We have been instructed not to create a record of our communication with you. We realize that this record could be used against in court or in public. Phone calls are less likely to be used against us in court or in public.
Particularly sensitive matters are redacted or are put under seal. For example, if you file your tax returns, you blackout the social security number on every page.
The professor is teaching one section of a class where different sections are taught by different faculty. As all the students - regardless of which section they are enrolled in - are enrolled in the same course, they should all be studying the same material. While it is not impossible to ensure that this happens when different sections use different texts, it is a lot easier to ensure that this happens when everyone does use the same text.
Yes, what if matrix multiplication is done differently in one book as opposed to the next..
It's linear algebra. Set a syllabus for what needs to be covered, yes, with a little room for teacher-specific enrichment, but requiring the same unethically chosen textbook for everyone is absurd. Linear algebra doesn't change based on what textbook you read it from. The *only* advantage is students have more people to talk with about the problem set if they're all assigned the same book.
Why would you need a $180 book to teach linear algebra? Matrix multiplication is easy. And if you have a state university system the size of California's, you can hire a great educator to write a textbook for less than, say, the 1.8M per year it would cost 10K students going through linear algebra a year to buy them.
And sure that means there will be a decent number of people who can't play their games without buying an upgrade, but I don't have a problem with that.
Yeah, but the guys who risked their money and years of their life to develop your game might.
Many choices avoids the problem of corrupting the decider by concentrated bribery. Few choices runs the risk of leaving people to fall prey to their own ignorance or to manipulative advertisement.
If you have too few, then the person who makes the choice initially is the only one you have to corrupt. With retirement plans, for example, this can be a problem--a skilled retirement planner will make much better decisions than your average employee, but historically there are also significant conflicts of interest where they choose funds they get a higher commission on, and the like.
Non-synchronized clocks are only a problem if you let them be a problem/make them a problem.
You have to be able to have an accurate time reference because a lot of devices interact with the real world. Logs, audit trails, signals intelligence, even photographs and surveillance cameras are a lot more meaningful if they have timestamps. If you can manipulate timestamps by using a flaw in NTP, then you can have an alibi for... anything.
Species could never conquer each other. The distances between planets are too vast. By the time you arrived at the planet, the civilization would have ceased to exist. Space is big. Really big. You might think it is a long way to the chemist, but that is just peanuts to space.
Not necessarily. Say you undertook a planetary-scale effort and built a spacecraft capable of moving 1/100th of c, it would take 1200+ years to make the journey to, for example, a very close (12 light years) habitable planet. That's a very long time by our local political standards, but if we ever actually achieve a stable government then it's not all that long. If good AI enables us to build a stable civilization for a few hundred thousand years, there might be some meaningful interstellar travel.
That being said, the best bet for expanding our sandbox is still terraforming a planet (or other environment, like the ocean or arctic or sky) that is already nearby.
It was a mass produced clock, not any "invention".
Unfortunately true. He is not a particularly bright kid and is being unduly celebrated. He took apart a clock. While we should celebrate kids taking apart clocks, we shouldn't call it an invention.
Big companies who do medical records (e.g. Microsoft, Google) care about security. The average company doing medical records cares about having a marketing buzzword that makes purchasers and patients feel secure. Hospitals generally don't give enough of a fuck because they don't understand it and it costs money, and it doesn't really cost them anything if they get broken into. It's not like many people will choose a different hospital or doctor.
As an avid backpacker, I'm amazed how often recent enthusiasts I've come across have little or zero/map and compass skills. Sure, your GPS on your iPhone and hiking app are great, IF you have power, and if it's accurate. But if you lose it, break it, battery dies, then what?
I still travel with Trails Illustrated maps (or other topo maps) and a compass whenever I'm in the backcountry.
I think the Naval Academy made the right decision.
Trails are blazed or marked most of the time unless you get pretty far off the beaten path. It's pretty rare to see someone *need* to use a compass these days outside of an orienteering course, even if they don't have GPS, so long as they have a map of their area.
So I assume you are also in favor of registering every firearm in the country as well, since they don't need to be turned into anything? For someone who doesn't support the panopticon, you sure seem to be in favor of it.
No, I was simplifying for ease of understanding. It's the scenario under which it can be used that makes a drone especially dangerous. You can crash it into a crowd without being there, for example. It's designed to be remote controlled. Remote controlled firearms should probably be registered, but I don't see a need to register ordinary firearms. (A simple background check for certain violent crimes, felon status, suicidality or the like to be able to own one, maybe, but not to register one).
On the 1991 cruise I was on when in the Navy, our ship's GPS went out. No way to fix it. We had to use compasses and star charts till we got to Pearl Harbor so it could be fixed. If the guys hadn't been trained for it, we'd have been screwed.
Exactly. Tech can fail or be disabled, either deliberately or due to enemy action. Remember how Russia was testing their GPS jamming tech against the US a few years ago in the middle east, by providing it to one of the countries we fought? Similarly, Iran used GPS to bring down a drone. Our guys need to be able to get by without it and, for that matter, to confirm that the computer is right.
It's not like we're requiring every enlisted man to know this stuff--but the officers on a ship of war should damn well know how to navigate by the stars if they have to.
I am against panopticon-like scanning of cell phone GPS all the time, or every license plate that goes in and out of Manhattan, for example, but think registering drones is sensible.
Do you really want everyone everywhere to be tracked 24/7? Pro NSA spying panopticon? Because that is what you are saying.
I recognize that every government in the world tracks almost everyone as it can as much as it can. I also recognize that there are certain things that *should* be tracked to increase public safety. I am against panopticon-like scanning of cell phone GPS all the time, or every license plate that goes in and out of Manhattan, for example, but think registering drones is sensible.
It doesn't stop it, it makes it easier for an algorithm to notice "we should send an agent to interview person X, who disappeared in Syria for two years and now bought four drones and a little bit of fertilizer..."
Any vehicle "data hacking"? Or a vehicle in motion? Otherwise, accessing data of a car's computer while the car is stationary would be a crime. So this would have made the VW investigators criminals. It would also make anyone creating a 3rd device reading on-board computer data illegal without a license from the manufacturer. If you can't introspect a car without putting in jeopardy anyone's safety, then this is just another DMCA.
It's already a *felony* to "hack" a vehicle. Hacking in the vernacular implies access not authorized by the owner. This law is about Congress cowtowing to industry to assist them in creating a structural monopoly. Note how the thing Congress can use to argue that they're not doing that is creating a *best practices* standard to *create a privacy policy*. Yeah, It's this great compromise that asks companies to say they're good companies!
I'm going to be the rational minority in what will likely be a long, bloody thread, but I think this is a good move by the government. There were a few incidents, some in near my local airport where a drone came within the vicinity of operating aircraft. It sucks that a few bad apples ruined what would have been an enjoyable hobby, but it has to be regulated.
I agree it's a good move, but it's not really about a danger to aviation so much as about terrorism. Drones are almost as good as self-driving cars would be at allowing suicide bombers to blow things up without the need for suicide. Small payload, but can still be turned into a flying death machine, and very common. If you require registration, not only do you have a better chance at tracking the owner of a drone, but you can do more to run the owners through watch lists and add drone ownership as another weight in an equation or neural net that is trying to spot people the government needs to worry about.
I know there are privacy issues, but if you were in charge of antiterrorism efforts, you'd be crazy not to want this.
How can they be the ruling class if they're lumped in with the proles? There aught a be a law!
This isn't about the ruling class. This is about everyone else. If GCHQ gets to spy on people who make decisions about how extensive their operations are, then they get to blackmail those people. This is the problem with government surveillance--not what most people do with it, but what happens if someone in a position of power within the surveillance system takes advantage of it to manipulate government decisions rather than to defend the nation or its people under the auspices of and within the constraints of the law.
Almost every company in China is effectively state owned, or at least state-backed in part. They all work through and often raise debt from Bank of China, which is a *lot* more involved in day-to-day company financing than the Federal Reserve.
Yet caps on drain cleaner are more regulated than trigger guards on guns. Why?
Well there are many ways to safely store a gun that do not require trigger locks. You could store it in a safe, for instance.
Be VERY, very careful about storing a gun in a gun safe around kids. (Pick the right one and pay more). There are a lot of badly designed safes out there that kids can crack into. See e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The German police advice about pedophiles is not to brag about your kids? What's next, are they going to tell Jews not to wear Yamacas to avoid antisemitism?
Slashdot Mirror
We have been instructed not to create a record of our communication with you. We realize that this record could be used against in court or in public. Phone calls are less likely to be used against us in court or in public.
Particularly sensitive matters are redacted or are put under seal. For example, if you file your tax returns, you blackout the social security number on every page.
The professor is teaching one section of a class where different sections are taught by different faculty. As all the students - regardless of which section they are enrolled in - are enrolled in the same course, they should all be studying the same material. While it is not impossible to ensure that this happens when different sections use different texts, it is a lot easier to ensure that this happens when everyone does use the same text.
Yes, what if matrix multiplication is done differently in one book as opposed to the next..
It's linear algebra. Set a syllabus for what needs to be covered, yes, with a little room for teacher-specific enrichment, but requiring the same unethically chosen textbook for everyone is absurd. Linear algebra doesn't change based on what textbook you read it from. The *only* advantage is students have more people to talk with about the problem set if they're all assigned the same book.
Why would you need a $180 book to teach linear algebra? Matrix multiplication is easy. And if you have a state university system the size of California's, you can hire a great educator to write a textbook for less than, say, the 1.8M per year it would cost 10K students going through linear algebra a year to buy them.
And sure that means there will be a decent number of people who can't play their games without buying an upgrade, but I don't have a problem with that.
Yeah, but the guys who risked their money and years of their life to develop your game might.
Many choices avoids the problem of corrupting the decider by concentrated bribery. Few choices runs the risk of leaving people to fall prey to their own ignorance or to manipulative advertisement.
If you have too few, then the person who makes the choice initially is the only one you have to corrupt. With retirement plans, for example, this can be a problem--a skilled retirement planner will make much better decisions than your average employee, but historically there are also significant conflicts of interest where they choose funds they get a higher commission on, and the like.
...
Problem solved with no need to sync clocks.
Non-synchronized clocks are only a problem if you let them be a problem/make them a problem.
You have to be able to have an accurate time reference because a lot of devices interact with the real world. Logs, audit trails, signals intelligence, even photographs and surveillance cameras are a lot more meaningful if they have timestamps. If you can manipulate timestamps by using a flaw in NTP, then you can have an alibi for... anything.
Species could never conquer each other. The distances between planets are too vast. By the time you arrived at the planet, the civilization would have ceased to exist. Space is big. Really big. You might think it is a long way to the chemist, but that is just peanuts to space.
Not necessarily. Say you undertook a planetary-scale effort and built a spacecraft capable of moving 1/100th of c, it would take 1200+ years to make the journey to, for example, a very close (12 light years) habitable planet. That's a very long time by our local political standards, but if we ever actually achieve a stable government then it's not all that long. If good AI enables us to build a stable civilization for a few hundred thousand years, there might be some meaningful interstellar travel.
That being said, the best bet for expanding our sandbox is still terraforming a planet (or other environment, like the ocean or arctic or sky) that is already nearby.
Remove casing from a Wallmart clock
get invited by Google and President
Fucking genius, durrrr.
It was a mass produced clock, not any "invention".
Unfortunately true. He is not a particularly bright kid and is being unduly celebrated. He took apart a clock. While we should celebrate kids taking apart clocks, we shouldn't call it an invention.
Haha no.
Big companies who do medical records include EPIC, not Microsoft or Google.
Microsoft and Google are big tech companies who do medical records and care about security.
Big companies who do medical records (e.g. Microsoft, Google) care about security. The average company doing medical records cares about having a marketing buzzword that makes purchasers and patients feel secure. Hospitals generally don't give enough of a fuck because they don't understand it and it costs money, and it doesn't really cost them anything if they get broken into. It's not like many people will choose a different hospital or doctor.
As an avid backpacker, I'm amazed how often recent enthusiasts I've come across have little or zero/map and compass skills. Sure, your GPS on your iPhone and hiking app are great, IF you have power, and if it's accurate. But if you lose it, break it, battery dies, then what?
I still travel with Trails Illustrated maps (or other topo maps) and a compass whenever I'm in the backcountry.
I think the Naval Academy made the right decision.
Trails are blazed or marked most of the time unless you get pretty far off the beaten path. It's pretty rare to see someone *need* to use a compass these days outside of an orienteering course, even if they don't have GPS, so long as they have a map of their area.
Because they are very easy to turn into weapons.
So I assume you are also in favor of registering every firearm in the country as well, since they don't need to be turned into anything? For someone who doesn't support the panopticon, you sure seem to be in favor of it.
No, I was simplifying for ease of understanding. It's the scenario under which it can be used that makes a drone especially dangerous. You can crash it into a crowd without being there, for example. It's designed to be remote controlled. Remote controlled firearms should probably be registered, but I don't see a need to register ordinary firearms. (A simple background check for certain violent crimes, felon status, suicidality or the like to be able to own one, maybe, but not to register one).
People can have nuanced positions.
either accidentally or due to enemy action.
(Can Slashdot join the modern world and add an edit button?)
On the 1991 cruise I was on when in the Navy, our ship's GPS went out. No way to fix it. We had to use compasses and star charts till we got to Pearl Harbor so it could be fixed. If the guys hadn't been trained for it, we'd have been screwed.
Exactly. Tech can fail or be disabled, either deliberately or due to enemy action. Remember how Russia was testing their GPS jamming tech against the US a few years ago in the middle east, by providing it to one of the countries we fought? Similarly, Iran used GPS to bring down a drone. Our guys need to be able to get by without it and, for that matter, to confirm that the computer is right.
It's not like we're requiring every enlisted man to know this stuff--but the officers on a ship of war should damn well know how to navigate by the stars if they have to.
I am against panopticon-like scanning of cell phone GPS all the time, or every license plate that goes in and out of Manhattan, for example, but think registering drones is sensible.
Why do you think registering drones is sensible?
Because they are very easy to turn into weapons.
Do you really want everyone everywhere to be tracked 24/7? Pro NSA spying panopticon? Because that is what you are saying.
I recognize that every government in the world tracks almost everyone as it can as much as it can. I also recognize that there are certain things that *should* be tracked to increase public safety. I am against panopticon-like scanning of cell phone GPS all the time, or every license plate that goes in and out of Manhattan, for example, but think registering drones is sensible.
It doesn't stop it, it makes it easier for an algorithm to notice "we should send an agent to interview person X, who disappeared in Syria for two years and now bought four drones and a little bit of fertilizer..."
Any vehicle "data hacking"? Or a vehicle in motion? Otherwise, accessing data of a car's computer while the car is stationary would be a crime. So this would have made the VW investigators criminals. It would also make anyone creating a 3rd device reading on-board computer data illegal without a license from the manufacturer. If you can't introspect a car without putting in jeopardy anyone's safety, then this is just another DMCA.
It's already a *felony* to "hack" a vehicle. Hacking in the vernacular implies access not authorized by the owner. This law is about Congress cowtowing to industry to assist them in creating a structural monopoly. Note how the thing Congress can use to argue that they're not doing that is creating a *best practices* standard to *create a privacy policy*. Yeah, It's this great compromise that asks companies to say they're good companies!
I'm going to be the rational minority in what will likely be a long, bloody thread, but I think this is a good move by the government. There were a few incidents, some in near my local airport where a drone came within the vicinity of operating aircraft. It sucks that a few bad apples ruined what would have been an enjoyable hobby, but it has to be regulated.
I agree it's a good move, but it's not really about a danger to aviation so much as about terrorism. Drones are almost as good as self-driving cars would be at allowing suicide bombers to blow things up without the need for suicide. Small payload, but can still be turned into a flying death machine, and very common. If you require registration, not only do you have a better chance at tracking the owner of a drone, but you can do more to run the owners through watch lists and add drone ownership as another weight in an equation or neural net that is trying to spot people the government needs to worry about.
I know there are privacy issues, but if you were in charge of antiterrorism efforts, you'd be crazy not to want this.
How can they be the ruling class if they're lumped in with the proles? There aught a be a law!
This isn't about the ruling class. This is about everyone else. If GCHQ gets to spy on people who make decisions about how extensive their operations are, then they get to blackmail those people. This is the problem with government surveillance--not what most people do with it, but what happens if someone in a position of power within the surveillance system takes advantage of it to manipulate government decisions rather than to defend the nation or its people under the auspices of and within the constraints of the law.
Almost every company in China is effectively state owned, or at least state-backed in part. They all work through and often raise debt from Bank of China, which is a *lot* more involved in day-to-day company financing than the Federal Reserve.
Yet caps on drain cleaner are more regulated than trigger guards on guns. Why?
Well there are many ways to safely store a gun that do not require trigger locks. You could store it in a safe, for instance.
Be VERY, very careful about storing a gun in a gun safe around kids. (Pick the right one and pay more). There are a lot of badly designed safes out there that kids can crack into. See e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The German police advice about pedophiles is not to brag about your kids? What's next, are they going to tell Jews not to wear Yamacas to avoid antisemitism?
That's like keeping your front door wide-open and putting a sign in your yard that reads 'Steal my shit' then getting mad when you're robbed.
No it's not. The sign provides consent.
It doesn't usually work like that.
If you get a genome scan you learn you have a higher chance of developing certain problems. That doesn't make those problems an existing condition.