videos around the access point, track down the range of time, and start ID'ing and tracking down the individuals in those videos.
Not a perfect solution, but it has worked for other crimes such as kidnappings and burglaries. And physically moving around is not as easy as hopping electronic signals across the globe.
people ask questions to slashdot that should be directed to a lawyer all the time here. Why should teeth whitening be any different? I'm sure this affects just as many people, if not more, than some of those legal questions.
If we're going to apply standards for what gets posted to Ask Slashdot, we should do it uniformly, with well set rules.
MOD THIS UP!
This is a great question that goes to the heart of the issue for fair use!
Here Here!
Fellow Kendo and Iaido practitioner.
For some reason, archery and swordfighting seems to draw a lot of nerds and geeks. The archery and kendo clubs at the University of Washington were over 50% science and engineering.
I highly recommend people try these. Archery (recurves, not compounds) is very relaxed physically, but requires discipline of the mind. Kendo is very structured as a martial art, and is more "search for perfection of technique" rather than the "sport" nature of western fencing.
I agree, but the world is unfortunately not so open minded. I think that if the person asking this question wants to work as a developer, engineer, or some other "front-line-grunt", then self-expression won't be a very big deal.
But, if that individual wants to advance into upper management, or have to talk to clients, then the sad fact is that first and surface impressions matter; and not only are those impressions tainted by stereo-types, but they can last for a very long time, further tainting everything else they perceive about you.
For example, say you were sent out to a big client to make the case for buying your company's Linux solution. Microsoft sends out their representative to sell an XP solution.
Even if you're wearing a suit, they see green hair and an ear-ring. The M$ guy is one of those Harvard B-school types with the expensive suite, clean hair, and over-zealous flamboyant voices, using way too many "power-words".
70% of the time, who do you think the client will lean towards, just at first glance? The visually clean M$ guy, or the camoflauged Linux punk that just wants to spread anarchy at their expense?
Here Here! Mod Parent up more!
I, too, cannot understand the knee jerk reaction about privacy. We're not talking about black-boxes having wireless and making it mandatory to beam GPS info everywhere.
Here is a piece of technology that records data for the few moments leading up to a traumatic event. What's wrong with that?
That's NOT an invasion of privacy. It's a technological WITNESS to the TRUE occurrence of events! There's no privacy to be invaded here! The driver did what he did and the car behaved as dictated by physics, on a public road!
And honestly, there's no slippery slope here. Until we start getting threats of true privacy invading GPS data beaming, secret surveilence of the inside of your car type of stuff, there's no point getting all over-excited in conspiracy theories. And when such bills are proposed, its the job of citizens to voice their concerns, and vote appropriately.
But I've ranted for too long. Just wanted to lend my support to the parent poster!
I would have been suprised if somebody tried to write an acceptance speech which would have been in-character
you mean something totally obnoxious, uncreative, and unfunny like Eminem's "I got male I got male I got male I got male now you go now you go I got male I got male I got male....." ?
In terms of the workings of the legal system, I think that assigning blame to other things is simply the way things work. I am as mad as the next guy that video games is targetted, but the law requires lawyers to defend to their maximum legal ability; and it is the prosecutors' job to make sure there is no doubt in the guilt of the accused. Better this necessary evil, than holding people with no trial..... oh... wait...
Don't blame lawyers... they just use and interpret the law. Contact your lawmakers. They're the ones that make them. And since it's basically impossible to destroy all lawyers once and for all (like ridding humanity of violence), it's better to contact your lawmakers and get things done.
Having said that, though, this defense attorney, a "self-styled expert on the influence of violent video games on youths", sounds like he's using this case for his own self-righteous publicity.
after all these years, why do people still think it's cool to refer to Microsoft as M$?
<tongue-in-cheek>
Because MS stands for Multiple Sclerosis.
</tongue-in-cheek>
Game Neverending
this is the game that never ends.....
it just goes on and on my friends...
Economically speaking, it's true. Though I will admit I have no hard numbers to give you.
People have a marginal value for driving dangerously, which is balanced by the marginal cost of that action. Where the two meet (marginal cost -vs- marginal value curve), is how people behave (or drive in this case).
In comes a safety feature. That safety feature reduces the marginal cost of driving dangerously. Thus, the driver is able to "afford" more dangerous driving. ie the equilibrium point where marginal value and marginal cost meets has shifted higher towards dangerous driving.
Thus, in economics theory, the driver will drive more dangerously with additional safety features.
The opposite effect, in the original poster's example, of having a spike come out greatly increases the marginal cost. Thus, the "affordable" point shifts far down towards much safer driving.
Of course... this is fundamental microeconomics, and I'm no expert in economics.
Actually, if the AI is done right, it might be an interesting covert/political/puzzle type game.
So true...
And it's amazing these same people aren't more vocal about the war on Iraq the US just underwent. If anything, that more than any video-game teaches that problems are solved by violence.
Now I'm not saying Saddam wasn't a bad guy or that the Iraqi people didn't suffer.
But let's call it for what it is. One month in and no signs of WMD. Problem solved? well, I guess you could say that. But what's the lesson learned? It's okay to solve things by violence.
Just like it was okay for those boys at Columbine to solve their problem of being bullied by using violence.
Mod me off topic:
Sprint is shittier.
They have no real reps to talk to. I had cel service with them, and twice they disconnected my phone because of billing errors. Then, when you try to talk to them, you get their virtual representative. Basically, it's Clippy for your cel phone. i.e. useless. And when you talk to someone real, they charge you money for it.
Uhmm... wait... don't answer that last question. I figured it out on my own.
This is exactly why we need this bill.
Because by your argument, we shouldn't have the DMCA. All those things are better covered by existing laws. But the DMCA exists. We need to be a little more realistic and support laws like this to gain some ground.
Yes, laws Should make sense, but they don't; so we need to play the political game.
They also conveniently don't count back in compensating income designed to offset these "losses", like the RIAA CDR tax. Seeing as how they haven't really paid any of that tax back to the artists, I'm guessing that's quite a deep source of income for the RIAA.
Anyone got numbers for the amount they collect via CDR tax?
Maybe if the nanotubes' conduction/size ratio is good enough, they could be used as heat-pipes within the chip itself.
Intel has always held a very conservative line regarding research into far-out new technologies. The vast majority of Intel's research money goes into fab/mount/production technologies.
For stuff like nano-tubes and quantum computing, Intel usually helps fund academia to let them take the high-risk endeavors. And then take the benefits as they are produced.
I'm not sure what Intel's current plan is now, but it seems that they're putting more R&D dollars into the mobile/ubiquitous computing market, to try and branch out their chip options, instead of being forever racing against Moore's Law.
Intel-research.net, for some info on Intel and partnerships with academia on this type of research.
Yes! I've seen them in some malls where you can pay some amount of cash to get a quick water-jet massage.
There was one here in Metrotown, Burnaby, BC, Canada. I think it was around $10 for 5-10 minutes or something. Can't remember exactly.
But this also raises the question... if you look at exercise machines, a major selling point is how convenient it is to put away and be out-of-sight. A true massaging machine would require some amount of bulk to provide a fair level of pressure. Would people actually want to place such machines in their home, should they become affordable?
Or will people continue to go to "beauty salons" for that kind of stuff?
I'd say that the owner not having control of their own keys is a major technical flaw of "trusted computing".
Before we go too far into the MS bashing, or Other-Big-Like-Evil-Company(TM) bashing for caste mentality division in the workforce, remember that we have a similar problem in the OSS world.
Anti-noob and RTFM mentality is a serious obstacle for the heavily geek-driven projects in the OSS world. Both on the side of new developers and new users. These are important people and a valuable resource for renewing project growth, ideas, and direction.
Just something to think about...
That still doesn't make it right.
The internet is a different medium than business cards. I agree that some effort should have been made to protect that person's identity. Atleast until that person has given permission for the full name and contact to be disclosed.
I know that many people will contend that programming is not as mindless as working at McDonalds. But being a software developer myself (out of work), I must point out the painful truth of what an abundant commodity programmers are.
The bottom line is that no one owns a monopoly on innovation, knowledge, or education. It reminds me of some old StarTrek TNG episode where the 12 year old boy exclaims that he doesn't want to go to calculus class.
As China, India, and other countries catch up with us by heavily investing in education and research, our value as a human resource will only continue to fall. And companies will continue to outsource.
Cry all we want, but that's just the way it is. And without a unified voice to speak for us, we won't get the same tarrif protection the auto-industry gets.
Let's face it, common shoes are no longer made in North America. And in a decades time, common software and software components will no longer be made in North America. Sure there will be some exceptions. But that's the sad truth... exceptions.