My main question is how is this an invasion of privacy? I wouldn't have a problem scanning in my hand to check in to work -- but it seems that a lot of people do. I guess letting companies having biometric information could be the beginning of a long and slippery slope, but I can't really see a worst case scenario... someone care to visualize it for me?
I am one of those who would have a big problem with scanning into work with my palm, fingers, eyeballs, or whatever, unless I worked at a military installation or similar. Biometrics are used under the presumption that an employer will cheat when being clocked in and out. The presumption of guilt. I find that very offensive. I find it very offensive that I have to take the risk of having my biometric data on some database that can at any time be compromised, just becasue some suit thinks his employees are trying to cheat him.
I'm not very familiar with the new Canadian privacy law, but the article seems to imply that the protection of an individual's personal data only applies to the individual as a consumer, not the individual as an employee. It also implies that as an employee, your personal data can, in some instances, be used for other purposes than the original purpose for its collection. (Any Canadian privacy experts out there who can enlighten me and the rest of us?)
If what I assume is correct, there is no reason for McDonalds to not use the hand/fingerprint data in some other way, if they wanted to, for example checking for criminal records, as mentioned in the article. They say they won't use the data for anything else, but they have also said their food is healthy. Would employees have the right to be informed if McDonalds suddenly used the hand/fingerprint data for something other than clocking in and out? Plus, it is not impossible for this data to be stolen and then abused. Who would then be responsible, under Canadian law? If employees have weaker protection under the law, does this mean that employers aren't required to secure the personal data of its employees the same way an e-tailer is required to the secure personal data of its customers?
Another problem is what happens when this technology becomes mainstream, and used in most workplaces. It is understandably used in workplaces where security is an issue, and for now it's only McDonalds and a handful of other places that do not have the same security concerns as say, a nuclear power plant. The more use, the more potential for abuse. Workers need to have their rights secured before these devices are used. I just hope Manitoba (and the other provinces lacking strong provincial privacy legislation) wake up and create new laws to protect the people!
It's bad enough I'm seriously addicted to cheese. And to cool kitchen gadgets. And now they're making a cheese slicing laser. I'm never going to get cured! Never I say!
Boys play with traditional toys up until the age of eight or 10, and it is in the zero to seven age range that Lego has its niche.'
What about girls? (And there's supposed to be ingrained gender equality in Denmark hmmmf!)
OK, the girls that play with Legos and stuff like that might get shunned by the the silly girls who play with dolls and maybe some parents want their little girls to wear frilly dresses and play with dolls and girlie stuff but 1) it was always more fun to play with the boys, and 2) who says you can't make a tea party set with lego blocks??
What's the point of having this anti-spam law in the US anyways? The real point I mean. Is it an attempt to make American citizens or the people of the world think that the US is tough on spam or something? I mean all that stuff about real address and markers for porn are nice and all, but without the rule of opt-in, you may as well not bother having an anti-spam law at all.
An anti-spam law ought to ensure that people do not receive spam. Period. It doesn't matter if the addresses are real or not. It does not matter if they are marked for pornographic content or not. They should not be receiving that kind of e-mail in the first place, and it should not be a burden upon the people to ensure non-receipt of spam. And if for some reason someone or other wants this kind of e-mail, they should explicitly consent to itsreceipt.
No, no, you can't do that! That might lead to independent thought and stuff!
But seriously, I remember playing with Legos sans specialist bricks, as well as with Lincoln Logs, Erector sets, and the such. And then I see the toys today. Are kids so less creative now that "traditional" Legos are too great a challenge?
This is horrible. I was hoping to buy my nephew lots of Mindstorms stuff when he got older. Maybe I have to buy them now and keep them around?
I'm not sure the price of these toys is the problem. Toys in general aren't exactly cheap these days. Neither are video games, and video games seem to be what is the most appealing to children these days. So what we might need to look into is why expensive video games are more interesting than expensive toys where children have to actually think to use them. Or did I just answer my own question?
Borrayo says he has no way of knowing if the records, with titles like Como Te Extrano Vol. IV ? Musica de los 70?s y 80?s, are illegal, but he thought better of arguing the point.
Not only do they pick on a little guy that doesn't know English, they pick on a little guy that doesn't know English who sells cheezy Mexican whatever...
And what's this about recording height and weight and eye color and stuff? Doesn't California have a supposedly decent privacy law of some sort? (If someone can send me a link, I'd appreciate it, as I'm not familiar with it.)
How hard is it to have "None of the above" as an option?
Perhaps these voters wanted to vote for a Democrat, and when they want to vote for a Democrat, they do not want to vote for "none of the above." Or a Republican. So if the ballot only has Republicans, then there is a serious problem.
Have they actually proved that the voter didn't hit the vote button, or is the claim a mere speculation?
I kind of get this kooky conspiracy theory feeling where say every 3 votes for the "wrong" candidate is excluded and it's a part of the closed program code. You kind of get that feeling when you see stuff like this: Bogdanoff had a ready explanation for the mystery. She theorized that some of the people who cast nonvotes were among the county's true-blue Democrats who were appalled to find a ballot with only Republicans. Did this really happen?
I'm otherwise (still) surprised that paper receipts were never given in the beginning, but it's a very good idea for the future. If anything, it should be a requirement.
I heard on the news yesterday that Lego has a 1,4 billion DKK deficit and that the vice administrative director Poul Plougmann was fired with immediate effect.
They also interviewed a bunch of little kids who were all very uninterested in Legos. What a shame...
Hmm...I may be heading towards the off-topic zone here, but my curiousity is killing me.
Do you feel you could have taken the SAT and done well without the calculators?
What I would be interested in looking at is a copy of the exam I took when I took it (late 80s) and compare it to the tests they give out now, or say 7 years ago. Especially when I keep hearing the SAT has been "dumbed down" (maybe it's just the English section? Remember the "regatta" debate, you old folks here?:)
...we weren't allowed to use calculators. I still managed to cough up a 750 on the math part. I guess I would have gotten that 800 had I been allowed that calculator...*cough*
When I was in Thailand, I encountered a lot of merchants who used the abacus to calculate whatever. People who had calculators used them more to show tourists the Arabic number price than to calculate the final sum.
It's the most powerful TI graphing handheld allowed for use on the AP* Calculus, AP Statistics, AP Physics, AP Chemistry, PSAT/NMSQT**, SAT(R) I , SAT II Math IC & IIC exams.
BEWARE! "Back in the old days" rant coming...
When I took those exams, we weren't allowed to use those fancy calculators. If we were even allowed to use calculators at all, we were only allowed to use the most basic scientific calculator you can find. No graphics, no programming, nada zip zero.
OK, rant over. I guess the old-fashioned kind of calculator is hard to find these days. But I'm quite curious now. Have the questions been adjusted to account for use of all these fancy calculators?
Honestly, this was bound to happen some day or the other.
I think it's happening more often than what we read about in the mainstream press. Most businesses want to keep things hush-hush as to not generate bad publicity.
Good, atleast this way companies will be more careful about protecting data.
I doubt it, although I tend to be a pessimist when it comes to these matters. As long as they can hide behind lawsuits, it will be business as usual.
My final note of pessimism: things are going to get much worse before they get better. Brace yourselves!
Over here, immigrants from places like Pakistan and Sri Lanka and India have a significantly higher rate of diabetes II than the Nordic white population. Many of these immigrants are vegetarians, for religious reasons. They get diabetes II because they eat too little protein, too many carbs (espcially bread, cakes and cookies - I see what they buy at the shops), way too much oil (even if it's vegetable oil), and don't exercise enough.
Diabetes I is low in certain developing countries not because of better diet, but because of poverty. People with diabetes I were left to die, usually because they/their family couldn't afford the treatment (or diagnosis for that matter), and thus diabetes I gets slowly removed from the gene pool.
...is going to be one of the "hot" health topics this year. I've seen several reports like the Harvard one, and I've seen several reports saying coffee/caffeine promotes insulin resistance which leads to diabetes type 2. I've also seen reports saying regular coffee helps, but not decaf or tea. And of course reports saying tea is THE thing. At this point, it's too early to say who's right and who's wrong.
One thing to note is that a lot of the reports I read saying that coffee leads to diabetes type 2 also imply that the coffee is consumed together with some kind of carbohydrate-laced food, usually cakes or something. It is also equally important to note that there are a large number of athletes and serious exercisers who use coffee as a performance enhancer; they tend to not have diabetes type 2 and they tend not to consume their coffee with performance-undermining cakes.
What I would like to see are more reports taking these factors into account.Compare people who drink just coffee with people who drink coffee and eat cake. Compare people who drink coffee and exercise vigorously on a regular basis with people who drink coffee and sit on the couch all day. Let's get rid of all the double-messages and ambiguities.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you know? And do you think they'd tell you if you did?
I am one of those who would have a big problem with scanning into work with my palm, fingers, eyeballs, or whatever, unless I worked at a military installation or similar. Biometrics are used under the presumption that an employer will cheat when being clocked in and out. The presumption of guilt. I find that very offensive. I find it very offensive that I have to take the risk of having my biometric data on some database that can at any time be compromised, just becasue some suit thinks his employees are trying to cheat him.
If what I assume is correct, there is no reason for McDonalds to not use the hand/fingerprint data in some other way, if they wanted to, for example checking for criminal records, as mentioned in the article. They say they won't use the data for anything else, but they have also said their food is healthy. Would employees have the right to be informed if McDonalds suddenly used the hand/fingerprint data for something other than clocking in and out? Plus, it is not impossible for this data to be stolen and then abused. Who would then be responsible, under Canadian law? If employees have weaker protection under the law, does this mean that employers aren't required to secure the personal data of its employees the same way an e-tailer is required to the secure personal data of its customers?
Another problem is what happens when this technology becomes mainstream, and used in most workplaces. It is understandably used in workplaces where security is an issue, and for now it's only McDonalds and a handful of other places that do not have the same security concerns as say, a nuclear power plant. The more use, the more potential for abuse. Workers need to have their rights secured before these devices are used. I just hope Manitoba (and the other provinces lacking strong provincial privacy legislation) wake up and create new laws to protect the people!
Must have...must have...must have...must have...
As long as personal data continues to be a commodity, profit will go over privacy.
What about girls? (And there's supposed to be ingrained gender equality in Denmark hmmmf!)
OK, the girls that play with Legos and stuff like that might get shunned by the the silly girls who play with dolls and maybe some parents want their little girls to wear frilly dresses and play with dolls and girlie stuff but 1) it was always more fun to play with the boys, and 2) who says you can't make a tea party set with lego blocks??
"Stick to your ribs" suddenly has a whole new meaning...
An anti-spam law ought to ensure that people do not receive spam. Period. It doesn't matter if the addresses are real or not. It does not matter if they are marked for pornographic content or not. They should not be receiving that kind of e-mail in the first place, and it should not be a burden upon the people to ensure non-receipt of spam. And if for some reason someone or other wants this kind of e-mail, they should explicitly consent to itsreceipt.
He's around 18 months. He's almost ready for his first Duplo set *sigh* They grow up so fast..
No, no, you can't do that! That might lead to independent thought and stuff!
But seriously, I remember playing with Legos sans specialist bricks, as well as with Lincoln Logs, Erector sets, and the such. And then I see the toys today. Are kids so less creative now that "traditional" Legos are too great a challenge?
I'm not sure the price of these toys is the problem. Toys in general aren't exactly cheap these days. Neither are video games, and video games seem to be what is the most appealing to children these days. So what we might need to look into is why expensive video games are more interesting than expensive toys where children have to actually think to use them. Or did I just answer my own question?
And this coming from an Anonymous Coward...
Paraphrasing Andre Bacard, people who have nothing to hide are either complete dullards or extreme exhibitionists.
Not only do they pick on a little guy that doesn't know English, they pick on a little guy that doesn't know English who sells cheezy Mexican whatever...
And what's this about recording height and weight and eye color and stuff? Doesn't California have a supposedly decent privacy law of some sort? (If someone can send me a link, I'd appreciate it, as I'm not familiar with it.)
Perhaps these voters wanted to vote for a Democrat, and when they want to vote for a Democrat, they do not want to vote for "none of the above." Or a Republican. So if the ballot only has Republicans, then there is a serious problem.
I kind of get this kooky conspiracy theory feeling where say every 3 votes for the "wrong" candidate is excluded and it's a part of the closed program code. You kind of get that feeling when you see stuff like this: Bogdanoff had a ready explanation for the mystery. She theorized that some of the people who cast nonvotes were among the county's true-blue Democrats who were appalled to find a ballot with only Republicans. Did this really happen?
I'm otherwise (still) surprised that paper receipts were never given in the beginning, but it's a very good idea for the future. If anything, it should be a requirement.
They also interviewed a bunch of little kids who were all very uninterested in Legos. What a shame...
Is that a slide rule in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?
Do you feel you could have taken the SAT and done well without the calculators?
What I would be interested in looking at is a copy of the exam I took when I took it (late 80s) and compare it to the tests they give out now, or say 7 years ago. Especially when I keep hearing the SAT has been "dumbed down" (maybe it's just the English section? Remember the "regatta" debate, you old folks here? :)
...we weren't allowed to use calculators. I still managed to cough up a 750 on the math part. I guess I would have gotten that 800 had I been allowed that calculator...*cough*
When I was in Thailand, I encountered a lot of merchants who used the abacus to calculate whatever. People who had calculators used them more to show tourists the Arabic number price than to calculate the final sum.
BEWARE! "Back in the old days" rant coming...
When I took those exams, we weren't allowed to use those fancy calculators. If we were even allowed to use calculators at all, we were only allowed to use the most basic scientific calculator you can find. No graphics, no programming, nada zip zero.
OK, rant over. I guess the old-fashioned kind of calculator is hard to find these days. But I'm quite curious now. Have the questions been adjusted to account for use of all these fancy calculators?
I think it's happening more often than what we read about in the mainstream press. Most businesses want to keep things hush-hush as to not generate bad publicity.
Good, atleast this way companies will be more careful about protecting data.
I doubt it, although I tend to be a pessimist when it comes to these matters. As long as they can hide behind lawsuits, it will be business as usual.
My final note of pessimism: things are going to get much worse before they get better. Brace yourselves!
'Vegetarianism no shield against diabetes'
Diabetes I is low in certain developing countries not because of better diet, but because of poverty. People with diabetes I were left to die, usually because they/their family couldn't afford the treatment (or diagnosis for that matter), and thus diabetes I gets slowly removed from the gene pool.
One thing to note is that a lot of the reports I read saying that coffee leads to diabetes type 2 also imply that the coffee is consumed together with some kind of carbohydrate-laced food, usually cakes or something. It is also equally important to note that there are a large number of athletes and serious exercisers who use coffee as a performance enhancer; they tend to not have diabetes type 2 and they tend not to consume their coffee with performance-undermining cakes.
What I would like to see are more reports taking these factors into account.Compare people who drink just coffee with people who drink coffee and eat cake. Compare people who drink coffee and exercise vigorously on a regular basis with people who drink coffee and sit on the couch all day. Let's get rid of all the double-messages and ambiguities.