Unfortunately, it'll require that the government be more disciplined, and the citizens will have to ditch the attitude that the gov't is out to get them.
Two things that will happen shortly after hell freezes over.
Seriously, I expect my elected officials to abuse any and all surveillance methods available to them. They do so already (ie echelon, et al.), why is this any different?
If one is worried about losing the kite and camera, then clever use of a weak link could help. Strong kite string would lead to the camera and weaker string would bind the camera to the kite. Excessive force from the wind would severe the link between the kite and camera, not the camera and owner. A parachute tied to a light tertiary line (a rip cord) would yank the camera's parachute when the kite breaks away. (An even better design would design a failure mode into the kite itself so that the kite loses its aerodynamic shape if the wind load becomes too high).
Although there is still a chance of the camera being caught in a kite-eating tree, wind gusts and line breaks need not lead to loss of the camera.
Or:
Me to boss: "Is it Ok for me to take the work camera for the weekend? I've got a 'conference' that I'm attending"
Later at the stationery cupboard: "Hmmm, this 50 metre box of bubble wrap should come in handy"
The idea for solving "Information Pollution" is interesting, but what of the quality of the information that is delivered? In this day and age when you can find web sites devoted to "Proof we never made it to the moon" and hard facts are often replaced with "that sounds about right" isn't the real pollution the content we supposedly want - and not the advertisers?
Find me a system to easily and quickly verify the "facts" with something I can trust.
I find this whole concept fascinating. So much of the information available today is either obviously false, or more interestingly, deliberatly false.
Still, I guess it's just the new mind control.
The idea of peer approved/trusted "truth" is fascinating because it's so seductive. Don't think or question, we'll tell you what's the truth.
See the movie Six Degrees of Separation and discover for yourself that Will Smith is an incredibly talented actor. He just usually uses his talent to make very mainstream movies.
I think that there are two reasons for this:
When people are young and beautiful, they are rarely offered the meaty roles.
Case in point: Brad Pitt, he spends the majority of his time fighting his pretty boy image in some quite strange roles, but he still has time for mindless crap a la Ocean's Eleven which pays the bills.
If someone offered you 100 million to star in 'scary movie' or $5 plus meals to star in shakespeare, which would you pick?
3 - How many people have insurance of some sort, and have never needed it (I am).
Working in an insurance company, I can tell you it's nothing compared to the ratio of people who claim for insurance and haven't read the policy wording. Tip people: look for the words "We will not pay for..."
Is it just me or is putting information about chemical/biological/nuclear weaponry in prominent places on the internet not just asking for trouble? I know I know, obscurity is no security, but it beats the hell out of this kind of stuff.
I know how you feel, this whole "freedom of speech" thing is just wrong! I firmly believe that the government has our best interests at heart, and would only conceil information that could be used by evil people (probably terrorists). I feel so much safer knowing that upstanding people like George Bush are in office.
I don't know how many times I've said this, but I served eight years in Federal prison and the incidence of rape is much lower than the news media (including/.) would have you believe (at least if you're over forty and not terribly attractive...heh, heh).
Are you sure? I mean, did you take a poll or something?
Wouldn't the obvious question be: "Why are people happy to break the law to download music illegally rather than pay for it?".
Nothing is going to make P2P music transfers legal, but considering that you can walk into any music store and buy blank CDs I think that this has been totally accepted by society at large as OK behaviour. The only people who don't seem to be happy about it are the RIAA and it's regional equivalents.
No amount of legal action and scare campaigns is going to change a behaviour that is thought of as OK. What's worse, downloading the CD or shoplifting it from the store?
In days of yore, musicians made money by putting on shows, performing at the shows, etc.
Now we get Christina Aguilera dressed like a cheap street whore working her poochie on MTV on tape loop - ever get the feeling that the human race is regressing.
When my car is stolen, when my house is broken into the police says "sorry, no resources" to catch them...
Should taxpayers really pay police, FBI, etc. for playing collection agent for the RIA?
Ha! You only voted to get your preferred political candidate into office. They paid. Guess who gets the silver service.
Slashdot Mirror
When Natalie Portman of the hot grits party is elected.
If one is petrified, how does one take anything other than what is given?
Nurse, pass me my gloves and lubricant, and that huge turnip shaped mandrake root ...
Two things that will happen shortly after hell freezes over.
Seriously, I expect my elected officials to abuse any and all surveillance methods available to them. They do so already (ie echelon, et al.), why is this any different?
Are you kidding? That Paris Hilton sex tape was shit!
Although there is still a chance of the camera being caught in a kite-eating tree, wind gusts and line breaks need not lead to loss of the camera.
Or:
Me to boss: "Is it Ok for me to take the work camera for the weekend? I've got a 'conference' that I'm attending"
Later at the stationery cupboard: "Hmmm, this 50 metre box of bubble wrap should come in handy"
Find me a system to easily and quickly verify the "facts" with something I can trust.
I find this whole concept fascinating. So much of the information available today is either obviously false, or more interestingly, deliberatly false.
Still, I guess it's just the new mind control.
The idea of peer approved/trusted "truth" is fascinating because it's so seductive. Don't think or question, we'll tell you what's the truth.
I'm not even sure that truth exists.
No, this is Slashdot. Nobody reads anything.
I get those sort of orders occasionally (ie. on one hand "we must tighten our belts" on the other "could you just throw away everything here")
The largest thing I ever got rid of was a 5 metre section of the building's air conditioning system (hope they didn't want it).
I think that there are two reasons for this:
Case in point: Brad Pitt, he spends the majority of his time fighting his pretty boy image in some quite strange roles, but he still has time for mindless crap a la Ocean's Eleven which pays the bills.
Just bite the pillow, it'll help you focus.
One man's defect is another man's feature - just look at that damn paper clip.
Working in an insurance company, I can tell you it's nothing compared to the ratio of people who claim for insurance and haven't read the policy wording. Tip people: look for the words "We will not pay for ..."
Just chant "USA, USA, USA" and feel the IQ drop.
I know how you feel, this whole "freedom of speech" thing is just wrong! I firmly believe that the government has our best interests at heart, and would only conceil information that could be used by evil people (probably terrorists). I feel so much safer knowing that upstanding people like George Bush are in office.
Since when did this become a problem for them?
It's nice to see that the decision is being made on a solely technical basis, lord knows we wouldn't want this to turn into a political shitfight.
Are you sure? I mean, did you take a poll or something?
Burn him!
Are you kidding? I'm both.
Give the gift of love, and people think you're cheap. Give them a cheap bit of crap, and they love you for it. Go figure.
Wouldn't the obvious question be: "Why are people happy to break the law to download music illegally rather than pay for it?".
Nothing is going to make P2P music transfers legal, but considering that you can walk into any music store and buy blank CDs I think that this has been totally accepted by society at large as OK behaviour. The only people who don't seem to be happy about it are the RIAA and it's regional equivalents.
No amount of legal action and scare campaigns is going to change a behaviour that is thought of as OK. What's worse, downloading the CD or shoplifting it from the store?
Now we get Christina Aguilera dressed like a cheap street whore working her poochie on MTV on tape loop - ever get the feeling that the human race is regressing.
Ha! You only voted to get your preferred political candidate into office. They paid. Guess who gets the silver service.
DRM here to stay? I think the whole of Asia will have something to say about that.
I thought I was ... but I guess some people need the dots connected for them.