Technically, the Air Force has the right to the frequency, which it began using nearly three years ago at some bases. Signals have previously interfered with garage doors near bases in Florida, Maryland, and Pennsylvania."
ALL YOUR GARAGE ARE BELONG TO BASE!
i think there's also an abbott and costello joke in there somewhere
well, you should be able to make a machine that is at least hard to hack. seriously, think about this for a moment, the machine is a counter. it counts. what could be simpler than that? you ought to be able to build the thing from a handful of transistors you got in a grab bag at Radio Shack and seal it up in potting compound. so first of all, don't make anything more complicated than it needs be.
secondly, the bigger issue is physical security of the voting machines. no matter how simple or complex a machine is, replacing the machine with an imposter that looks just like it will always be a problem. about the best you can do is to physically examine machines and load them with a test deck of ballots before each tally.
or hand count as you suggest. i think we are just lazy about it. and most of our poll workers seem to be old people with limited eyesight.
I'm really not edumacated enough with radio frequencies to even make an educated guess beyond the fact that certain frequencies of microwaves are pretty good at heating anything with water molecules inside.
But oddly enough, people rarely get upset about AC power anymore. Did you know that when you are electrocuted, the frequency of the electric current can determine whether or not your heart goes into fibrillation? And it just so happens that 50 to 60 Hertz (the line voltage frequencies in UK and America) is just about optimal for causing fibrillation. That frequency range interferes with our own bioelectrical hardware. And yet, just walking around in our homes, we are constantly exposed to it, being capacitively coupled by a few picofarads to both line and ground. Heck, go and stand under a 100kV or so transmission line and you're now under a huge E field gradient, easily a couple or few kV from head to toe.
I think most of what is going on here is just fear of the unknown and a lack of familiarity with the technology. As people become more familiar, they will lose their fear and see the benefits as outweighing possible risks. Same as with electric power, even though it may be the bigger threat.
Well, you may be somewhat right, although to me it sounds more like extortion. I may be "anthropologically unsophistocated", but I understand basic human nature.
If I were Microsoft, this is what I'd do: I'd shelve the project. Then if the tribal leaders decide they want an OS in their own language, they can make a request. But when you make a request of someone, it's silly to expect them to do it free of charge.
I can't honestly figure out why Microsoft would press the issue unless they're under some contractual obligation with the government.
At the risk of having my excellent karma downmodded into oblivion, I present a clip from The Boondocks. It is rather crude and uses a profane word that is usually used in a racist manner, so don't say you weren't warned.
But basically, I think he's right. Most "technology" kids use today are just high-tech toys. Being good at using Google actually requires having a decent vocabulary and broad knowledge base (a traditional, non-tech type of education), or at least the drive to dig deeper and read a little more to find more terms to key on. For the most part, we're just lazy and aren't willing to put in the necessary work to find the kind of information that is useful.
so you're claiming that even the three phosphors are not monochromatic? because if they were, then that'd be three monochromatic colors you could reproduce.
That's rather short-sighted. Boolean logic was invented a long time before the practical use of it in computers came about. And even computers did not have much economic benefit at first.
Amen. And Al Gore hasn't contributed one iota. All he is doing is pumping the current Climatology Zeitgeist. Too often, we just go on blindly accepting traditional notions without ever bothering to actually put them to the test.
And yes, Scientific American in general has been going downhill, IMO. It's not yet as bad as Popular Science, but it's getting there.
that's really not my point. it seems to me that much of what ADA is about (or what people starting lawsuits think it is about) is helping handicapped people to get through society more independently. but if you're blind, that's a pretty tall order. they still need a set of borrowed eyes, whether that's a guide dog or an assistant at Target. and i don't see how a website is any different, or should be held to a higher standard.
heck, i'm not even sure it's desireable. what exactly is the point of this, anyhow, to make blind people into shut-ins? how many of them even want this?
My advice? Watch Wal*mart and match the accessibility they provide.
In that case, there definitely seems to be a limit to what is considered an acceptable level of accessibility. Maybe I'm just unaware, but I've never noticed cans of beans or boxes or soap with Braille labels. Imagine having to do the same for the list of ingredients. It seems to me that there is a certain level of expected accessibility and it is determined either by the costs or the ability of large corporations to lobby for exclusions.
FWIW, large companies like Target would suffer the least from this, because they have economy of scale. Smaller businesses would be damaged.
Maybe I'm just insensitive, but I really don't see what the problem is. Why should a blind person have a higher degree of accessibility from an online site than they'd get if they visited the brick and mortar store in person? Either way, they'll probably need assistance.
Add to this the fact that PayPal constantly pushes linking your PayPal account to your "real" bank account (apparently so they can clean you out in one fell swoop) and you have a recipe for... well, I'd say about 5 lbs of ammonium nitrate, some black powder, and a time-delay fuse.
well, you seem to be missing something (i'll leave the ignorant in their bliss here). but it does explain how you managed to only break a window.;)
Well, if only things were so simple. Modern research is showing that the population of the Americas is more complicated than originally thought, with people migrating from both Europe and Asia. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/claimbonn.html
So which argument should we follow, "We were here first" or "We were here last"? Because you may not have been as first as you think you are, and hell, we're probably related anyway.
I do see your point, I think, that perhaps these filtering companies are just exercising their free speech rights. But even assuming that only private individuals and corporations are buying and using your software, there still is the issue of libel here. How would you like it if you were applying for a job, and the prospective employer decides to google you. But when they try to visit the site you've published some opinion on, the company's web filtering software blocks it and tells them it is a racist/hate/extremist/terrorist-sympathizing site? Whose rights are being violated now?
If you really want to fight back, then the best thing to do is actually let them think they're getting in. Leave a few insecure holes here and there and plant some misinformation. If you're clever enough, then you can even use that misinformation to gain an advantage against them.
I think Google will get away with this obvious infringement on copyright for a reason entirely unrelated to issues of ownership or profit. And that is that the government wants it. Specifically, the government wants to be able to quickly datamine works to determine explicitly, and by correlation, what exactly certain people are reading and writing and why.
Google may even get funding from the government to do this, or to give special fulltext database access to investigators.
The Supreme Court will back them up because the use will be declared to be necessary to the needs of law enforcement and national security.
I think the original premise is wrong. Real world intelligence is not lossless. The algorithms only have to be right most of the time to be effective. And our intelligence is incredibly redundant. If you want robust AI, you're going to have to accept redundancy and imperfection. Same goes for data transmission. Sure, you compress, but then you also add in self-error correcting codes with a level on redundancy based on the known reliability of the network.
The real reason you should stay away from engineering is that it is a waste of your talents. No one respects engineers, and it shows in many ways, primarily the pay and cubicle warehousing. Seriously, take it from someone who knows, and has been there. They will treat you like mushrooms, keeping you in the dark and feeding you guano. They will pay you just a little more than union labor. They will treat your labor like a liquid commodity.
Seriously, if you're smart enough to become an engineer, and be good at it even, then at least pick a profession where they'll either pay you like the genius that you are. Or one where they'll at least let you go outside or have your own office with a window.
Lately, I've been considering pursuing a career in a medical field. Nurse anesthesists make about twice what many engineers make, and Anesthesiologists about 6 times. Yeah, fuck this shit.
Slashdot Mirror
ALL YOUR GARAGE ARE BELONG TO BASE!
i think there's also an abbott and costello joke in there somewhere
well, you should be able to make a machine that is at least hard to hack. seriously, think about this for a moment, the machine is a counter. it counts. what could be simpler than that? you ought to be able to build the thing from a handful of transistors you got in a grab bag at Radio Shack and seal it up in potting compound. so first of all, don't make anything more complicated than it needs be.
secondly, the bigger issue is physical security of the voting machines. no matter how simple or complex a machine is, replacing the machine with an imposter that looks just like it will always be a problem. about the best you can do is to physically examine machines and load them with a test deck of ballots before each tally.
or hand count as you suggest. i think we are just lazy about it. and most of our poll workers seem to be old people with limited eyesight.
I'm really not edumacated enough with radio frequencies to even make an educated guess beyond the fact that certain frequencies of microwaves are pretty good at heating anything with water molecules inside.
But oddly enough, people rarely get upset about AC power anymore. Did you know that when you are electrocuted, the frequency of the electric current can determine whether or not your heart goes into fibrillation? And it just so happens that 50 to 60 Hertz (the line voltage frequencies in UK and America) is just about optimal for causing fibrillation. That frequency range interferes with our own bioelectrical hardware. And yet, just walking around in our homes, we are constantly exposed to it, being capacitively coupled by a few picofarads to both line and ground. Heck, go and stand under a 100kV or so transmission line and you're now under a huge E field gradient, easily a couple or few kV from head to toe.
I think most of what is going on here is just fear of the unknown and a lack of familiarity with the technology. As people become more familiar, they will lose their fear and see the benefits as outweighing possible risks. Same as with electric power, even though it may be the bigger threat.
Well, you may be somewhat right, although to me it sounds more like extortion. I may be "anthropologically unsophistocated", but I understand basic human nature.
If I were Microsoft, this is what I'd do: I'd shelve the project. Then if the tribal leaders decide they want an OS in their own language, they can make a request. But when you make a request of someone, it's silly to expect them to do it free of charge.
I can't honestly figure out why Microsoft would press the issue unless they're under some contractual obligation with the government.
At the risk of having my excellent karma downmodded into oblivion, I present a clip from The Boondocks. It is rather crude and uses a profane word that is usually used in a racist manner, so don't say you weren't warned.
But basically, I think he's right. Most "technology" kids use today are just high-tech toys. Being good at using Google actually requires having a decent vocabulary and broad knowledge base (a traditional, non-tech type of education), or at least the drive to dig deeper and read a little more to find more terms to key on. For the most part, we're just lazy and aren't willing to put in the necessary work to find the kind of information that is useful.
well, speaking as a guy that really appreciates his porn, i'm finding this a little hard to masturbate to. a little "edgier", please.
so you're claiming that even the three phosphors are not monochromatic? because if they were, then that'd be three monochromatic colors you could reproduce.
That's rather short-sighted. Boolean logic was invented a long time before the practical use of it in computers came about. And even computers did not have much economic benefit at first.
Amen. And Al Gore hasn't contributed one iota. All he is doing is pumping the current Climatology Zeitgeist. Too often, we just go on blindly accepting traditional notions without ever bothering to actually put them to the test.
And yes, Scientific American in general has been going downhill, IMO. It's not yet as bad as Popular Science, but it's getting there.
the wavelength of 405nm is right on the edge of the visible spectrum. i'm not even sure you can display that color on a typical RGB monitor.
...and now I know why. :(
that's really not my point. it seems to me that much of what ADA is about (or what people starting lawsuits think it is about) is helping handicapped people to get through society more independently. but if you're blind, that's a pretty tall order. they still need a set of borrowed eyes, whether that's a guide dog or an assistant at Target. and i don't see how a website is any different, or should be held to a higher standard.
heck, i'm not even sure it's desireable. what exactly is the point of this, anyhow, to make blind people into shut-ins? how many of them even want this?
timothy, can a blind person shop at brick-and-mortar target without human assistance? if not, why should online be any different?
In that case, there definitely seems to be a limit to what is considered an acceptable level of accessibility. Maybe I'm just unaware, but I've never noticed cans of beans or boxes or soap with Braille labels. Imagine having to do the same for the list of ingredients. It seems to me that there is a certain level of expected accessibility and it is determined either by the costs or the ability of large corporations to lobby for exclusions.
FWIW, large companies like Target would suffer the least from this, because they have economy of scale. Smaller businesses would be damaged.
Maybe I'm just insensitive, but I really don't see what the problem is. Why should a blind person have a higher degree of accessibility from an online site than they'd get if they visited the brick and mortar store in person? Either way, they'll probably need assistance.
It should read: Scientists Capture Inbred Dolphin
So there you go smartass, insightful and funny.
well, you seem to be missing something (i'll leave the ignorant in their bliss here). but it does explain how you managed to only break a window.
Well, if only things were so simple. Modern research is showing that the population of the Americas is more complicated than originally thought, with people migrating from both Europe and Asia. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/first/claimbonn.html
So which argument should we follow, "We were here first" or "We were here last"? Because you may not have been as first as you think you are, and hell, we're probably related anyway.
I do see your point, I think, that perhaps these filtering companies are just exercising their free speech rights. But even assuming that only private individuals and corporations are buying and using your software, there still is the issue of libel here. How would you like it if you were applying for a job, and the prospective employer decides to google you. But when they try to visit the site you've published some opinion on, the company's web filtering software blocks it and tells them it is a racist/hate/extremist/terrorist-sympathizing site? Whose rights are being violated now?
my bad. this post should undo it.
If you really want to fight back, then the best thing to do is actually let them think they're getting in. Leave a few insecure holes here and there and plant some misinformation. If you're clever enough, then you can even use that misinformation to gain an advantage against them.
I think Google will get away with this obvious infringement on copyright for a reason entirely unrelated to issues of ownership or profit. And that is that the government wants it. Specifically, the government wants to be able to quickly datamine works to determine explicitly, and by correlation, what exactly certain people are reading and writing and why.
Google may even get funding from the government to do this, or to give special fulltext database access to investigators.
The Supreme Court will back them up because the use will be declared to be necessary to the needs of law enforcement and national security.
The 'creepy-looking loner guy that posts to slashdot all day' registry.
I mean, really, who wants that guy near your kids?
I think the original premise is wrong. Real world intelligence is not lossless. The algorithms only have to be right most of the time to be effective. And our intelligence is incredibly redundant. If you want robust AI, you're going to have to accept redundancy and imperfection. Same goes for data transmission. Sure, you compress, but then you also add in self-error correcting codes with a level on redundancy based on the known reliability of the network.
The real reason you should stay away from engineering is that it is a waste of your talents. No one respects engineers, and it shows in many ways, primarily the pay and cubicle warehousing. Seriously, take it from someone who knows, and has been there. They will treat you like mushrooms, keeping you in the dark and feeding you guano. They will pay you just a little more than union labor. They will treat your labor like a liquid commodity.
Seriously, if you're smart enough to become an engineer, and be good at it even, then at least pick a profession where they'll either pay you like the genius that you are. Or one where they'll at least let you go outside or have your own office with a window.
Lately, I've been considering pursuing a career in a medical field. Nurse anesthesists make about twice what many engineers make, and Anesthesiologists about 6 times. Yeah, fuck this shit.
Yeppers, maybe there's something to metamoderation after all. I figure no one will understand my comment because no one reads the friggin' articles.