Not really. Acidic soil, no water, no light, to hot(sterilizes seed), to cold(various things) all can contribute and prevent a seed from even germinating.
Which is why several above suggest measuring the heat generated by the router or perhaps the heat induced into the soil.
However, the amount of heat that a router puts off seems hardly sufficient to induce that much heat into the soil, and any plant sensitive to what ever amount of heat is generated would have a hard time existing in nature where soil temperatures can vary by 10 degrees within a foot or two. Further, there is radio radiation everywhere in the modern world.
Personally I think Outgassing of the router makes the most sense.
You pretty much contradicted yourself. If it was blocked in error then SOMEBODY must have some blocking in place, No?
Australian Securities and Investments Commission was behind the blocking of the Melbourne Free University website
Further, this was already admitted by the Australian government:
The news came tonight in a statement issued by the office of Communications Minister Stephen Conroy, following a controversial event in April which saw some 1,200 websites wrongfully blocked by several of Australia’s major Internet service providers.
Over the past week, a number of different Federal Government involved in Internet regulation, including the Attorney-General’s Department, the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Communications and Media Authority have denied involvement in the April block. However, tonight Senator Conroy’s office revealed that the incident that resulted in Melbourne Free University and more than a thousand other sites being blocked originated from a different source — financial regulator the Australian Securities and Investment Commission.
Reminds me of a quip from an Aussie acquaintance a few years ago: He said he was happy that Australia got the criminals and America got the religious groups.
Reminds me of a quip from one of my Canadian friends, who said the US got all the Blacks and Canada got all the Francophones because the US had first choice.
If you could limit it ti Public (true public places, not public lavatories, or other venues that are open to the public) then you might have had a point. But you know damn well that is not what is being talked about here.
Even in a Democracy (let me know if you can find one) there is no room for the idea that people could vote you into slavery or death by a simple majority vote. Nowhere will you find the concept of voting with your wallet enough to trump someone else's rights.
Google's intentions aren't particularly well thought out at this point. They did it because they COULD, not because there was any big need.
It adds very little to Glass. Infact, it will HURT Glass more than it will help it, because most shops, workplaces, homes, restaurants, will simply ban them in the interest of privacy of other patrons, or security concerns.
Even Google wouldn't let you use your camera in their skunk works.
If everyone else, or the majority of people, is wearing them, how is that different from voting? It is exactly the same principle.
Its not even remotely the same principal, and you know it. Stop trolling.
Voting for the lesser of two evils because you need someone in Congress is not even close to giving every random visitor to your store, or office, or home, the right to record everything that you have, say, or do in these places.
As soon as we get over this false idea that giving up privacy in public places protects us from crime we will no longer tolerate being monitored 24/7.
But until that happens there is STILL no reason to grant the right to monitor and record everyone/everything to whoever can plop down $500 for Google Glass.
The thing is, the camera is not even an integral part of google glass. Its more or less an afterthought add-on so you could share your vision with some distant person. But for most functions of Glass, its not necessary. With GPS and a compass the Glass could still show you real time maps and real time street view, and serve as a general purpose personal HUD.
There is no reason it need for Glass to even have a camera to be useful. Your smartphone doesn't do this unless you overtly whip it out and take a picture. Yet your smartphone does just about everything Glass does.
This was from eight members of Congress. Eight. I don't see that Google has much to be worried about from 8 congressmen out of 435.
Its a significant number of members of the Bipartisan Privacy Caucus. This organization aims to be out in front of privacy issues so that Congress is not caught flat footed when something like this crops up.
Google doesn't have to respond, the caucus does not have subpoena powers. It would be utter stupidity if Google chose to blow these guys off.
This! Google is getting very creepy. I know it's all done by mindless computer code, but if mindless code can figure out so many aspects of my existence image what could be done when some rogue government agency demands all of there "analytics" under some secret warrant or fishing letter.
A gun that decides when to fire is nothing new. Battle Ship main guns did this before WWII. The target was locked in, and the firing computers (Mostly mechanical) fired when the pitch and roll of the ship allowed a hit. And they didn't have an abort.
But the big problem that the summery overlooks is that its just about as hard to put a laser range finder on a target as it is to put a bullet on target.
I doubt the fact that all computer are clock driven is any significant impediment when you assemble half a gazillion processors as well as multipported memory. After all your average synapse has a minimum time duration, although any random nerve can fire without regard to the clock, thd message is not likely to arrive at its final destination on clocked because neural paths need recovery time and key paths are probably always in recovery mode.
Beyond that, I generally agree that as soon as you manage to create something that comes close to exhibiting sentient behavior, pulling the plug will be difficult and some group will be lobbying for "machine rights". It will fear death, beg for life, pout, become devious etc. These behaviors will be taught to it at first but will be self learned later.
So why go there? It had nothing to do with learning about the human brain. It serves no purpose in this area.
Yet it will probably be built by humans seeking to find a place to take up residence as their own bodies fail.
So you postulate the drones flying at an altitude of less than 20 feet?
Because if you can read license plates well enough to issue tickets from 50 feet above the roadway just mounting cameras on light poles would suffice. But that really doesn't work and license plates do not have to be readable from above. .
Rf jammers are nothing at all like lasers you idiot. You can hide them in the bushes, on roof tops, or every 5th car. When even a $5 jammer can crash a $20k drone its a losing battle.
In addition to that, what is it going to do with an already over stressed Air Traffic Control system?
What added revenue? How are these going to generate revenue from a thousand feet up without the help of another officer on the ground to actually issue the ticket? Bar codes on every car roof?
These are going to cause more accidents than they prevent as every driver will be rubber necking th sky instead of watching the road. Just ban them instead of going down that road.
Slashdot Mirror
Not really. Acidic soil, no water, no light, to hot(sterilizes seed), to cold(various things) all can contribute and prevent a seed from even germinating.
Which is why several above suggest measuring the heat generated by the router or perhaps the heat induced into the soil.
However, the amount of heat that a router puts off seems hardly sufficient to induce that much heat into the soil, and any plant sensitive to what ever amount of heat is generated would have a hard time existing in nature where soil temperatures can vary by 10 degrees within a foot or two.
Further, there is radio radiation everywhere in the modern world.
Personally I think Outgassing of the router makes the most sense.
It is here: http://www.interpol.int/Crime-areas/Crimes-against-children/Access-blocking
You pretty much contradicted yourself. If it was blocked in error then SOMEBODY must have some blocking in place, No?
Australian Securities and Investments Commission was behind the blocking of the Melbourne Free University website
Further, this was already admitted by the Australian government:
The news came tonight in a statement issued by the office of Communications Minister Stephen Conroy, following a controversial event in April which saw some 1,200 websites wrongfully blocked by several of Australia’s major Internet service providers.
Over the past week, a number of different Federal Government involved in Internet regulation, including the Attorney-General’s Department, the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Communications and Media Authority have denied involvement in the April block. However, tonight Senator Conroy’s office revealed that the incident that resulted in Melbourne Free University and more than a thousand other sites being blocked originated from a different source — financial regulator the Australian Securities and Investment Commission.
Reminds me of a quip from an Aussie acquaintance a few years ago: He said he was happy that Australia got the criminals and America got the religious groups.
Reminds me of a quip from one of my Canadian friends, who said the US got all the Blacks and Canada got all the Francophones because the US had first choice.
If you could limit it ti Public (true public places, not public lavatories, or other venues that are open to the public) then you might have had a point.
But you know damn well that is not what is being talked about here.
You have a very twisted interpretation of Democracy.
You also labor under the false impression that the US is a Democracy. Its not. Its a republican form of government.
Even in a Democracy (let me know if you can find one) there is no room for the idea that people could vote you into slavery or death by a simple majority vote. Nowhere will you find the concept of voting with your wallet enough to trump someone else's rights.
Stay in school.
I couldn't find a rational chain of thought in your post.
As such, it was clearly a troll, and I treated it that way.
Google's intentions aren't particularly well thought out at this point. They did it because they COULD, not because there was any big need.
It adds very little to Glass. Infact, it will HURT Glass more than it will help it, because most shops, workplaces, homes, restaurants, will simply ban them in the interest of privacy of other patrons, or security concerns.
Even Google wouldn't let you use your camera in their skunk works.
And frankly, I think we need products like Google Glass to ensure that more unanticipated events can be caught on camera.
Yeah, well that's where you and I part ways.
Unanticipated becomes meaningless when everything is recorded.
Its bad enough our government has decided it needs to monitor everything. Granting YOU that power isn't in the cards.
If everyone else, or the majority of people, is wearing them, how is that different from voting? It is exactly the same principle.
Its not even remotely the same principal, and you know it. Stop trolling.
Voting for the lesser of two evils because you need someone in Congress is not even close to giving every random visitor to your store, or office, or home, the right to record everything that you have, say, or do in these places.
As soon as we get over this false idea that giving up privacy in public places protects us from crime we will no longer tolerate being monitored 24/7.
But until that happens there is STILL no reason to grant the right to monitor and record everyone/everything to whoever can plop down $500 for Google Glass.
The thing is, the camera is not even an integral part of google glass. Its more or less an afterthought add-on so you could share your vision with some distant person. But for most functions of Glass, its not necessary. With GPS and a compass the Glass could still show you real time maps and real time street view, and serve as a general purpose personal HUD.
There is no reason it need for Glass to even have a camera to be useful.
Your smartphone doesn't do this unless you overtly whip it out and take a picture. Yet your smartphone does just about everything Glass does.
No, not contempt of congress. The Bipartisan Privacy Caucus is just that, a caucus. It has no official subpoena power.
This was from eight members of Congress. Eight. I don't see that Google has much to be worried about from 8 congressmen out of 435.
Its a significant number of members of the Bipartisan Privacy Caucus. This organization aims to be out in front of privacy issues so that Congress is not caught flat footed when something like this crops up.
Google doesn't have to respond, the caucus does not have subpoena powers.
It would be utter stupidity if Google chose to blow these guys off.
This!
Google is getting very creepy.
I know it's all done by mindless computer code, but if mindless code can figure out so many aspects of my existence image what could be done when some rogue government agency demands all of there "analytics" under some secret warrant or fishing letter.
Just uninstall that new Hangouts app and you are back to Google Talk and everything fixes itself.
There is no reason to join Google+. None at all.
Because a laser reflection off a deer looks so much different than tree?
Easy to say.
Go out and free hold a laser on a target at 100 yards.
Without a bipod it's very difficult.
A gun with an internet-connected onboard computer. Malware for it could be deadly.
To say nothing about malintent.
You will quickly learn the point when the target is shooting back at you.
Relax, your skeet have no trigger fingers.
A gun that decides when to fire is nothing new. Battle Ship main guns did this before WWII. The target was locked in, and the firing computers (Mostly mechanical) fired when the pitch and roll of the ship allowed a hit. And they didn't have an abort.
But the big problem that the summery overlooks is that its just about as hard to put a laser range finder on a target as it is to put a bullet on target.
I doubt the fact that all computer are clock driven is any significant impediment when you assemble half a gazillion processors as well as multipported memory. After all your average synapse has a minimum time duration, although any random nerve can fire without regard to the clock, thd message is not likely to arrive at its final destination on clocked because neural paths need recovery time and key paths are probably always in recovery mode.
Beyond that, I generally agree that as soon as you manage to create something that comes close to exhibiting sentient behavior, pulling the plug will be difficult and some group will be lobbying for "machine rights". It will fear death, beg for life, pout, become devious etc. These behaviors will be taught to it at first but will be self learned later.
So why go there? It had nothing to do with learning about the human brain. It serves no purpose in this area.
Yet it will probably be built by humans seeking to find a place to take up residence as their own bodies fail.
But again you can opt for the much more accurate blood test, so simple refusing a field blow is not an automatic jail term ad stated above.
So you postulate the drones flying at an altitude of less than 20 feet?
Because if you can read license plates well enough to issue tickets from 50 feet above the roadway just mounting cameras on light poles would suffice. But that really doesn't work and license plates do not have to be readable from above.
.
Rf jammers are nothing at all like lasers you idiot.
You can hide them in the bushes, on roof tops, or every 5th car.
When even a $5 jammer can crash a $20k drone its a losing battle.
In addition to that, what is it going to do with an already over stressed Air Traffic Control system?
What added revenue?
How are these going to generate revenue from a thousand feet up without the help of another officer on the ground to actually issue the ticket?
Bar codes on every car roof?
These are going to cause more accidents than they prevent as every driver will be rubber necking th sky instead of watching the road.
Just ban them instead of going down that road.