Actually, China has been feeding NK for 10s years. It dropped somewhat in 2008 due to shortages in China, (in fact China has started importing grain from Kazakhstan in 2010). Russia, on the other hand has stepped up their humanitarian aid to NK in recent years.
NK provides the crazy uncle that China needs to cover some of the things it does in regard to Tibet, Taiwan, and Iran. China is not going to get on board with any program of regime change in NK.
We sat to the side for decades upon decades until the people of Libya gave us the choice of allowing them to be slaughtered or giving minimal aid that allows for self-governance? I think he got a pretty good deal out of it, really.
And you sound like EXACTLY the type of person that would have bitched loudly had we not "sat to the side" for decades.
We got nothing out of this except a dumping ground for excess grain inventory that might not depress market prices by being resold. That's fine, bill it as humanitarian aid, and call it done. But trying to suggest we got a nuclear deal out of the bargain is simply unbelievable.
If anything this signals that China is getting fed up with feeding NK.
You don't generally use sudo when installing printers under Linux. You either use the web frontend for CUPS, in which case you're prompted for a password (either root or a user in a printer admin group), or more likely some application in the DE, in which case it's up to the PolKit configuration or whatever arcane nonsense they use these days. And yes, the default policy should be to allow users to add printers.
This is true, but out of the box, there is no printer-admin group in OpenSuse, and no users are added to it by default. You have to remember to do that, as well as 3 or 5 similar group-membership things in order to make a machine "user maintainable" for normal operations. Things like video, wifi, cdrom, all need permissions or are managed by membership in groups that you have to remember to check.
Left unsaid is how old Linus's kid is. Given the parentage, I'm surprised the kid doesn't already have root, not only on the laptop but the school's network server as well.
I'm more than a little Tired of reading about all these triumphant negotiation sessions over the years where NK promises to be a good boy just long enough to get the trade concessions, only to violate the agreement shortly there after. This is like the third or forth president in a row that has been duped by these tactics. As each agreement falls apart, there are the usual dire warnings about "grave consequences". These are the code words by which the US State Department looks tough, but signals the other side that the only "grave" involved is the one in which the whole issue will be buried as soon as the grandstanding is over with.
Son of Whack-Job, and Grandson of Whack-a-Doodle has absolutely no incentive to honor this agreement any more than his predecessors did the prior ones. However, a certain government leader needs a feather in his re-election hat. So we get another useless agreement with a perpetual liar state.
The article is very light on specifics of where this data was obtained, other than pointing at Comscore.
I suspect the original source was this ComScore blog article. Even that article is very light on methodology.
Quoting:
While Google Plus nearly matches Tumblr from an audience standpoint in the U.S., it does not yet attract similar levels of user engagement on its primary web pages. Importantly, these figures account for activity on plus.google.com and [but] do not include engagement with the Google Plus toolbar or other distributed content throughout the Google network of sites.
Right there seems to be an admission that ComScore isn't able to measure the total engagement, because they can't see it, and nobody needs to access plus.google.com once they are signed up. All the links you need appear on pages protected by https.
The very nature of Google+, with its circles of friends may work against any outsiders having any real access to the amount of time spent there by the average user. and, google's use of https makes this harder still.
These guys are shooting in the dark.
Still, I tend to agree, I only know of a few bloggers who think its cool to hang the little G+ symbol behind their names.
Sounds to me like data mining and meta analysis, which is all the rage today.
This study followed their subjects for an average of ONLY 2.5years. They clearly didn't follow them prior to the prescriptions. Further the "controls" were selected based on superficial categories (age, gender, smoking, body mass index, ethnicity, marital status, alcohol use and prior cancer). Nowhere near a complete list of things that keep people awake at night.
And the causation argument still is the key here, since these drugs (several common hypnotics, including zolpidem, temazepam, eszopiclone, zaleplon, other benzodiazepines, barbiturates and sedative antihistamines) are not usually prescribed for people who have no problem sleeping.
Selection of controls was really the weak point here.
If you are under enough stress, or have some other problem keeping you awake, its as likely those issues are to blame as the use of these drugs. The headlines could just as well have been "Trouble Sleeping may be Killing you".
While I agree that its all bunk, I would be interested in knowing if the two files where bit for bit the same or just sound the same to the listener?
The summary above is sort of confusing. You have to RTFA
Quote TFA
The British mastering engineer Ian Shepherd goes deeper in his analysis of Mastered for iTunes by using a music engineering tool called a null test. Shepherd explains this procedure as a method of reversing the phase of a song’s waveform so that after a song’s waveforms and volumes are matched in software a mixing engineer can play them back to see if the song’s out of phase waveform cancels or nulls out the normal version of the song.
After his comparison of the three digital music files, Shepherd says there was a sonic difference between the Mastered for iTunes waveform and the CD waveform. He says the Mastered for iTunes and AAC-encoded files didn’t reveal any differences,
So the the answer is that there is no reason to believe the files were bit-for-bit the same (that would be impossible in any encoding), and they didn't necessarily sound the same either. He had to use digital methods to discover the differences.
And he was comparing the standard AAC against the CD and the Mastered for Itunes against the CD, and the standard AAC against the MFI encoding.
And in both cases there were differences between the AAC versions and the CD, but none between the two encoded versions.
He did not say he could hear the differences without technical means. Usually if the engineer has to go to these lengths to discern any differences it means he couldn't tell them by ear alone.
And if he can't tell by ear alone, then A) it doesn't matter, or B) he has geezer ears. "Mastering Engineer" status is a short lived career. By the time you get there, your ears are no longer qualified for the work. Technical means to the rescue.
But the single dock only applies to Apple. Nobody else uses it.
With Android now some 47% of the market its time to start using a more standardized approach to this than relying on a single proprietary dock.
It might be HDMI, or Bluetooth, USB, or something else. But it should be an industry standard. Ideally, I shouldn't have to take my phone out of my pocket when I get in the car, I should have phone, maps, and music all linked to the car automatically via something like Bluetooth 3.0 or something.
Cars aren't the only thing that people will want to link to their phones. Houses and offices could use such an interface. Cables and docking are so yesterday.
This is why the car should support *integration* with phones and not *duplicate* phones functionality. Connectivity should be in the most future-proof possible way. This could be mic and headphone jack, USB (for charging), & Bluetooth.
Let the phone do the hard work and provide a means of integrating the phone.
You might need to modularise the interface so it can be swapped out every few years as the 'standard' phone interfaces change.
Excellent advice.
And the same for Navigation systems. Factory Nav is always way over priced, hard to update, and obsolete by the time it rolls out the factory door.
There needs to be (probably already is) an interface design spec where you simply plug in the device you want from Tom Tom, Garmin, or Magellan and it puts the devices display on the car's touch screen.
But why would the auto makers do this when they can continue to charge you 2000 dollars for a nav system that cost them $150?
and it is good to hear it is dead, but on the other hand, the man pulling the strings will most likely be pushing for something else.
Or maybe not.
As in Football, the best Defense is a good Offense.
With the second bill introduced to MANDATE public access, Elsevier is now on their heels, trying to defend their turf, and may not have the clout to fight both fronts. They are pretty much going to have to spend their blood and treasure fighting the Federal Research Public Access Act, because if it passes anything they could propose would first have to overcome that hurdle.
A Dutch company trying to dictate publishing policy to the US Government isn't likely to play well with the US tax payer in an election year. That gives a year's grace to push the Public Access Act thru, with the major political parties both jockeying for position as the party of open-ness.
Exactly. Film was going to die. Printing was all there was left.
They pretty much let HP take that away from them.
There is no reason Kodak could not have pushed both high-end pro-grade printers as well as home-snap-shot printers. They didn't do either with any gusto, and thereby gave up everything they had.
Photo printing, as a result, still sucks so bad that we put up with digital picture frames!! OMG, what an abomination.
Not true, Kodak actually adopted digital technology extremely early. They ventured into inventing many of the first generation digital photography technologies in association with Apple (and that’s biting them in the rear since now the patents they got from that and are using to sue Apple, among others, are being disputed by Apple as also or exclusively belonging to them.)
What really killed Kodak was the structure. The company had an extremely high profit margin business model in the film arena. So profitable they own[ed?] their own silver mills. When digital photography came to be, and film finally died, a humongous branch of their business died.
I'm not so sure it wasn't failure to adapt after all. In fact, your own description pretty much says it was.
It was a given that film was going to go away fairly early. While Kodak did make some forays into digital photography, they did not lead the charge into a whole new way of doing business. It happened without them. They were not a significant player.
Additionally they ceded the only other remaining aspect of the old methods to HP. They pretty much dropped the ball on printing too. That previously relied on a silver process, and Kodak simply could not get away from that silver technology in any meaningful way. So both sides of the company got hit with a new technology, and rather then leading the way, Kodak hung on to the past.
Their only chance for survival would have been to wholeheartedly embrace digital photo printing, where they at least had the chemical expertise, and the possibility to retain a "consumables" portion of the business, in ink, paper, and also devices (printers). But HP beat them in that market as well.
While a dozen companies make photo printers, (even Kodak) they are a huge pain in the neck, the ink is always dried out when you need it, the paper is way too expensive, way too finicky, and the archival quality is abysmal. Few people bother to print family photos as a result.
Sadly lost in all of this is the family photo album, or the shoebox of history. Nobody prints photos anymore. Entire family photo history is lost to the first hard drive failure, and the one at a time viewing of computer files on a monitor is simply unsatisfying.
Clearly they have too much money if they have the time and manpower to track 3000 people.
The only time and manpower involved was placing it on the car in the first place.
From then its all done by computers. Most of these cases are probably drug related, and the investigating agent simple wants an alert if the car goes near some other known distribution point or any unusual places. This takes s almost zero manpower, which I suspect is why it was done in the first place
Its probably much simpler than you imagine. They probably never did turn them off, they simply stopped recording the incoming location data. I seriously doubt they would build in a function to stop tracking in a tracking device.
These things don't have a gps transmitter. All they have is a cellular data radio that transmits long/lat info and an id number.
Actually the point is it should never happen WITHOUT a warrant.
And clearly they haven't got enough for a warrant. Seeing as how it takes so little to get a warrant that they have no reluctance to ask for one to retrieve 500 worth of property. Apparently a crime on par with petty theft is enough to get you tracked.
Since these were all illegal, why not force them to reveal to the tracked parties their tracking activities and ask for the devices back. They may face legal action, but so what? The supreme court didn't make new law, it just stated what was the law all along. Placing the trackers with out a warrant was always a crime.
Either that or The FBI could seek a warrant for their continued use. Surely after tracking these suspects for how ever many weeks it took for the case to find its way through the courts they must have evidence of something that rises to the level of petty theft.
Instead they get a second byte of the apple, by being allowed to peek in windows and perhaps trespass under the guise of retrieving government property. No bad deed goes unrewarded.
Well, actually, given the bandwidth capability of LTE there is nothing of a challenge here. Any mobile voip client can deliver crystal clear voice quality dramatically better than cellular.
Its not unusual for me to start a call on cell, ask if the end-user has a direct Voip address and switch to that. I use CsipSimple on android, but there are no shortage of clients, and free voip accounts are everywhere. Even inbound (DID) land-line to Voip numbers can be had for free if you shop around, and DOD voip to landline dialing is dirt cheap, even internationally.
This seems like another Fraunhofer move to extend patents that are close to expiring, by tweeking them just a bit, painting them with a fresh coat of LET, and calling them something new.
So tired of hearing how privacy is so highly upheld in the EU, while at the same time reading about government after government mandating the retention of every tweet, email, text, gps position of every single citizen. Give it a rest, will ya?
But he can unilaterally order the NSA to stop scanning phone calls and email and text messages and tweets.
Half the crap the private companies collect are at the behest of the government. Everyone wants to blame Bush, but Bush's America was under attack. That was then. This is now. But Obama's America is still saddled with all the things Bush put in place and all the additions Obama put in place, and nothing has been scaled back.
3) If the test does reliably predict autism, how practical is it to put it into use? I can't imagine it would make much sense to do it to every 6-month-old--the cost would be prohibitive, particularly since it's a relatively small percentage of the population which are autistic. Would this become something that is only used for children who have a high risk of developing autism?
Unless or Until there is a early intervention/prevention treatment, finding these children early seems expensive and not that helpful.
AutismSpeaks is big on therapy but statistical evaluation of success seems pretty spotty at best, since no two kids are the same, and none of these seem appropriate for autism at 6 months to 1-year, which scans might detect.
Since normal detection typically occurs at 2 years, therapy has at best 12 to 18 months additional time to "work" if scans are performed. But all the therapy in use today was developed for 2 years and up.
The best hope the scans seem to provide is more data for those studying Autism. Not likely to help the patient much.
Slashdot Mirror
The only thing China really wants from NK is to act as a strong buffer against the capitalistic influence of SK,
And a sock puppet to export nuclear and missile technology to Syria, Iran, Hamas, Burma and probably a few other places.
The watch list starts on page 20 of this PDF: http://epic.org/foia/epic-v-dhs-media-monitoring/Analyst-Desktop-Binder-REDACTED.pdf
You could simply extract all of that and paste it into your sig and have the mother of all scan melt-down generators.
A lot of oppressed, hungry people will get some food to eat. It will be like Christmas for them.
Isn't that a good enough reason to allow yourself to be "duped" once in a while...?
Sure. Humanitarian aid is fine.
Just don't sell it as a nuclear agreement.
Actually, China has been feeding NK for 10s years. It dropped somewhat in 2008 due to shortages in China, (in fact China has started importing grain from Kazakhstan in 2010). Russia, on the other hand has stepped up their humanitarian aid to NK in recent years.
NK provides the crazy uncle that China needs to cover some of the things it does in regard to Tibet, Taiwan, and Iran. China is not going to get on board with any program of regime change in NK.
We sat to the side for decades upon decades until the people of Libya gave us the choice of allowing them to be slaughtered or giving minimal aid that allows for self-governance? I think he got a pretty good deal out of it, really.
And you sound like EXACTLY the type of person that would have bitched loudly had we not "sat to the side" for decades.
We got nothing out of this except a dumping ground for excess grain inventory that might not depress market prices by being resold.
That's fine, bill it as humanitarian aid, and call it done. But trying to suggest we got a nuclear deal out of the bargain is simply
unbelievable.
If anything this signals that China is getting fed up with feeding NK.
You don't generally use sudo when installing printers under Linux. You either use the web frontend for CUPS, in which case you're prompted for a password (either root or a user in a printer admin group), or more likely some application in the DE, in which case it's up to the PolKit configuration or whatever arcane nonsense they use these days. And yes, the default policy should be to allow users to add printers.
This is true, but out of the box, there is no printer-admin group in OpenSuse, and no users are added to it by default. You have to remember to do that, as well as 3 or 5 similar group-membership things in order to make a machine "user maintainable" for normal operations. Things like video, wifi, cdrom, all need permissions or are managed by membership in groups that you have to remember to check.
Left unsaid is how old Linus's kid is. Given the parentage, I'm surprised the kid doesn't already have root, not only on the laptop but the school's network server as well.
I'm more than a little Tired of reading about all these triumphant negotiation sessions over the years where NK promises to be a good boy just long enough to get the trade concessions, only to violate the agreement shortly there after. This is like the third or forth president in a row that has been duped by these tactics. As each agreement falls apart, there are the usual dire warnings about "grave consequences". These are the code words by which the US State Department looks tough, but signals the other side that the only "grave" involved is the one in which the whole issue will be buried as soon as the grandstanding is over with.
Son of Whack-Job, and Grandson of Whack-a-Doodle has absolutely no incentive to honor this agreement any more than his predecessors did the prior ones. However, a certain government leader needs a feather in his re-election hat. So we get another useless agreement with a perpetual liar state.
Suing without a patent in hand has got to be a pretty risky business model.
Rejected is rejected till its accepted. And its not going to be accepted. Prior art goes way back to CompuServe days, well before his 1995 filing.
The article is very light on specifics of where this data was obtained, other than pointing at Comscore.
I suspect the original source was this ComScore blog article. Even that article is very light on methodology.
Quoting:
While Google Plus nearly matches Tumblr from an audience standpoint in the U.S., it does not yet attract similar levels of user engagement on its primary web pages. Importantly, these figures account for activity on plus.google.com and [but] do not include engagement with the Google Plus toolbar or other distributed content throughout the Google network of sites.
Right there seems to be an admission that ComScore isn't able to measure the total engagement, because they can't see it, and nobody needs to access plus.google.com once they are signed up. All the links you need appear on pages protected by https.
The very nature of Google+, with its circles of friends may work against any outsiders having any real access to the amount of time spent there by the average user. and, google's use of https makes this harder still.
These guys are shooting in the dark.
Still, I tend to agree, I only know of a few bloggers who think its cool to hang the little G+ symbol behind their names.
Exactly my analysis when I read the study.
Not being able to control for key worry/emotional issues pretty much discredits blaming the drugs involved.
Sounds to me like data mining and meta analysis, which is all the rage today.
This study followed their subjects for an average of ONLY 2.5years. They clearly didn't follow them prior to the prescriptions.
Further the "controls" were selected based on superficial categories (age, gender, smoking, body mass index, ethnicity, marital status, alcohol use and prior cancer). Nowhere near a complete list of things that keep people awake at night.
And the causation argument still is the key here, since these drugs (several common hypnotics, including zolpidem, temazepam, eszopiclone, zaleplon, other benzodiazepines, barbiturates and sedative antihistamines) are not usually prescribed for people who have no problem sleeping.
Selection of controls was really the weak point here.
If you are under enough stress, or have some other problem keeping you awake, its as likely those issues are to blame as the use of these drugs. The headlines could just as well have been "Trouble Sleeping may be Killing you".
While I agree that its all bunk, I would be interested in knowing if the two files where bit for bit the same or just sound the same to the listener?
The summary above is sort of confusing. You have to RTFA
Quote TFA
The British mastering engineer Ian Shepherd goes deeper in his analysis of Mastered for iTunes by using a music engineering tool called a null test. Shepherd explains this procedure as a method of reversing the phase of a song’s waveform so that after a song’s waveforms and volumes are matched in software a mixing engineer can play them back to see if the song’s out of phase waveform cancels or nulls out the normal version of the song.
After his comparison of the three digital music files, Shepherd says there was a sonic difference between the Mastered for iTunes waveform and the CD waveform. He says the Mastered for iTunes and AAC-encoded files didn’t reveal any differences,
So the the answer is that there is no reason to believe the files were bit-for-bit the same (that would be impossible in any encoding), and they didn't necessarily sound the same either. He had to use digital methods to discover the differences.
And he was comparing the standard AAC against the CD and the Mastered for Itunes against the CD, and the standard AAC against the MFI encoding.
And in both cases there were differences between the AAC versions and the CD, but none between the two encoded versions.
He did not say he could hear the differences without technical means. Usually if the engineer has to go to these lengths to discern any differences it means he couldn't tell them by ear alone.
And if he can't tell by ear alone, then A) it doesn't matter, or B) he has geezer ears.
"Mastering Engineer" status is a short lived career. By the time you get there, your ears are no longer qualified for the work. Technical means to the rescue.
But the single dock only applies to Apple. Nobody else uses it.
With Android now some 47% of the market its time to start using a more standardized approach to this than relying on a single proprietary dock.
It might be HDMI, or Bluetooth, USB, or something else. But it should be an industry standard.
Ideally, I shouldn't have to take my phone out of my pocket when I get in the car, I should have phone, maps, and music all linked to the car automatically via something like Bluetooth 3.0 or something.
Cars aren't the only thing that people will want to link to their phones. Houses and offices could use such an interface. Cables and docking are so yesterday.
This is why the car should support *integration* with phones and not *duplicate* phones functionality. Connectivity should be in the most future-proof possible way. This could be mic and headphone jack, USB (for charging), & Bluetooth.
Let the phone do the hard work and provide a means of integrating the phone.
You might need to modularise the interface so it can be swapped out every few years as the 'standard' phone interfaces change.
Excellent advice.
And the same for Navigation systems. Factory Nav is always way over priced, hard to update, and obsolete by the time it rolls out the factory door.
There needs to be (probably already is) an interface design spec where you simply plug in the device you want from Tom Tom, Garmin, or Magellan and it puts the devices display on the car's touch screen.
But why would the auto makers do this when they can continue to charge you 2000 dollars for a nav system that cost them $150?
and it is good to hear it is dead, but on the other hand, the man pulling the strings will most likely be pushing for something else.
Or maybe not.
As in Football, the best Defense is a good Offense.
With the second bill introduced to MANDATE public access, Elsevier is now on their heels, trying to defend their turf, and may not have the clout to fight both fronts. They are pretty much going to have to spend their blood and treasure fighting the Federal Research Public Access Act, because if it passes anything they could propose would first have to overcome that hurdle.
A Dutch company trying to dictate publishing policy to the US Government isn't likely to play well with the US tax payer in an election year.
That gives a year's grace to push the Public Access Act thru, with the major political parties both jockeying for position as the party of open-ness.
Exactly. Film was going to die. Printing was all there was left.
They pretty much let HP take that away from them.
There is no reason Kodak could not have pushed both high-end pro-grade printers as well as home-snap-shot printers. They didn't do either with any gusto, and thereby gave up everything they had.
Photo printing, as a result, still sucks so bad that we put up with digital picture frames!! OMG, what an abomination.
Not true, Kodak actually adopted digital technology extremely early. They ventured into inventing many of the first generation digital photography technologies in association with Apple (and that’s biting them in the rear since now the patents they got from that and are using to sue Apple, among others, are being disputed by Apple as also or exclusively belonging to them.)
What really killed Kodak was the structure. The company had an extremely high profit margin business model in the film arena. So profitable they own[ed?] their own silver mills. When digital photography came to be, and film finally died, a humongous branch of their business died.
I'm not so sure it wasn't failure to adapt after all. In fact, your own description pretty much says it was.
It was a given that film was going to go away fairly early. While Kodak did make some forays into digital photography, they did not lead the charge into a whole new way of doing business. It happened without them. They were not a significant player.
Additionally they ceded the only other remaining aspect of the old methods to HP. They pretty much dropped the ball on printing too.
That previously relied on a silver process, and Kodak simply could not get away from that silver technology in any meaningful way.
So both sides of the company got hit with a new technology, and rather then leading the way, Kodak hung on to the past.
Their only chance for survival would have been to wholeheartedly embrace digital photo printing, where they at least had the chemical expertise, and the possibility to retain a "consumables" portion of the business, in ink, paper, and also devices (printers). But HP beat them in that market as well.
While a dozen companies make photo printers, (even Kodak) they are a huge pain in the neck, the ink is always dried out when you need it, the paper is way too expensive, way too finicky, and the archival quality is abysmal. Few people bother to print family photos as a result.
Sadly lost in all of this is the family photo album, or the shoebox of history. Nobody prints photos anymore. Entire family photo history is lost
to the first hard drive failure, and the one at a time viewing of computer files on a monitor is simply unsatisfying.
Clearly they have too much money if they have the time and manpower to track 3000 people.
The only time and manpower involved was placing it on the car in the first place.
From then its all done by computers.
Most of these cases are probably drug related, and the investigating agent simple wants an alert if the car goes near some other known distribution point or any unusual places. This takes s almost zero manpower, which I suspect is why it was done in the first place
Its probably much simpler than you imagine.
They probably never did turn them off, they simply stopped recording the incoming location data. I seriously doubt they would build in a function to stop tracking in a tracking device.
These things don't have a gps transmitter. All they have is a cellular data radio that transmits long/lat info and an id number.
The point is it should NEVER happen.
Actually the point is it should never happen WITHOUT a warrant.
And clearly they haven't got enough for a warrant. Seeing as how it takes so little to get a warrant that they have no reluctance to ask for one to retrieve 500 worth of property. Apparently a crime on par with petty theft is enough to get you tracked.
Since these were all illegal, why not force them to reveal to the tracked parties their tracking activities and ask for the devices back. They may face legal action, but so what? The supreme court didn't make new law, it just stated what was the law all along. Placing the trackers with out a warrant was always a crime.
Either that or The FBI could seek a warrant for their continued use. Surely after tracking these suspects for how ever many weeks it took for the case to find its way through the courts they must have evidence of something that rises to the level of petty theft.
Instead they get a second byte of the apple, by being allowed to peek in windows and perhaps trespass under the guise of retrieving government property. No bad deed goes unrewarded.
Well, actually, given the bandwidth capability of LTE there is nothing of a challenge here.
Any mobile voip client can deliver crystal clear voice quality dramatically better than cellular.
Its not unusual for me to start a call on cell, ask if the end-user has a direct Voip address and switch to that. I use CsipSimple on android, but there are no shortage of clients, and free voip accounts are everywhere. Even inbound (DID) land-line to Voip numbers can be had for free if you shop around, and DOD voip to landline dialing is dirt cheap, even internationally.
This seems like another Fraunhofer move to extend patents that are close to expiring, by tweeking them just a bit, painting them with a fresh coat of LET, and calling them something new.
Not to mention the fact that this ruling is not based on Search/Seizure provisions (4th), but rather the Self Incrimination (5th).
So I think a Car Analogy might be more successful than the Garage analogy here.....
So tired of hearing how privacy is so highly upheld in the EU, while at the same time reading about government after government mandating the retention of every tweet, email, text, gps position of every single citizen. Give it a rest, will ya?
But he can unilaterally order the NSA to stop scanning phone calls and email and text messages and tweets.
Half the crap the private companies collect are at the behest of the government.
Everyone wants to blame Bush, but Bush's America was under attack. That was then. This is now. But Obama's America is still saddled with all the things Bush put in place and all the additions Obama put in place, and nothing has been scaled back.
3) If the test does reliably predict autism, how practical is it to put it into use? I can't imagine it would make much sense to do it to every 6-month-old--the cost would be prohibitive, particularly since it's a relatively small percentage of the population which are autistic. Would this become something that is only used for children who have a high risk of developing autism?
Unless or Until there is a early intervention/prevention treatment, finding these children early seems expensive and not that helpful.
AutismSpeaks is big on therapy but statistical evaluation of success seems pretty spotty at best, since no two kids are the same, and none of these seem appropriate for autism at 6 months to 1-year, which scans might detect.
Since normal detection typically occurs at 2 years, therapy has at best 12 to 18 months additional time to "work" if scans are performed. But all the therapy in use today was developed for 2 years and up.
The best hope the scans seem to provide is more data for those studying Autism. Not likely to help the patient much.