The system needs overrides for military and law enforcement which could conceivably be abused by people that wish to do so. The idea is simple but implementation is not near as easy as you make it out to be
I would expect such safety procautions but there have been simpler mechanisms over looked in the past. All I was saying is that I hope we've learned from out mistakes in the past so we don't end up with a Fusion accident, it would stop the advancement and thus slow everything else down. Electricity should be cheaper since everything that drives modern society is driven by electricity, this trent will only increase unless a massive EMP goes off and sets a good chunk of us back to the dark ages for a while. Take me maybe a year or so to replace all my electronics at current price, but things would undoubtedly become more expensive so it may take me five or six years.
I agree, I wouldn't be worried about it but I'd suspect on a grand enough scale all that energy being released at once could have some very interesting or underwear ruining effects.
Mr Fusion no, but giant fusion power plant charging a fuel cell could.
Besides that, Fusion is hot, if confinement is broken you could end up with serious problems, fortunately because of the nature of fusion there wouldn't be any particles outside that are light enough to fuse properly with so it would hopefully fizzle out.
I think it does have great potential and is very worth researching, throw some more money at that problem and have the thing built sooner. It would do a world of good changing a reliance on oil and thus changing a whole political landscape for the entire world.
Sorry, but intelligence has nothing to do with many of the problems on the roads today. There are idiots that drive quite safely and geniuses that are space cadets.
Only way to work is to eliminate a computer at the controls. A central traffic grid would be hard to setup but once created could be very efficient at selecting routes to destinations. When you arrive at the address you specify getting in the car then you can point to a more precise location or tell the car to park itself. If you have no specific destination you could tell the car to just cruise.
Only way flying anything for the masses would work is if it were computer controlled. Some wireless connection to a traffic grid so you just set your destination address and it takes you their using the most efficient route. Once you are close to your destination verbal or even thought commands could be used for fine movement, hell, even pointing would work.
I think we won't see a change in transportation until we see some new energy sources. Right now I just don't think we can do all that much more with gasoline. Bring on Fusion and much improved batteries. Man, batteries haven't really changed in years!
I think that is holding back most innovation right now, reliance on gasoline and fossil fuels keeps out energy levels low in comparison. We might see a large change in 2014? Whenever the fusion reactor is created and successfully tested. Of course, hopefully they learned from such nuclear accidents as Cherynobl and Three Mile Island, I suspect a fusion related accident would be much worse.
I think a lot of people forget that the RIAA does not hold the only opinion on the matter. There are plenty of artists and record labels of different mind. I used to work for Big Heavy World and I'd say that the RIAA is taking advantage of both sides AND complaining that they aren't making more money. They would have a legitimate claim to damage if they attempted an online music service first and it failed because everyone was downloading free music. If they had given the original Napster a license most of this would have been a non issue by now.
That said, $14 dollars for a cd where often only $1 goes to the artist is just plain wrong. Big Heavy World sells cds for $14 but 1 or 2 dollars goes to the artist, maybe another dollar goes to the label and the rest goes to charity. Each cd they put out benefit a different charity.
So there are clearly stances that the RIAA has not fully throught through. Big Heavy World posts on their website their mp3s and loves it when people share and come out to their concerts.
Its nice to see there are other people that realize that lesson we all learned as kids about sharing still remains true as adults.
I was referring to Red Hat, Mandrake, Debian, SuSE. All companies that charge for their GPL'd software and they are well within the license.
What Linksys did was wrong as it didn't respect the terms of the agreement.
You speak in totalitarian terms, either everyone steals or everyone doesn't. In reality when it comes to things like music some people inevitably share, they always have, and many people will then compensate the creator for their work. When you have 40 million people downloading and 20 million buying the work outright then pretty even if the creator charges $1 for the work they would be sitting quite healthy with the fruits of their works. Except that leaves out the RIAA adding $13 to the cost of that work for themselves. Hardly a fair situation for both the consumer and the artist.
No, not like the Cuban embargo, all that has done was ruin a tiny country and make the problem worse.
Allowing free trade with China was the wrong way to go, stick with tariffs, limit the benefit they can have by selling to us and help out the U.S. economy at the same time. China has made no attempts at friendly relationships with the rest of the world so why should they be rewarded?
I don't mistake what China is, but I believe router manufacturers should not be held morally or otherwise legally responsible for what is done with their products. They offer the same advice to anyone willing to pay, and they charge the same price based on quantity. So if Qwest wants to setup a DSL network that filters qwestsucks.com then so be it, its not Cisco's fault the people buying their products have shitty intentions.
My Linux distro has man pages that tell me how to do the same things with netfilter so I hardly see anybody responsible.
I do agree intent matters, if the Cisco reps said, this is how you suppress your population then they would have a moral liability. However, I highly doubt anything like that happened since it is routine practice in the business world.
The original owner can still charge a fee if they like. Think like how company's charge for GPL'd software.
They still can choose the fate of the work but the copy lives on which in my opinion is not a bad thing in a world where copyrights last as long if not longer than the creator.
The system was built so works would eventually enter public domain after suitable compensation to the creator. This system works, the modifications are rediculous especially from a software standpoint.
Imagine waiting 70 years just to look at the source code for Linux. The code would be completely irrelevent by then so why should the author hold back something that could benefit the rest of the society? Yeah, they have the right for a time, while they make money on it, but there has to be a line at some point.
The original question was different, originally the question was whether they should be held liable. If the government says that its okay then they are not liable. If the U.S. government actually punished China or other countries for human rights violations then the story would be different. Right now there are no laws that say Cisco is doing anything wrong. Since this is the case they are not liable for anything China does with their equipment.
I recall that happening everytime I'd go to the library when I was in school. Seriously, they filtered the word "sucks"
At any rate, there are many corporations out there big and small that say what sites a user can go to and which ones they can't. Some companies even go the whitelist approach as much as it pains me to come across.
That is a very blurry line but the argument would be valid in the case of google. They say Google didn't change their servers so it looks like the provided information to China that they don't provide to others. Definitely not the same situation.
They provide the same support to everybody, they have no agenda or intent. A lot of corporations filter content exactly like China does, since they do the exact same thing for anybody I think they are hardly liable.
Sorry but your analogy is even worse, I'm trying to recide if you're joking.
Cisco does not change their product for China, they sell the same product to everybody, they provide all the same resources to everybody. If someone runs me over with their car intentionally then I cannot sue the car manufacturer nor should I be able to, they have no control over how their consumers will use the product. Just like cd burner manufacturers. Many people use their products legitimately and many do not, they should not be held liable.
Ultimately blame lays in the most direct path unless their is collusion involved.
DD doesn't circumvent copy protection. All those mechanisms will still be in place on the copy so the next person that wants to try to use Nero Disc Copy will still fail.
I don't think the law is as black and white as you put it.
As much as I'd like to agree with that policy it ain't gonna happen simply because if an ISP create a policy it has to be for all users of a particular service. Those users could be using Windows, they could also be using Mac, or Linux or a billion and one other variants. This is where I think it is best to just educate everybody. That is the key piece most of these people that get infected are missing.
I agree its not all bad, the noise does make drivers aware of their presence, but face it, there are drivers that don't noticed cars right beside them, louder cars don't prevent that so why should louder bikes be any different.
The horn does work if they only use it when a car in encrouching on their space, bikes are all a complete space, if a police officer sees you driving beside a bike on a two lane road they will pull you over since the bike has the whole lane to themselves. Of course since they break the rule a lot it makes it harder to defend them.
With probably the majority of bikes this is true but there are bikes that literally shake the ground as they go by. Often you will think the bike is right near you but in reality its barely in view, then it gets closer and all other sounds are drowned out so you still can't tell where it is.
Also, I live in Phoenix, a good portion of the year you can't drive with your Windows down, the heat will get to you. A/C is a fair requirement. Some would dare go without but not me.
Straight pipes should not be used on the street, besides the fact that in traffic all you use is low end torque, if you want a car or bike that runs great while its running fast only use it when racing otherwise it has no business going through neighorhoods and such.
Its quite interesting because a lot of neighorhood have a sound level max that these bikes and cars break all the time but since its not music its quite acceptable, not too sure why, then again, I never did get the "Harley Davidson sound"
Most people I see just put an exhaust tip on the end to make the car louder and coincidentally restricting the airflow even more.
It is one thing just to hear the car like it is without a muffler, quite another when its so loud the ground shakes around it.
My point was the muffler does not need to be loud to achieve ideal airflow. A little pressure is also not a bad thing as it tends to produce more torque. There is a fine line of adjustment
That would almost be a valid point, it is one I've heard of before, and to that I say, use your damned horn! A constant noise has the exact same effect. When the bike is loud enough you can't tell where it is even though its right behind you or next to you.
Slashdot Mirror
The system needs overrides for military and law enforcement which could conceivably be abused by people that wish to do so. The idea is simple but implementation is not near as easy as you make it out to be
I would expect such safety procautions but there have been simpler mechanisms over looked in the past. All I was saying is that I hope we've learned from out mistakes in the past so we don't end up with a Fusion accident, it would stop the advancement and thus slow everything else down. Electricity should be cheaper since everything that drives modern society is driven by electricity, this trent will only increase unless a massive EMP goes off and sets a good chunk of us back to the dark ages for a while. Take me maybe a year or so to replace all my electronics at current price, but things would undoubtedly become more expensive so it may take me five or six years.
grrr, should have checked that more carefully. Eliminate a human at the controls and put a computer in there full time is what I meant
I agree, I wouldn't be worried about it but I'd suspect on a grand enough scale all that energy being released at once could have some very interesting or underwear ruining effects.
Besides that, Fusion is hot, if confinement is broken you could end up with serious problems, fortunately because of the nature of fusion there wouldn't be any particles outside that are light enough to fuse properly with so it would hopefully fizzle out.
I think it does have great potential and is very worth researching, throw some more money at that problem and have the thing built sooner. It would do a world of good changing a reliance on oil and thus changing a whole political landscape for the entire world.Only way to work is to eliminate a computer at the controls. A central traffic grid would be hard to setup but once created could be very efficient at selecting routes to destinations. When you arrive at the address you specify getting in the car then you can point to a more precise location or tell the car to park itself. If you have no specific destination you could tell the car to just cruise.
Only way flying anything for the masses would work is if it were computer controlled. Some wireless connection to a traffic grid so you just set your destination address and it takes you their using the most efficient route. Once you are close to your destination verbal or even thought commands could be used for fine movement, hell, even pointing would work.
Solve any congestion problems and improve the health of citizens at the same time. Seems like a great idea to me
I think that is holding back most innovation right now, reliance on gasoline and fossil fuels keeps out energy levels low in comparison. We might see a large change in 2014? Whenever the fusion reactor is created and successfully tested. Of course, hopefully they learned from such nuclear accidents as Cherynobl and Three Mile Island, I suspect a fusion related accident would be much worse.
I wanna talk on my cell phone while reading a news paper with one foot out my door while I drive a flying car!
I used to work for Big Heavy World and I'd say that the RIAA is taking advantage of both sides AND complaining that they aren't making more money. They would have a legitimate claim to damage if they attempted an online music service first and it failed because everyone was downloading free music. If they had given the original Napster a license most of this would have been a non issue by now.
That said, $14 dollars for a cd where often only $1 goes to the artist is just plain wrong. Big Heavy World sells cds for $14 but 1 or 2 dollars goes to the artist, maybe another dollar goes to the label and the rest goes to charity. Each cd they put out benefit a different charity.
So there are clearly stances that the RIAA has not fully throught through. Big Heavy World posts on their website their mp3s and loves it when people share and come out to their concerts.Its nice to see there are other people that realize that lesson we all learned as kids about sharing still remains true as adults.
What Linksys did was wrong as it didn't respect the terms of the agreement.
You speak in totalitarian terms, either everyone steals or everyone doesn't. In reality when it comes to things like music some people inevitably share, they always have, and many people will then compensate the creator for their work. When you have 40 million people downloading and 20 million buying the work outright then pretty even if the creator charges $1 for the work they would be sitting quite healthy with the fruits of their works. Except that leaves out the RIAA adding $13 to the cost of that work for themselves. Hardly a fair situation for both the consumer and the artist.Allowing free trade with China was the wrong way to go, stick with tariffs, limit the benefit they can have by selling to us and help out the U.S. economy at the same time. China has made no attempts at friendly relationships with the rest of the world so why should they be rewarded?
I don't mistake what China is, but I believe router manufacturers should not be held morally or otherwise legally responsible for what is done with their products. They offer the same advice to anyone willing to pay, and they charge the same price based on quantity. So if Qwest wants to setup a DSL network that filters qwestsucks.com then so be it, its not Cisco's fault the people buying their products have shitty intentions.My Linux distro has man pages that tell me how to do the same things with netfilter so I hardly see anybody responsible.
I do agree intent matters, if the Cisco reps said, this is how you suppress your population then they would have a moral liability. However, I highly doubt anything like that happened since it is routine practice in the business world.They still can choose the fate of the work but the copy lives on which in my opinion is not a bad thing in a world where copyrights last as long if not longer than the creator.
The system was built so works would eventually enter public domain after suitable compensation to the creator. This system works, the modifications are rediculous especially from a software standpoint.Imagine waiting 70 years just to look at the source code for Linux. The code would be completely irrelevent by then so why should the author hold back something that could benefit the rest of the society? Yeah, they have the right for a time, while they make money on it, but there has to be a line at some point.
The original question was different, originally the question was whether they should be held liable. If the government says that its okay then they are not liable. If the U.S. government actually punished China or other countries for human rights violations then the story would be different. Right now there are no laws that say Cisco is doing anything wrong. Since this is the case they are not liable for anything China does with their equipment.
I recall that happening everytime I'd go to the library when I was in school. Seriously, they filtered the word "sucks" At any rate, there are many corporations out there big and small that say what sites a user can go to and which ones they can't. Some companies even go the whitelist approach as much as it pains me to come across.
That is a very blurry line but the argument would be valid in the case of google. They say Google didn't change their servers so it looks like the provided information to China that they don't provide to others. Definitely not the same situation.
They provide the same support to everybody, they have no agenda or intent. A lot of corporations filter content exactly like China does, since they do the exact same thing for anybody I think they are hardly liable.
Cisco does not change their product for China, they sell the same product to everybody, they provide all the same resources to everybody. If someone runs me over with their car intentionally then I cannot sue the car manufacturer nor should I be able to, they have no control over how their consumers will use the product. Just like cd burner manufacturers. Many people use their products legitimately and many do not, they should not be held liable.
Ultimately blame lays in the most direct path unless their is collusion involved.
I don't think the law is as black and white as you put it.
As much as I'd like to agree with that policy it ain't gonna happen simply because if an ISP create a policy it has to be for all users of a particular service. Those users could be using Windows, they could also be using Mac, or Linux or a billion and one other variants. This is where I think it is best to just educate everybody. That is the key piece most of these people that get infected are missing.
The horn does work if they only use it when a car in encrouching on their space, bikes are all a complete space, if a police officer sees you driving beside a bike on a two lane road they will pull you over since the bike has the whole lane to themselves. Of course since they break the rule a lot it makes it harder to defend them.
Also, I live in Phoenix, a good portion of the year you can't drive with your Windows down, the heat will get to you. A/C is a fair requirement. Some would dare go without but not me.
Straight pipes should not be used on the street, besides the fact that in traffic all you use is low end torque, if you want a car or bike that runs great while its running fast only use it when racing otherwise it has no business going through neighorhoods and such.Its quite interesting because a lot of neighorhood have a sound level max that these bikes and cars break all the time but since its not music its quite acceptable, not too sure why, then again, I never did get the "Harley Davidson sound"
It is one thing just to hear the car like it is without a muffler, quite another when its so loud the ground shakes around it.
My point was the muffler does not need to be loud to achieve ideal airflow. A little pressure is also not a bad thing as it tends to produce more torque. There is a fine line of adjustmentThat would almost be a valid point, it is one I've heard of before, and to that I say, use your damned horn! A constant noise has the exact same effect. When the bike is loud enough you can't tell where it is even though its right behind you or next to you.