Actually, the article says the exact opposite of the title. The title should say
Spoiler Alert: *SUCCESSFUL* Kids Become Successful Adults
because the article says:
These findings imply that basic childhood skills, independent of how smart you are, how long you stay in school, or the social class you started off in, will be important throughout your life," say Ritchie and Bates.
...show a split over electronic privacy rights within the Obama administration, with Justice Department prosecutors and investigators privately insisting they're not legally required to obtain search warrants for e-mail."
That implies that Obama really is trying to keep his promise about transparency, but he is fighting his own organization. The article doesn't mention Obama at all though.
You almost got it right: The OED itself is the copy! The creates of the OED must have stolen information from some other, older source, who put fake references in to detect it. The OED is a fraud!
So now you can't report security holes you find to the news because the FBI will arrest you for hacking.
If the news outlet is your first disclosure, that's pretty irresponsible. That is too often the case - people looking for fame or fortune or publicity instead of doing the right thing. It is a different matter if the company blows you off.
We need a law that says all software companies must have a hotline for reporting security violations, and must respond within some period of time.
This was a known patched vulnerability in an old version of IE. It was not a 0-day vulnerability. A 0-day vulnerability is one where there were 0 days to fix it because it was exploited before the software vendor knew about it. Stop using that term for every single headline! (Not blaming Slashdot this time - The title is straight from the arstechnica article)
I was in a B&N store a few months ago and I overheard a conversation between a sales clerk and an older couple that went like this: Customer: "So I can run apps on this?" Sales clerk: "No, this is just for reading books." Customer: "Oh, okay" and they walk away.
You don't need to be online to read medical records. That kind of DRM isn't appropriate. And DRM doesn't prevent anyone from accessing piracy, except honest people who choose not to do it.
It sounds like you have a proposed use case for DRM on medical records. I'm not sure it is even possible to do what you suggest, or even a good idea to do so. But flesh out the idea and include some technical details or all you will get is snarky attacks on it.
Can homomophic encryption be used to create near-perfect DRM?
Current DRM chain: Raw video stream -> Compress to MPEG -> Encrypt -> Send to customer's player -> Decrypt -> Decompress MPEG -> Cracker grabs video stream here -> Re-encrypt HDCP -> Send to television -> Television decrypts HDCP
Homomorphic DRM chain: Raw video stream -> Compress to MPEG -> Encrypt -> Send to customer's player -> Decompress without decrypting -> Send to television -> Television decrypts
But this assumes it is possible to perform an immensely complex transformation on the encrypted data. Is that even theoretically possible? Multiplying encrypted numbers is a long way from performing an MPEG decompression on an encrypted string.
There are things Google, and customers, could do to help this problem.
A bit of background as to some of the causes: Phone manufacturers are hesitant to release updates because they really should test them first. Testing is a pain for a few reasons. One is that they also have customizations to their phone UI. Another is that they have many different hardware configurations. They have all these hardware configurations because their marketing people thought that coming out with an entirely new phone handset every 6 months was a good idea. This problem is amplified by the lawyers who refuse to let them release their drivers open source. So those drivers may not even compile against the latest Android kernel. If they released the drivers, then those drivers would be maintained by Google. (Similar problems existing with some PC hardware manufacturers.)
Sooooo...
Google could require that OEMs provide their drivers back to Google. That way they know the drivers will at least compile against the latest versions of Android. Google has put in some effortsto preventfragmentation. But I don't think they have addressed the driver issue.
Customers could actually complain to their phone carriers and handset manufacturers about bugs, security problems, and missing features. They could also refuse to buy phones from carriers and manufacturers who don't let you install stock Android on the phone. That right there is the #1 -- just cut out the OEMs entirely.
Can someone post a link to a Gene patent? Based on a previous Slashdot comment, I was led to believe that the patent is not on the gene, but on the method of testing for the presence of the gene. The latter would be a perfectly valid utility patent. But these articles always act like th patent is on the gene itself. Which is true?
...most voters are locked in to their ideological party loyalty. But Lars Hall, a cognitive scientist at Lund University in Sweden, knew better.
1) Voters are not locked into their *ideological* party. They are locked into their *political* party. This is a very important difference!
Most people follow the color, the banner, or the party name -- not the philosophy. Philosophy is something people think about, study, and decide upon using rational thought. But political parties (at least in the US) rarely actually follow a philoshy. The usually use the looser term "platform" which consists of a series of malleable ideas that can actually mean the exact opposite of what the original underlying philisophy might have once been.
Ex: Republicans are "fiscally conservative" thus they are against welfare spending. Not quite! They are against welfare for the poor and minorities. But they are in favor of welfare for the elderly and veterans. The true "conservative" is fiscally conservative equally to all people. Republicans tend to believe in states rights: except for marijuana, gay marriage, and gambling. George HW Bush campaigned on the conservative principle of getting out of the affairs of other nations. Then he invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. One can play the same game for democrats too. Party != Philosophy.
2) "Political magic" and "Voter manipulation" as it is called in the article does not mean the voter changed their actual vote. People often act and sound more open minded then they actually are once they walk into the polling booth.
Police forces, especially in Australia have repeatedly said there is no quota....No matter how much evidence against their conspiracy theory there is, because they cant admit responsibility for it they cant thing straight about it.
One of the officers actually recorded the police chief stating the quota and chastising the officers who didn't meet them. There's been lots of cases like this over the years. Google News even indexed an article about a similar case back in 1985.
Not that this makes speeding right - but I just want to make sure you know this is really common practice in many places. It's no conspiracy theory.
The judge is only allowed to look at the relevant law, and decide whether a given set of circumstances meets that or not.
That isn't true. The judge can look at whatever he wants. Judges often use things outside of the law itself to help clarify the meaning of the law. In this case, the judge actually did that and justifies why:
Thus, although the words used by the Legislature are the most useful guide to its intent, we do not view the language of the statute in isolation.
Then later
The comments section in the analysis of Senate Bill 28, when it was before the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee, acknowledged this significant exemption:
The judge used the words of the legislators that were outside of the written statute. This it not uncommon.
Activism is useless when it is aimed at unproductive channels. Instead, they should have signed the petition to remove the DA in question. Or written a letter to the state. Petition to remove DA Carmen Ortiz
It sounds like T-mobile has the best purchasing experience. People shouldn't have to create a spreadsheet with a pivot table to find the best plan. Simple = good.
The problem with many carriers isn't the subsidy scam, but the confusion. The phone shows one price - but that is with plan X. But with plan Y it is a different price. Another phone shows the price including a mail-in rebate, but this one here has an instant rebate. They don't know how much the taxes are. This plan would be $A/month but you pay some amount for text messages, but this plan has unlimited text messages but is it worth it? What if I add my son to the plan?
Fracking created the the waste. But why didn't the treatment plants know they weren't removing the contaminants? Why did they release water into the watershed without testing it first? If you run an industrial waste water treatment plant, and a company says "hey, I've got some water here I'd like you to treat" I would expect a part of the process is asking "what is in the water?" and "can our process handle this?"
It sounds like some due diligence was not done here. It is thankful that the graduate student tested this, and that the treatment plants cooperated. There needs to be mandatory monitoring and reporting not just on the quality of the water in the watershed, but also what the treatment plants are directly outputting.
If you go back to the original XBOX days, Microsoft was suing people who sold mod chips that let you run your own applications on your XBOX. So no, you can't modify the hardware all you want.
I will echo what others have said about it not being worth while, but let me also explain why. It is an economic problem:
There is a point where the replacement cost of a piece of electronics exceeds the cost of refurbishing them. Even if you do it yourself, you have to think about what other things you could have done with that time. If it took you 2 hours per PC, then you are obviously a capable PC repair tech. At $25/hr that's $50 you could have made. That's half way toward a cheap tablet which is probably more useful than the PC you refurbished.
Similarly, the cost to maintain them often exceeds the total value gained. Those old machines are likely to be flaky or fail entirely. The lost productivity spent working around unreliable hardware. And then people aren't using the current OSs so there are limitations to what you can do with it anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, the article says the exact opposite of the title. The title should say
Spoiler Alert: *SUCCESSFUL* Kids Become Successful Adults
because the article says:
These findings imply that basic childhood skills, independent of how smart you are, how long you stay in school, or the social class you started off in, will be important throughout your life," say Ritchie and Bates.
...show a split over electronic privacy rights within the Obama administration, with Justice Department prosecutors and investigators privately insisting they're not legally required to obtain search warrants for e-mail."
That implies that Obama really is trying to keep his promise about transparency, but he is fighting his own organization. The article doesn't mention Obama at all though.
You almost got it right: The OED itself is the copy! The creates of the OED must have stolen information from some other, older source, who put fake references in to detect it. The OED is a fraud!
So now you can't report security holes you find to the news because the FBI will arrest you for hacking.
If the news outlet is your first disclosure, that's pretty irresponsible. That is too often the case - people looking for fame or fortune or publicity instead of doing the right thing. It is a different matter if the company blows you off.
We need a law that says all software companies must have a hotline for reporting security violations, and must respond within some period of time.
How about neutrino fluxes? ...How about "the flash" (other than neutrinos), like long-wave EMP radiation...
The problem is that none of these things were detected!
Wikipedia: 2009 detonation - Lack of radionuclide confirmation
or this one: ...as of two days after the blast, Chinese, Japanese, and South Korean investigators had failed to detect any radiation...
Wikipedia: 2013 detonation -
All evidence we have shows that it *was not* nuclear.
This was a known patched vulnerability in an old version of IE. It was not a 0-day vulnerability. A 0-day vulnerability is one where there were 0 days to fix it because it was exploited before the software vendor knew about it. Stop using that term for every single headline! (Not blaming Slashdot this time - The title is straight from the arstechnica article)
I was in a B&N store a few months ago and I overheard a conversation between a sales clerk and an older couple that went like this:
Customer: "So I can run apps on this?"
Sales clerk: "No, this is just for reading books."
Customer: "Oh, okay" and they walk away.
B&N has fixed that problem. That's a good thing.
You don't need to be online to read medical records. That kind of DRM isn't appropriate. And DRM doesn't prevent anyone from accessing piracy, except honest people who choose not to do it.
It sounds like you have a proposed use case for DRM on medical records. I'm not sure it is even possible to do what you suggest, or even a good idea to do so. But flesh out the idea and include some technical details or all you will get is snarky attacks on it.
Can homomophic encryption be used to create near-perfect DRM?
Current DRM chain:
Raw video stream -> Compress to MPEG -> Encrypt -> Send to customer's player -> Decrypt -> Decompress MPEG -> Cracker grabs video stream here -> Re-encrypt HDCP -> Send to television -> Television decrypts HDCP
Homomorphic DRM chain:
Raw video stream -> Compress to MPEG -> Encrypt -> Send to customer's player -> Decompress without decrypting -> Send to television -> Television decrypts
But this assumes it is possible to perform an immensely complex transformation on the encrypted data. Is that even theoretically possible? Multiplying encrypted numbers is a long way from performing an MPEG decompression on an encrypted string.
Is coal power really more cost effective per megawatt if you include the cost of long term CO2 build-up and clean up of the emissions and mines?
(Just playing devil's advocate here)
There are things Google, and customers, could do to help this problem.
A bit of background as to some of the causes:
Phone manufacturers are hesitant to release updates because they really should test them first. Testing is a pain for a few reasons. One is that they also have customizations to their phone UI. Another is that they have many different hardware configurations. They have all these hardware configurations because their marketing people thought that coming out with an entirely new phone handset every 6 months was a good idea. This problem is amplified by the lawyers who refuse to let them release their drivers open source. So those drivers may not even compile against the latest Android kernel. If they released the drivers, then those drivers would be maintained by Google. (Similar problems existing with some PC hardware manufacturers.)
Sooooo...
Google could require that OEMs provide their drivers back to Google. That way they know the drivers will at least compile against the latest versions of Android. Google has put in some efforts to prevent fragmentation. But I don't think they have addressed the driver issue.
Customers could actually complain to their phone carriers and handset manufacturers about bugs, security problems, and missing features. They could also refuse to buy phones from carriers and manufacturers who don't let you install stock Android on the phone. That right there is the #1 -- just cut out the OEMs entirely.
Can someone post a link to a Gene patent? Based on a previous Slashdot comment, I was led to believe that the patent is not on the gene, but on the method of testing for the presence of the gene. The latter would be a perfectly valid utility patent. But these articles always act like th patent is on the gene itself. Which is true?
Sorry, it was George W Bush I was thinking of.
The article gets it wrong. It says:
...most voters are locked in to their ideological party loyalty. But Lars Hall, a cognitive scientist at Lund University in Sweden, knew better.
1) Voters are not locked into their *ideological* party. They are locked into their *political* party. This is a very important difference!
Most people follow the color, the banner, or the party name -- not the philosophy. Philosophy is something people think about, study, and decide upon using rational thought. But political parties (at least in the US) rarely actually follow a philoshy. The usually use the looser term "platform" which consists of a series of malleable ideas that can actually mean the exact opposite of what the original underlying philisophy might have once been.
Ex: Republicans are "fiscally conservative" thus they are against welfare spending. Not quite! They are against welfare for the poor and minorities. But they are in favor of welfare for the elderly and veterans. The true "conservative" is fiscally conservative equally to all people. Republicans tend to believe in states rights: except for marijuana, gay marriage, and gambling. George HW Bush campaigned on the conservative principle of getting out of the affairs of other nations. Then he invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. One can play the same game for democrats too. Party != Philosophy.
2) "Political magic" and "Voter manipulation" as it is called in the article does not mean the voter changed their actual vote. People often act and sound more open minded then they actually are once they walk into the polling booth.
Police forces, especially in Australia have repeatedly said there is no quota....No matter how much evidence against their conspiracy theory there is, because they cant admit responsibility for it they cant thing straight about it.
I can't speak for Australia, but in the US, quotas are common practice. Some places mask the quotas because they are controversial. There is a court case going on right now over the firing of several NYPD officers for not meeting their "Stop and frisk" quotas.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/20/nypd-stop-and-frisk-trial-quota-brass_n_2914795.html
One of the officers actually recorded the police chief stating the quota and chastising the officers who didn't meet them. There's been lots of cases like this over the years. Google News even indexed an article about a similar case back in 1985.
Not that this makes speeding right - but I just want to make sure you know this is really common practice in many places. It's no conspiracy theory.
This laser is probably in the 10's of kilowatts,
citation please?
The judge is only allowed to look at the relevant law, and decide whether a given set of circumstances meets that or not.
That isn't true. The judge can look at whatever he wants. Judges often use things outside of the law itself to help clarify the meaning of the law. In this case, the judge actually did that and justifies why:
Thus, although the words used by the Legislature are the most useful guide to its intent, we do not view the language of the statute in isolation.
Then later
The comments section in the analysis of Senate Bill 28, when it was before the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee, acknowledged this significant exemption:
The judge used the words of the legislators that were outside of the written statute. This it not uncommon.
The bird sounds are just too dang cute. Seriously: that's the difference. Graphics can look cool, but sound truly affects us emotionally
Activism is useless when it is aimed at unproductive channels. Instead, they should have signed the petition to remove the DA in question. Or written a letter to the state.
Petition to remove DA Carmen Ortiz
I would have agreed to install the second one too, mainly because it sounds like a "no" answer would mean my death.
So would that mean that quantum algorithms can be patented? There is no way to do them other than with a quantum computer.
It sounds like T-mobile has the best purchasing experience. People shouldn't have to create a spreadsheet with a pivot table to find the best plan. Simple = good.
The problem with many carriers isn't the subsidy scam, but the confusion. The phone shows one price - but that is with plan X. But with plan Y it is a different price. Another phone shows the price including a mail-in rebate, but this one here has an instant rebate. They don't know how much the taxes are. This plan would be $A/month but you pay some amount for text messages, but this plan has unlimited text messages but is it worth it? What if I add my son to the plan?
Fracking created the the waste. But why didn't the treatment plants know they weren't removing the contaminants? Why did they release water into the watershed without testing it first? If you run an industrial waste water treatment plant, and a company says "hey, I've got some water here I'd like you to treat" I would expect a part of the process is asking "what is in the water?" and "can our process handle this?"
It sounds like some due diligence was not done here. It is thankful that the graduate student tested this, and that the treatment plants cooperated. There needs to be mandatory monitoring and reporting not just on the quality of the water in the watershed, but also what the treatment plants are directly outputting.
If you go back to the original XBOX days, Microsoft was suing people who sold mod chips that let you run your own applications on your XBOX. So no, you can't modify the hardware all you want.
I will echo what others have said about it not being worth while, but let me also explain why. It is an economic problem:
There is a point where the replacement cost of a piece of electronics exceeds the cost of refurbishing them. Even if you do it yourself, you have to think about what other things you could have done with that time. If it took you 2 hours per PC, then you are obviously a capable PC repair tech. At $25/hr that's $50 you could have made. That's half way toward a cheap tablet which is probably more useful than the PC you refurbished.
Similarly, the cost to maintain them often exceeds the total value gained. Those old machines are likely to be flaky or fail entirely. The lost productivity spent working around unreliable hardware. And then people aren't using the current OSs so there are limitations to what you can do with it anyway.