It seems to me that Diebold hasn't done anything wrong here. They have a horrible product which doesn't hold up to any scrutiny. Incompetent, perhaps, but not wrong. The politicians, who are absolutely incapable of critical thought, especially when it comes to using tax money, screwed up buy buying into an obviously flawed system, and now they're trying to shift the blame (as politicians always do) to Diebold. Oh well, I guess that always has been and will be the way of things. Diebold's job was to sell their product. It was the customers job to decide if they needed it, and unfortunately, that customer uses our money.
This is the existing system - premiums aren't small. I carry only the required liability insurance, have a clean record, and pay $700/year for one car. If it weren't mandated, the insurance (which I'd buy) would be cheaper. I could always carry uninsured motorist insurance, which would likely have higher premiums than now. In effect, I'd have the same coverage, but now I don't have a government requirement that might make me have a black box in my car.
I would have no problem with this - if insurance wasn't government mandated. The problem is that insurance companies could now refuse to insure people who don't put the black box in their car, preventing them from driving and in effect assuming government powers.
If insurance wasn't mandatory, we would see insurance rates plummet. As for the argument about people who are too irresponsible to pay up after an accident, those same people are driving around illegally uninsured anyway.
Lotus developed a wide bandwidth fully active suspension based Esprit many years ago. It was described in a recent issue of Vehicle Dynamics magazine (Sometime between May and July). It was impractical for mass production because the system used too much energy. I'd guess the Bose system has the same limitation. Yet again, Bose shows their expertise with marketing.
It's a Media Center, perhaps, but it looks about as portable as a Mac Portable. Can I carry it with me? Sure. Do I _want_ to carry it with me? Absolutely not.
I'm glad that Gutmans is willing to stand up to the FSF. It seems that the FSF wants software to be free - but part of being free is having the right to develop non-free software.
I'm sure that they'll have clauses that it's for entertainment only and give you a dynamic IP with most ports blocked. What's the use of that kind of bandwidth then? I'd rather get 1.5 mbps from a place like Speakeasy which allows me to get work done. (Note: Not a plug, not even a happy customer - more of a customer-to-be)
The solution is simple. Pay with cash, the ultimate privacy tool. Don't get "shopper club" cards, and pay the price difference (our supermarket here, Farmer Jack, has actually ditched requiring them for savings). Anybody who pays with a credit card should know their transactions are logged, and I see nothing wrong with that. After all, that costs the retailers money; the least they can do is get some return on it.
I usually rip the Red Book layer for my iPod, but for serious listening, I put the disc in my SACD player. It definitely has no drawbacks over a regular CD.
No, the problem is that people are ignorant and stupid.
What percentage of the American population do you think is aware of this issue? Maybe 1 or 2 percent? That's not enough to make a political difference.
I agree that 128kbps is not ideal. Therefore, I use iTMS to buy those random one hit wonder songs for which I'd never buy the album, but for my favorite music, I buy the album.
1) It might be available on SACD, which I think sounds _much_ better than CD. 2) Even if it isn't, I get cover art, liner notes, and the ability to rip at any bit rate I want 3) no DRM 4) I get that warm fuzzy feeling of actually owning something physical for my money.
I get all that for all of a few dollars in price difference, which is well worth it to me. The music store is a 3 minute walk away, so convenience isn't an issue.
Broadband is a luxury item - we don't have an inherent right to cheap and/or fast internet service. Why is the government getting involved in it instead of waiting for the market to work things out (which may take a few years)
I have a SACD setup. Hearing is truly believing - my $150 SACD player blows away $1000 audiophile CD players, IMO. I had written it off as theoretically useless until I heard it, but now I'm absolutely sold.
The "loose gas cap" code is an evap system code that is part of the OBD-II scanner. Most auto parts stores will read the code for free. The article is mostly BS.
As time passes, I'm thinking about just switching to commercial DSL service. Current broadband offerings for the most part are targeted to the uneducated masses, and are cheap for that reason. My ISP had the nerve to tell me that my connection was "For entertainment purposes only" when I asked why the windows file sharing port was blocked (I have a static IP and I needed to share some files with some non-Mac friends of mine).
So instead of bitching, the easier solution seems to be to pay for quality. The same applies to every other consumer product out there.
Yet again, lawyers will dictate the course of technology - the fear of a lawsuit jacks up insurance rates, which makes research and development excessively costly.
There seems to be a lot of interest all of a sudden on slashdot on super high res images (yesterday there was an article on a large film camera which was by no means revolutionary or record setting).
It's really not that cutting edge. If you go to www.betterlight.com, they're releasing a 4x5 back capable of 10200x13800 pixels soon, and already have one available that's about 100 Mpixel. Granted, these are slow, but they've been available for a long time and are used daily by product photographers.
I shoot 4x5 myself on film and make 550 MB scans. It's relatively cheap and very high res.
Last time I checked, the US was irked (fairly so, I think) because Galileo was to be broadcast on the exact same carrier frequency as GPS, making jamming of only Galileo but not GPS very difficult.
Disabling civilian GPS receivers during wartime may not be that feasable anymore. The military often uses civilian GPS receivers due to their low cost when the accuracy of P code devices is not required.
This is quickly becoming a waste of bandwidth, but I feel compelled to provide a defense.
First of all, I don't appreciate my views being called a troll. They are sincere. I haven't called yours a troll, have I?
Second, I never said that big business and politics weren't intertwined - but that the majority of the people have the power to change the government if they wanted to. That they are "brainwashed" doesn't matter - if they're utterly incompetent, incapable of basic rational thought and critical thinking to the point that they can't reject propaganda as hogwash, then perhaps they're incapable of governing.
Third - I have had a flaw on my credit report. It cost me exactly $0.00 to fix. We are not entitled to loans, are we? In this day and age when it's trivial to get a loan to the point of absurdity, I see nothing to complain about on this front.
Fourth - I agree with you about taxes. But how is big business responsible for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, prescription drugs, housing credits, etc? If there was a proposal to eliminate all income (corporate and personal) taxes, I don't think you'd see big business against it.
You're free to reply, and hold your views, but please entitle me to the same courtesy as I'm trying to extend you. Name calling doesn't help.
>Consumers care about privacy but what can they do?
They can go to a supermarket, avoid the "shoppers club card" and pay with cash. No privacy issues.
As for banks - many want to keep information private, but are not allowed to do so by money laundering laws.
And as for credit cards, just don't use one.
>I agree with this marginally. There is an overwhelming vocal minority, who also happen to be extraordinarily wealthy, who will browbeat the remaining population
Based on what are they overwhelmingly wealthy? The wealthy are typically the ones in nice neighborhoods who aren't complaining about crime or stalkers. Perhaps the soccer-mom demographic is powerful, but I don't see it anywhere else.
>The overwhelming vocal, powerful minority which controls the politics also controls the largest business transactions
By definition, if they're a minority, they can't entirely control politics when politicians are democratically elected.
>Year after year the political dog and pony show goes on and the consumers are always the paying loser.
You've provided no evidence of consumers being the losers. Instead, you seem to be using the same type of hype as "what about the children", talking of the innocent poor/middle class trod on by the rich. The consumers who choose to "lose" are the losers. Any forced privacy concerns are due to regulations alone (like money laundering laws). I've never been forced to do anything by big business, and I don't know of anyone who has been.
The reason American companies don't care about customer privacy is because consumers don't care. And consumers don't care because they expect the government to protect them from everything. If people wake up, realize that they need to make decisions rather than legislating everything and criticizing "evil big business", maybe businesses would actually have an opportunity to improve the bottom line by improving privacy standards. As of right now, that's a fallacy in the minds of the average slashdotter.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems to me that Diebold hasn't done anything wrong here. They have a horrible product which doesn't hold up to any scrutiny. Incompetent, perhaps, but not wrong. The politicians, who are absolutely incapable of critical thought, especially when it comes to using tax money, screwed up buy buying into an obviously flawed system, and now they're trying to shift the blame (as politicians always do) to Diebold. Oh well, I guess that always has been and will be the way of things. Diebold's job was to sell their product. It was the customers job to decide if they needed it, and unfortunately, that customer uses our money.
Ok, maybe it is more functional than an iPod, but once it doesn't fit comfortably in my pocket, why not just use a laptop?
This is the existing system - premiums aren't small. I carry only the required liability insurance, have a clean record, and pay $700/year for one car. If it weren't mandated, the insurance (which I'd buy) would be cheaper. I could always carry uninsured motorist insurance, which would likely have higher premiums than now. In effect, I'd have the same coverage, but now I don't have a government requirement that might make me have a black box in my car.
I would have no problem with this - if insurance wasn't government mandated. The problem is that insurance companies could now refuse to insure people who don't put the black box in their car, preventing them from driving and in effect assuming government powers. If insurance wasn't mandatory, we would see insurance rates plummet. As for the argument about people who are too irresponsible to pay up after an accident, those same people are driving around illegally uninsured anyway.
Note that they don't pay you until you've accumulated $25 in commission, meaning you don't get anything until there are 506 purchases made.
Lotus developed a wide bandwidth fully active suspension based Esprit many years ago. It was described in a recent issue of Vehicle Dynamics magazine (Sometime between May and July). It was impractical for mass production because the system used too much energy. I'd guess the Bose system has the same limitation. Yet again, Bose shows their expertise with marketing.
It's a Media Center, perhaps, but it looks about as portable as a Mac Portable. Can I carry it with me? Sure. Do I _want_ to carry it with me? Absolutely not.
I'm glad that Gutmans is willing to stand up to the FSF. It seems that the FSF wants software to be free - but part of being free is having the right to develop non-free software.
I'm sure that they'll have clauses that it's for entertainment only and give you a dynamic IP with most ports blocked. What's the use of that kind of bandwidth then? I'd rather get 1.5 mbps from a place like Speakeasy which allows me to get work done. (Note: Not a plug, not even a happy customer - more of a customer-to-be)
The solution is simple. Pay with cash, the ultimate privacy tool. Don't get "shopper club" cards, and pay the price difference (our supermarket here, Farmer Jack, has actually ditched requiring them for savings). Anybody who pays with a credit card should know their transactions are logged, and I see nothing wrong with that. After all, that costs the retailers money; the least they can do is get some return on it.
I usually rip the Red Book layer for my iPod, but for serious listening, I put the disc in my SACD player. It definitely has no drawbacks over a regular CD.
No, the problem is that people are ignorant and stupid. What percentage of the American population do you think is aware of this issue? Maybe 1 or 2 percent? That's not enough to make a political difference.
I agree that 128kbps is not ideal. Therefore, I use iTMS to buy those random one hit wonder songs for which I'd never buy the album, but for my favorite music, I buy the album.
1) It might be available on SACD, which I think sounds _much_ better than CD.
2) Even if it isn't, I get cover art, liner notes, and the ability to rip at any bit rate I want
3) no DRM
4) I get that warm fuzzy feeling of actually owning something physical for my money.
I get all that for all of a few dollars in price difference, which is well worth it to me. The music store is a 3 minute walk away, so convenience isn't an issue.
What is the purpose of this? Specialized interconnects? As far as I know, there is already massive overcapacity for telecom fiber networks.
Broadband is a luxury item - we don't have an inherent right to cheap and/or fast internet service. Why is the government getting involved in it instead of waiting for the market to work things out (which may take a few years)
I have a SACD setup. Hearing is truly believing - my $150 SACD player blows away $1000 audiophile CD players, IMO. I had written it off as theoretically useless until I heard it, but now I'm absolutely sold.
The "loose gas cap" code is an evap system code that is part of the OBD-II scanner. Most auto parts stores will read the code for free. The article is mostly BS.
As time passes, I'm thinking about just switching to commercial DSL service. Current broadband offerings for the most part are targeted to the uneducated masses, and are cheap for that reason. My ISP had the nerve to tell me that my connection was "For entertainment purposes only" when I asked why the windows file sharing port was blocked (I have a static IP and I needed to share some files with some non-Mac friends of mine). So instead of bitching, the easier solution seems to be to pay for quality. The same applies to every other consumer product out there.
Yet again, lawyers will dictate the course of technology - the fear of a lawsuit jacks up insurance rates, which makes research and development excessively costly.
There seems to be a lot of interest all of a sudden on slashdot on super high res images (yesterday there was an article on a large film camera which was by no means revolutionary or record setting). It's really not that cutting edge. If you go to www.betterlight.com, they're releasing a 4x5 back capable of 10200x13800 pixels soon, and already have one available that's about 100 Mpixel. Granted, these are slow, but they've been available for a long time and are used daily by product photographers. I shoot 4x5 myself on film and make 550 MB scans. It's relatively cheap and very high res.
Last time I checked, the US was irked (fairly so, I think) because Galileo was to be broadcast on the exact same carrier frequency as GPS, making jamming of only Galileo but not GPS very difficult.
Disabling civilian GPS receivers during wartime may not be that feasable anymore. The military often uses civilian GPS receivers due to their low cost when the accuracy of P code devices is not required.
This is quickly becoming a waste of bandwidth, but I feel compelled to provide a defense. First of all, I don't appreciate my views being called a troll. They are sincere. I haven't called yours a troll, have I? Second, I never said that big business and politics weren't intertwined - but that the majority of the people have the power to change the government if they wanted to. That they are "brainwashed" doesn't matter - if they're utterly incompetent, incapable of basic rational thought and critical thinking to the point that they can't reject propaganda as hogwash, then perhaps they're incapable of governing. Third - I have had a flaw on my credit report. It cost me exactly $0.00 to fix. We are not entitled to loans, are we? In this day and age when it's trivial to get a loan to the point of absurdity, I see nothing to complain about on this front. Fourth - I agree with you about taxes. But how is big business responsible for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, prescription drugs, housing credits, etc? If there was a proposal to eliminate all income (corporate and personal) taxes, I don't think you'd see big business against it. You're free to reply, and hold your views, but please entitle me to the same courtesy as I'm trying to extend you. Name calling doesn't help.
>Consumers care about privacy but what can they do?
They can go to a supermarket, avoid the "shoppers club card" and pay with cash. No privacy issues.
As for banks - many want to keep information private, but are not allowed to do so by money laundering laws.
And as for credit cards, just don't use one.
>I agree with this marginally. There is an overwhelming vocal minority, who also happen to be extraordinarily wealthy, who will browbeat the remaining population
Based on what are they overwhelmingly wealthy? The wealthy are typically the ones in nice neighborhoods who aren't complaining about crime or stalkers. Perhaps the soccer-mom demographic is powerful, but I don't see it anywhere else.
>The overwhelming vocal, powerful minority which controls the politics also controls the largest business transactions
By definition, if they're a minority, they can't entirely control politics when politicians are democratically elected.
>Year after year the political dog and pony show goes on and the consumers are always the paying loser.
You've provided no evidence of consumers being the losers. Instead, you seem to be using the same type of hype as "what about the children", talking of the innocent poor/middle class trod on by the rich. The consumers who choose to "lose" are the losers. Any forced privacy concerns are due to regulations alone (like money laundering laws). I've never been forced to do anything by big business, and I don't know of anyone who has been.
The reason American companies don't care about customer privacy is because consumers don't care. And consumers don't care because they expect the government to protect them from everything. If people wake up, realize that they need to make decisions rather than legislating everything and criticizing "evil big business", maybe businesses would actually have an opportunity to improve the bottom line by improving privacy standards. As of right now, that's a fallacy in the minds of the average slashdotter.