It looks like you never went to their website to see how it work.
First, the watch can be locked disallowing easy removal,
Second, If you try to cut the watch, it will initiate an emergency call (even if the kidnapper is on the move, at least you have a direction of were he's going - the location were the child was lost and the location at the time the watch was cut - allowing the cops to reduce the search area)
Third, You can activate the emergency call remotely by calling their call center.
It will reduce harm to a child. The less time pass between a child abduction and his recovery, the less harm the child will suffer.
If the child active the emergency call, he may even get saved without suffering any physical abuse. Sure, the child will have some psychological abuse because of the abduction but it will be a lot better than the physical abuse and it's psychological repercussions.
However, I don't think that the device will be useful for very young children when you need to deactive the emergency buttons. By the time you may start worrying, the child could suffer a lot.
However, the resolution of your (receiver) location will be 1 meter (a little more than 3 feet for the fellow Americans). This is much better than GPS.
I probably won't be prioritizing government traffic on any of my routers.
The government may force you to do it by passing a law.
Even without any law, if the router you own has the feature implemented but you choose to turn it of and someone get hurts (or cannot get help) because emergency traffic is not prioritized by your router, then you will get sued for not giving assistance to someone who needs it.
I've read some comments about taxing software the same way that physical stuff is taxed.
I've also read comments saying that some taxes are base on the perceived value of a good.
I believe that we cannot apply the same rules to software that to physical goods. Why? It's very simple, physical goods requires money to produce (I'm talking about construction and assembly of physical goods, not the creation - as in R&D - of physical goods). However, software don't cost anything to produce (ok, if you produce physical package to distribute your software it does cost something). Because it's only information, you can reproduce it at no cost.
How is value of a good determined. In general, R&D is not a big factor (it is but only when the product is introduced), the cost of producing the good vs demand is the way to fix the value of a product. Because software cost 0 to produce, even if there is strong demand, you can fulfill it at virtually no cost. So how does one one calculate the value of software... You can't (based on current economic principle).
As we transition in a new kind of economy (note that we will, probably, never completly leave the current economy behind), new laws and new economic rules should be created. The current way of trying to apply the same concept to software (and intellectual property for that matter) will never work. At some point, the system will collapse and new rules will be built.
I don't know the timeframe for this, but I'm sure it will be a lot sooner that we think.
Re:Whoa, doesn't the US protect its citizens ?
on
Loki Aftermath Looks Bad
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I aslo came from Quebec. I was working for Sanga just before they stop paying their employee. I've not stayed long being upaid. However they still owe me 6K CAN.
At first we went to the "Office des Normes du Travail" and filled a complain, along the other Montreal employee. They was some legal proceeding going on. Up to the point were the Sanga employee in Ontario decided to file a class action suit. The "Office des normes du travail" decided to give control to the lawfirm that was suing for the ON employee.
I received many legal document telling me that thing were going well. Up to the point were the company filled for bankrupcy. At that point, the lawfirm (can't remember which one) decided it was not worth the trouble and drop the charges.
So did the Quebec laws protected me... Not at all, it just gave me the illusion of being protected for some time. Sure I can decide to sue, but it will cost me a lot more that what they owe me.
The point is that the law may be protecting you, but if the system fail to help you being protected, there is not point in having these laws.
I beleive this kind of technology is good mostly for teleconference. When one make a presentation and draw on top of it, it's nice to have this sent to the other site.
Better, if it can record not only the result, but the actual act of drawing, the presentation can be played back just like the speaker presented the stuff.
If the only use you have is to digitalise a board, 1.3M Pixel digital camera (turn off the flash) will give you more than you ask for... No need for special casing for your pencils and eraser, very portable, can be used on any "legacy" board, can be used after you started drawing (unlike most cheap digital board were you need to start drawing with the special pencils casing, you cannot digitalize something that was started with legacy tools).
I just can't believe the crap from these people. They may have no laws preventing you from anything. But they do requires connections to the outside world.
If enough people gets annoyed by them because they start having to much illegal (from the outsider perspective) activities going thru their node, somebody will successfully pressure their connection provider in raising the cost of the connection or severing it.
They have a short term business case, but in the long run, they will have to abide by somebody else rules.
Oups... It was my mistake. What I wanted to say is that the competing apps (Kazaa & Grokster) included spyware. I never intended to mean that Morpheus included spyware.
They showed to thr RIAA that they control the network in some way (they can shut it down and manipulate some registry settings) (even if they may not be able to control content right now).
They tried to make people switch from a competitor software which was more popular in a very aggresive way. (I for one downloaded Kaaza after the shutdown... However I'm back on Morpheus now). People will not like this.
Now if Morpheus is able to reclaim it' users (it should be easy because they do include spyware), the FastTrack network will be amputated millions of users.
It's good for Morpheus... If they survive a lost (if they loose)against the RIAA, their network is now completely decentralized (thank' to gnutella). Which is a good thing against further lawsuit. However, in the same event, Kaaza and Grokster will loose their network and will have to build a new one on another protocol.
It's a win-win for Gnutella... Whatever the outcome of the lawsuit... Many more millions of users on the network.
Stop freaking about this. Whatever copy protection is put into hardware and/or software, it will be broken.
It will never be cost effective to put really strong protection measure in hardware. They will have to compromise at some point. This will make the scheme weaker.
And for digital media, who cares... As long a we can copy via an analog link, event if we loose a bit of quality (which current compression method, for audio and video, do anyway) the copied content can still be distrubuted in a digital form without any other generation loss. It may make the process a little bit more difficult, but not enough to prevent large scale infrigment.
On the software side, the data will be in an unprotected state somewhere along the pipe. So with some hacking, it will be possible to make perfect copy.
To make copy protection scheme hard to defeat would requires the protected content to be moved in a protected fashion from the persistent support (hard disk or whatever) to the display device. I doubt that all the industry players that need to be involved will be able to agree on a common scheme.
What amaze me with this kind of PR is that they always use large number to impress people.
The fact that the linear speed difference between the two satellites (from previous post, I assume that the 7000m/s is the speed difference between the two satellites) is not very important. What is important is the angular speed.
It is a lot easier to target an object moving at 100Km/h at a distance of 100 meters than to target the same object at a distance of 10 meters.
why waste all those NSA CPU cycles tryin gto crack it - just grab teh passphrase
That's the way to go...
All cryptography expert will tell you that the best way to break encryption is by attacking the protocol. What most people forget, is that entering a secret (the passphrase in this case) is part of the protocol. It is so much easier to attack this part of the protocol than to attack other parts.
However I did not know that an agent was allowed to modify the scene when doing a search warrant. I always (maybe wrongly) though that search warrant were done to gather information based on what's present. Not to allow an agent to add spoofing devices without your knowledge.
Slashdot Mirror
However, nothing is said about reading the content of the disk in a PC or a Mac.
I know it's just a word game. But that's what lawyer do!
They got it in the 60's.
Why does a lot of people think this device can allow a parent to track their children as they which!
Go and read their website!
You HAVE TO CALL THE CALL CENTER to initiate an emergency call. The device WILL NOT BROADCAST the child location ALL THE TIME!
It looks like you never went to their website to see how it work.
First, the watch can be locked disallowing easy removal,
Second, If you try to cut the watch, it will initiate an emergency call (even if the kidnapper is on the move, at least you have a direction of were he's going - the location were the child was lost and the location at the time the watch was cut - allowing the cops to reduce the search area)
Third, You can activate the emergency call remotely by calling their call center.
It will reduce harm to a child. The less time pass between a child abduction and his recovery, the less harm the child will suffer.
If the child active the emergency call, he may even get saved without suffering any physical abuse. Sure, the child will have some psychological abuse because of the abduction but it will be a lot better than the physical abuse and it's psychological repercussions.
However, I don't think that the device will be useful for very young children when you need to deactive the emergency buttons. By the time you may start worrying, the child could suffer a lot.
It should be operational in 2008.
It may be a long time to wait.
However, the resolution of your (receiver) location will be 1 meter (a little more than 3 feet for the fellow Americans). This is much better than GPS.
I probably won't be prioritizing government traffic on any of my routers.
The government may force you to do it by passing a law.
Even without any law, if the router you own has the feature implemented but you choose to turn it of and someone get hurts (or cannot get help) because emergency traffic is not prioritized by your router, then you will get sued for not giving assistance to someone who needs it.
I've read some comments about taxing software the same way that physical stuff is taxed.
I've also read comments saying that some taxes are base on the perceived value of a good.
I believe that we cannot apply the same rules to software that to physical goods. Why? It's very simple, physical goods requires money to produce (I'm talking about construction and assembly of physical goods, not the creation - as in R&D - of physical goods). However, software don't cost anything to produce (ok, if you produce physical package to distribute your software it does cost something). Because it's only information, you can reproduce it at no cost.
How is value of a good determined. In general, R&D is not a big factor (it is but only when the product is introduced), the cost of producing the good vs demand is the way to fix the value of a product. Because software cost 0 to produce, even if there is strong demand, you can fulfill it at virtually no cost. So how does one one calculate the value of software... You can't (based on current economic principle).
As we transition in a new kind of economy (note that we will, probably, never completly leave the current economy behind), new laws and new economic rules should be created. The current way of trying to apply the same concept to software (and intellectual property for that matter) will never work. At some point, the system will collapse and new rules will be built.
I don't know the timeframe for this, but I'm sure it will be a lot sooner that we think.
I aslo came from Quebec. I was working for Sanga just before they stop paying their employee. I've not stayed long being upaid. However they still owe me 6K CAN.
At first we went to the "Office des Normes du Travail" and filled a complain, along the other Montreal employee. They was some legal proceeding going on. Up to the point were the Sanga employee in Ontario decided to file a class action suit. The "Office des normes du travail" decided to give control to the lawfirm that was suing for the ON employee.
I received many legal document telling me that thing were going well. Up to the point were the company filled for bankrupcy. At that point, the lawfirm (can't remember which one) decided it was not worth the trouble and drop the charges.
So did the Quebec laws protected me... Not at all, it just gave me the illusion of being protected for some time. Sure I can decide to sue, but it will cost me a lot more that what they owe me.
The point is that the law may be protecting you, but if the system fail to help you being protected, there is not point in having these laws.
I beleive this kind of technology is good mostly for teleconference. When one make a presentation and draw on top of it, it's nice to have this sent to the other site.
Better, if it can record not only the result, but the actual act of drawing, the presentation can be played back just like the speaker presented the stuff.
If the only use you have is to digitalise a board, 1.3M Pixel digital camera (turn off the flash) will give you more than you ask for... No need for special casing for your pencils and eraser, very portable, can be used on any "legacy" board, can be used after you started drawing (unlike most cheap digital board were you need to start drawing with the special pencils casing, you cannot digitalize something that was started with legacy tools).
I just can't believe the crap from these people. They may have no laws preventing you from anything. But they do requires connections to the outside world.
If enough people gets annoyed by them because they start having to much illegal (from the outsider perspective) activities going thru their node, somebody will successfully pressure their connection provider in raising the cost of the connection or severing it.
They have a short term business case, but in the long run, they will have to abide by somebody else rules.
Oups... It was my mistake. What I wanted to say is that the competing apps (Kazaa & Grokster) included spyware. I never intended to mean that Morpheus included spyware.
Shame on me for not proofing what I wrote.
I believe Kaaza shot themself in the foot.
They showed to thr RIAA that they control the network in some way (they can shut it down and manipulate some registry settings) (even if they may not be able to control content right now).
They tried to make people switch from a competitor software which was more popular in a very aggresive way. (I for one downloaded Kaaza after the shutdown... However I'm back on Morpheus now). People will not like this.
Now if Morpheus is able to reclaim it' users (it should be easy because they do include spyware), the FastTrack network will be amputated millions of users.
It's good for Morpheus... If they survive a lost (if they loose)against the RIAA, their network is now completely decentralized (thank' to gnutella). Which is a good thing against further lawsuit. However, in the same event, Kaaza and Grokster will loose their network and will have to build a new one on another protocol.
It's a win-win for Gnutella... Whatever the outcome of the lawsuit... Many more millions of users on the network.
Stop freaking about this. Whatever copy protection is put into hardware and/or software, it will be broken.
It will never be cost effective to put really strong protection measure in hardware. They will have to compromise at some point. This will make the scheme weaker.
And for digital media, who cares... As long a we can copy via an analog link, event if we loose a bit of quality (which current compression method, for audio and video, do anyway) the copied content can still be distrubuted in a digital form without any other generation loss. It may make the process a little bit more difficult, but not enough to prevent large scale infrigment.
On the software side, the data will be in an unprotected state somewhere along the pipe. So with some hacking, it will be possible to make perfect copy.
To make copy protection scheme hard to defeat would requires the protected content to be moved in a protected fashion from the persistent support (hard disk or whatever) to the display device. I doubt that all the industry players that need to be involved will be able to agree on a common scheme.
A small RC blimp would be far more appropriate. No need to spend energy just to stay up. Also when it's not moving, it can go to standby mode.
The only problem I see is air conditioning vent. This could make it's live a little bit harder in some part of the office.
Put a red, purple, green and yellow humanoid on field in the wallpaper, now put a nice XawTV windows on top of each humanoid tummy.
What do you get?
and if you buy it, Micro$oft is the winner!
What amaze me with this kind of PR is that they always use large number to impress people.
The fact that the linear speed difference between the two satellites (from previous post, I assume that the 7000m/s is the speed difference between the two satellites) is not very important. What is important is the angular speed.
It is a lot easier to target an object moving at 100Km/h at a distance of 100 meters than to target the same object at a distance of 10 meters.
It's true that the probability is very.
However events don't look at statistics before happening.
So two events with very probability may arrive within a short time frame.
What strikes me with this project, is that the thing still has to go to 55Mph to take off.
Most bird take off instantly with just flapping.
Note that the uncomfortable feeling for the pilot on their last test would have been eliminated with instant take off.
I will not consider the thing a succes as long as instant take off is implemented (or at least take off will running instead of rolling).
1) a second monitor (LCD is the way to go) so you can display documents on that monitor while doing other stuff on the other monitor,
2) a shredder, so you can shred all the documents you have on you desktop.
Now the actual configuration of your cubicule can probably handle the zoo.
You forgot the ones for those who can't think... VisualBasic!
In fact, the human body was not designed at all! It was evolved!
That's the way to go...
All cryptography expert will tell you that the best way to break encryption is by attacking the protocol. What most people forget, is that entering a secret (the passphrase in this case) is part of the protocol. It is so much easier to attack this part of the protocol than to attack other parts.
However I did not know that an agent was allowed to modify the scene when doing a search warrant. I always (maybe wrongly) though that search warrant were done to gather information based on what's present. Not to allow an agent to add spoofing devices without your knowledge.
That's true... And when the fuel gauge is very low, you can tap on it to make sure that it's working