With a US-issued passport, we have a reasonable comfort level that the person is who they say they are. And, we already have those fingerprints on file.
I don't disagree with your basic premise. But AFAIK, the US Government does not fingerprint passport applicants. Maybe they lift them off of the application forms, but I doubt it.
In the end growth comes from exports being greater than imports and use of resources.
There's nothing wrong with a *stable* economy, BTW. Presumably eventually we'll run into the limits for economic growth possibilities on Earth anyway. Note that stable GDP doesn't imply lack of technological progress or innovation, just that the population of "customers" is remaining stable and there's only so much that a single person can purchase in a lifetime.
We were told that if you are out after curfew you are required to have ID on you at all times.
AFAIK, you're required to identify yourself to police correctly when asked, not necessarily carry an ID (unless you're driving). Actually, here (NJ) even if you get stopped randomly at a drunk driving checkpoint, the cops don't even ask for a license[1]. Just if you've been drinking tonight. Presumably if the cop smells alcohol, you'll have to take a breathalyzer test or "walk the line", but I've never been pulled over after after drinking.
-b.
[1]- This may vary by town, but in my experience they've never checked. I don't think they want to set themselves up for an "unreasonable search" suit.
Common law goes back centuries when the police didn't have any tools other than eye witness accounts.
Actually, "common law" is a system of law that evolves with court decisions. It's a living thing, not something that's set in stone.
Change one of those and it would be less than a decade before we have widespread fingerprinting and DNA tracking.
And they wouldn't help solve most crimes, you know. Fingerprints are easily defeatable with gloves. In a thing like a car theft, DNA would be difficult to use since many people would have sat in a car over time. DNA is only a good investigative tool in cases where the perp's blood is spilled or in case of a rape to determine the origin of semen. In other cases, it can be used to provide proof of guilt or innocence, but in those cases, the suspect is usually in hand from other evidence first.
not to rain on your parade but how does it stop terrorist groups that are American born and already in the country? I'm not just talking about fanatical islamists btw, USA has its fair share of whack jobs across the board.
Said "whackjobs" are less likely to be suicide attackers, first of all. Secondly, I don't know of any homegrown terrorist plots by people who wanted to destroy America as a whole. The same can't be said about Islamic terrorists. In fact, various Islamic groups *want* us to pass more Draconian internal laws so we will destroy our free society from the inside out. By tightening our borders but keeping things inside the US fairly free, we're doing the exact opposite of what our enemies desire.
Why you think that all your countries citizens are more loyal to the country than another countries citizens are to it, I don't know.
If you're born in a country, grew up there, and have family and friends living there, you'll be a lot less likely to want to indiscriminately kill your compatriots. Besides, suicide terrorists are much harder to stop, but people raised in an American culture are unlikely to become suicide terrorists. Lastly, people do have a way of being loyal to the country of their birth, even without strong economic incentives.
Even McVeigh didn't want to destroy America per se - he was fighting against the government in his twisted mind and he thought the Federal Building a military target. Islamic terrorists OTOH have routinely spoken about wanting the collapse of American society.
I know I'll not be visiting the USA until restrictions like these are lifted, your country needs my tourist £££s more than I need your country. I'll just hop on the next 99p flight to the south of France, or perhaps Pizza in Italy instead (or Berlin, Prague or Rome etc. there's a lot to see on my own continent). It's cheaper and just entertaining and more relaxing than fighting my way through US customs.
Have fun -- we won't miss you too much honestly. BTW - Prague, CZ and Krakow, PL are really beautiful and interesting cities, been there several times.
I think that if you'd completely isolate yourself you'd probably go to mass-produced clothing with a high cotton content made in partially automated manufactures. That way you don't have the short-term time and money costs associated with the development and deployment of tailoring robots.
It may also be a stepwise process - one innovation begets another until we do have robots. As it stands now, clothing manufacture hasn't changed much from 120 years ago.
Read the sentence before the one you quoted:You haven't been keeping up with who's been committing the major acts of terrorism in recent years, have you?
We were talking about US politics, not politics in foreign countries. Each country has a different demographic makeup, so different rules should apply. In the US, good border security may go a long way.
By requiring ID they are forcing final sales of airline tickets. If tickets were transferable or resalable the airlines would lose money because of the ability to buy tickets second hand.
Which should be illegal. If a service was bought from an airline, the airline should be required to provide said service to one customer -- any customer. If they're worried about stolen tickets, then just require a notarized letter from the original holder of the ticket that it's being transferred of their own free will yadda yadda...
Looking a catalogues just does not cut it for the fairer sex. Everything has to be on the rack to be touched, tried on, accessorized and to enable them to ask the most dangerious of questions "Does this make me look fat?".
There will be "floor models" to try on. Plus some clothing will be off the rack still. My original point was about automated domestic production, not about custom fitting. The possibility of custom fitting would just be a nice fringe benefit.
I don't want to que up every time I want to get a new suit.
One typically needs some alterations done anyway to make a suit fit correctly. So you'll be getting it the next day, usually, as it is now. This opens up the possibility of perfectly-fitting, custom-made suits at a more reasonable price: something that has been hitherto impossible.
Off-the-shelf clothing would still be available. This would just enhance the number of choices and make clothes better fitting. The measurements would be taken electronically and quickly. They wouldn't require standing still for more than a few seconds. Certainly no worse than trying clothing on a screaming kid until you happen upon something that fits. Remember that since clothing is handmade, there's some difference even between the same numerical sizes.
It is actually a lot more complicate that it would seem at first glance, even doing it by hand is.
I never said it would be simple, just that it's a solvable problem, eventually.
No, I need kids clothes now, I do not have the time to wait for the system to measure my children, fetch the cloth, load it into the system, cut it out, assemble it.....
Have your kids measured once or twice a year, possibly via an ultrasound or millimeter wave system that makes a 3D model of their physique. Maybe at the same time as a medical checkup. The data could be kept electronically on a flash disk that's given to a shop. For those times when you need clothing *now*, there could also be premade off-the-rack stuff made using the same automated tech.
I can just see it every one dressed in the same outfit, China 1960s comes to mind.
Nah, if custom, automated manufacturing of clothing becomes a reality, you'd have *more* diversity of styles, not fewer. You may even be able to tell your tailoring shop exactly what you want in a suit or shirt, and the alterations will be done as it's made rather than afterwards. Small designers will actually find it easier to sell their designs, since they won't need to put out several thousand copies or make it very expensive to make a profit.
There'll be interesting intellectual property questions, however:)
Someone I know just went to jail for owning child porn. He'll most likely be deported back to germany after his release from jail. His finger prints won't be in any interpol DB, so he'll still be free to enter the US anytime.
Well, if he got convicted in the US, his prints will likely be in an FBI or state database. Probably a bar to entering the US. I didn't say they'd *just* check Interpol DBs. Besides, child porn owners are about #1001 on our list of undesirable entrants into the US.
Just think no more cheap products to fill the shelves of your local WalMart stores. Won't the masses just love that. Remember that clothing is still made by hand.
*Still* made by hand. Don't think that we won't have robots that scan a human body and tailor custom clothing to it on site eventually. Think about it: your size will always be in stock. Necessity is the mother of invention.
Hint: Many of them were citizens of the nation they attacked, and carrying genuine ID, too.
The 9/11 hijackers were legally in the US, or at least *entered* legally. They were not citizens, AFAIK, or at least not native-born citizens. As for McVeigh and OKC, it was never McVeigh's aim to destroy American society nor to cause mass random panic. In his twisted mind, he was in a legit war against the US government, but not against all Americans.
I've never been fingerprinted before, in any country, so there's no record for comparison. I don't have a biometric passport. Can you please clarify exactly what they are checking?
International (Interpol?) criminal databases? If you're not in those DB's, then you likely won't have a problem.
Hm... Let's see, your country doesn't have enough oil, titan, steel, aluminum, electronic factories, etc. to be self-sufficient.
Oil: we have plenty in the ANWR and offshore should we need to tap it. If we go self-sufficient, we won't be burning a lot of it for energy anyway, since we'll probably go mostly nuclear with some wind, hydro, and solar.
Titanium: it's a niche element. Unlike the Russians, we never used a lot of it in airframes.
Steel/aluminium: we have the production and recycling capacity.
Electronic factories: nothing that can't be corrected in a few decades. I bet we can run them a lot more cleanly than the Chinese, too. Remember that up until the 1980s, we produced a large fraction of the world's electronics and electrical parts.
USSR tried to do that trick once - isolate itself from another countries.
That wasn't the reason why the USSR failed, though. The USSR was stuck with a political system that didn't reward personal initiative. The US system did and still does. Creating startup companies is still very easy and un-bureaucratic as compared to in most other countries.
The average [inser_country_here] Citizen is innoent too, you know. And yet we are seen as a potential criminal when entering the U.S. (more so if we are Latin American, African or Middle-Eastern).
But if we catch the non-innocent fraction and turn them away before they enter, then this makes everyone's life in the US a bit easier. We're not talking about a criminal prosecution here, we're talking about the privilege of entering US soil.
Fingerprinting non-citizens will not even raise the proverbial eye-brow of the nation...
As well it shouldn't. Before we let a random person into our country, we need to verify his identity to make sure he's not a criminal or terrorist. Biometrics are one way to do this since documents can and will be forged. There are a lot of people who hate us, perhaps justifiably. Given this, we need to protect ourselves. Border security is one of the least intrusive ways to do this compared to domestic spying and surveillance. Given a tight border, there'll be (in theory) much less of a need for Draconian domestic laws.
When you're an isolated third world country that no one visits and everyone trades else where will you still want to stay at home?
Nah, we have 300 million people, a lot of land, and a lot of technological expertise. I suspect that we can stand on our own if we really had to. Manufacturing can be a *hell* of a lot more automated than it is now, and ultimately, workers will realize that automation creates domestic jobs rather than taking them away.
Is *exactly* what's needed. If we can prevent dangerous people who hate the US from entering and possibly causing mayhem in the first place, then we can afford to be more relaxed with our domestic laws. Whether or not those people are justified in hating the US is a seperate question, but the average American is innocent in this and need not be subjected to increased risk of terrorism *nor* to Draconian domestic anti-terrorism laws. A strong border around a more free society is a totally reasonably compromise, IMHO.
I hope that after a decade or so without another attack, we can keep the good border security and finally repeal some of the more obnoxious domestic laws.
Your device could have some sort of solar panel on each side, and the charging pad/emitter could be an intense / invisible spectrum of light to charge.
Invisible light is either infrared (heat radiation) or it's UV (kills the eyes and skin in the truly invisible spectrum, plus I don't think good UV solar cells exist). But the source could just be a normal desk lamp. Probably not strong enough to charge a laptop, but it may work for things like cell phones, iPods, and calculators with more efficient solar cells.
I am sick of this (unsightly) rigging. Yes, I will tolerate a higher power bill to eliminate it.
What about standardizing low-voltage electronics at 5V and 12V input voltages whenever possible? Then you could have a big switcher power supply with, say, a dozen outputs to power everything on your desk.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't disagree with your basic premise. But AFAIK, the US Government does not fingerprint passport applicants. Maybe they lift them off of the application forms, but I doubt it.
-b.
There's nothing wrong with a *stable* economy, BTW. Presumably eventually we'll run into the limits for economic growth possibilities on Earth anyway. Note that stable GDP doesn't imply lack of technological progress or innovation, just that the population of "customers" is remaining stable and there's only so much that a single person can purchase in a lifetime.
-b.
AFAIK, you're required to identify yourself to police correctly when asked, not necessarily carry an ID (unless you're driving). Actually, here (NJ) even if you get stopped randomly at a drunk driving checkpoint, the cops don't even ask for a license[1]. Just if you've been drinking tonight. Presumably if the cop smells alcohol, you'll have to take a breathalyzer test or "walk the line", but I've never been pulled over after after drinking.
-b.
[1]- This may vary by town, but in my experience they've never checked. I don't think they want to set themselves up for an "unreasonable search" suit.
Actually, "common law" is a system of law that evolves with court decisions. It's a living thing, not something that's set in stone.
Change one of those and it would be less than a decade before we have widespread fingerprinting and DNA tracking.
And they wouldn't help solve most crimes, you know. Fingerprints are easily defeatable with gloves. In a thing like a car theft, DNA would be difficult to use since many people would have sat in a car over time. DNA is only a good investigative tool in cases where the perp's blood is spilled or in case of a rape to determine the origin of semen. In other cases, it can be used to provide proof of guilt or innocence, but in those cases, the suspect is usually in hand from other evidence first.
-b.
Said "whackjobs" are less likely to be suicide attackers, first of all. Secondly, I don't know of any homegrown terrorist plots by people who wanted to destroy America as a whole. The same can't be said about Islamic terrorists. In fact, various Islamic groups *want* us to pass more Draconian internal laws so we will destroy our free society from the inside out. By tightening our borders but keeping things inside the US fairly free, we're doing the exact opposite of what our enemies desire.
-b.
If you're born in a country, grew up there, and have family and friends living there, you'll be a lot less likely to want to indiscriminately kill your compatriots. Besides, suicide terrorists are much harder to stop, but people raised in an American culture are unlikely to become suicide terrorists. Lastly, people do have a way of being loyal to the country of their birth, even without strong economic incentives.
Even McVeigh didn't want to destroy America per se - he was fighting against the government in his twisted mind and he thought the Federal Building a military target. Islamic terrorists OTOH have routinely spoken about wanting the collapse of American society.
I know I'll not be visiting the USA until restrictions like these are lifted, your country needs my tourist £££s more than I need your country. I'll just hop on the next 99p flight to the south of France, or perhaps Pizza in Italy instead (or Berlin, Prague or Rome etc. there's a lot to see on my own continent). It's cheaper and just entertaining and more relaxing than fighting my way through US customs.
Have fun -- we won't miss you too much honestly. BTW - Prague, CZ and Krakow, PL are really beautiful and interesting cities, been there several times.
-b. -b.
It may also be a stepwise process - one innovation begets another until we do have robots. As it stands now, clothing manufacture hasn't changed much from 120 years ago.
-b.
We were talking about US politics, not politics in foreign countries. Each country has a different demographic makeup, so different rules should apply. In the US, good border security may go a long way.
-b.
Which should be illegal. If a service was bought from an airline, the airline should be required to provide said service to one customer -- any customer. If they're worried about stolen tickets, then just require a notarized letter from the original holder of the ticket that it's being transferred of their own free will yadda yadda...
As a "public accomodation", no they actually can't.
-b.
There will be "floor models" to try on. Plus some clothing will be off the rack still. My original point was about automated domestic production, not about custom fitting. The possibility of custom fitting would just be a nice fringe benefit.
I don't want to que up every time I want to get a new suit.
One typically needs some alterations done anyway to make a suit fit correctly. So you'll be getting it the next day, usually, as it is now. This opens up the possibility of perfectly-fitting, custom-made suits at a more reasonable price: something that has been hitherto impossible.
-b.
Off-the-shelf clothing would still be available. This would just enhance the number of choices and make clothes better fitting. The measurements would be taken electronically and quickly. They wouldn't require standing still for more than a few seconds. Certainly no worse than trying clothing on a screaming kid until you happen upon something that fits. Remember that since clothing is handmade, there's some difference even between the same numerical sizes.
-b.
I never said it would be simple, just that it's a solvable problem, eventually.
No, I need kids clothes now, I do not have the time to wait for the system to measure my children, fetch the cloth, load it into the system, cut it out, assemble it.....
Have your kids measured once or twice a year, possibly via an ultrasound or millimeter wave system that makes a 3D model of their physique. Maybe at the same time as a medical checkup. The data could be kept electronically on a flash disk that's given to a shop. For those times when you need clothing *now*, there could also be premade off-the-rack stuff made using the same automated tech.
-b.
Nah, if custom, automated manufacturing of clothing becomes a reality, you'd have *more* diversity of styles, not fewer. You may even be able to tell your tailoring shop exactly what you want in a suit or shirt, and the alterations will be done as it's made rather than afterwards. Small designers will actually find it easier to sell their designs, since they won't need to put out several thousand copies or make it very expensive to make a profit.
There'll be interesting intellectual property questions, however :)
-b.
Well, if he got convicted in the US, his prints will likely be in an FBI or state database. Probably a bar to entering the US. I didn't say they'd *just* check Interpol DBs. Besides, child porn owners are about #1001 on our list of undesirable entrants into the US.
-b.
*Still* made by hand. Don't think that we won't have robots that scan a human body and tailor custom clothing to it on site eventually. Think about it: your size will always be in stock. Necessity is the mother of invention.
-b.
The 9/11 hijackers were legally in the US, or at least *entered* legally. They were not citizens, AFAIK, or at least not native-born citizens. As for McVeigh and OKC, it was never McVeigh's aim to destroy American society nor to cause mass random panic. In his twisted mind, he was in a legit war against the US government, but not against all Americans.
-b.
International (Interpol?) criminal databases? If you're not in those DB's, then you likely won't have a problem.
-b.
Oil: we have plenty in the ANWR and offshore should we need to tap it. If we go self-sufficient, we won't be burning a lot of it for energy anyway, since we'll probably go mostly nuclear with some wind, hydro, and solar.
Titanium: it's a niche element. Unlike the Russians, we never used a lot of it in airframes.
Steel/aluminium: we have the production and recycling capacity.
Electronic factories: nothing that can't be corrected in a few decades. I bet we can run them a lot more cleanly than the Chinese, too. Remember that up until the 1980s, we produced a large fraction of the world's electronics and electrical parts.
USSR tried to do that trick once - isolate itself from another countries.
That wasn't the reason why the USSR failed, though. The USSR was stuck with a political system that didn't reward personal initiative. The US system did and still does. Creating startup companies is still very easy and un-bureaucratic as compared to in most other countries.
-b.
But if we catch the non-innocent fraction and turn them away before they enter, then this makes everyone's life in the US a bit easier. We're not talking about a criminal prosecution here, we're talking about the privilege of entering US soil.
-b.
As well it shouldn't. Before we let a random person into our country, we need to verify his identity to make sure he's not a criminal or terrorist. Biometrics are one way to do this since documents can and will be forged. There are a lot of people who hate us, perhaps justifiably. Given this, we need to protect ourselves. Border security is one of the least intrusive ways to do this compared to domestic spying and surveillance. Given a tight border, there'll be (in theory) much less of a need for Draconian domestic laws.
-b.
Nah, we have 300 million people, a lot of land, and a lot of technological expertise. I suspect that we can stand on our own if we really had to. Manufacturing can be a *hell* of a lot more automated than it is now, and ultimately, workers will realize that automation creates domestic jobs rather than taking them away.
-b.
I hope that after a decade or so without another attack, we can keep the good border security and finally repeal some of the more obnoxious domestic laws.
-b.
Invisible light is either infrared (heat radiation) or it's UV (kills the eyes and skin in the truly invisible spectrum, plus I don't think good UV solar cells exist). But the source could just be a normal desk lamp. Probably not strong enough to charge a laptop, but it may work for things like cell phones, iPods, and calculators with more efficient solar cells.
-b.
What about standardizing low-voltage electronics at 5V and 12V input voltages whenever possible? Then you could have a big switcher power supply with, say, a dozen outputs to power everything on your desk.
-b.