This may be because working out how CCTV affects crime is so very difficult. Some stats seem to suggest it reduces crime but others seem to suggest it pushes crime to places without CCTV. And there's more studies suggesting that it does sweet FA. It's pretty hard to implement the 'near perfect' study to assess the relationship - unfortunately.
While there are certainly many many cameras in the UK watching the population go about it's day to day business no one seems to have noticed that there are very few operators watching the feed. Even in a busy police CCTV room there's only a couple of officers keeping an eye on potentially hundreds of live feeds. Yes, the number of cameras is increasing but, no, the level of surveillance has changed little. What is more, people might be surprised over how much surveillance is routinely recorded and, even when it is recorded often those tapes are reused after a couple of months.
But! We could see a whole of talented animators start putting some really neat little pieces on YouTube - there's a hole bunch of them who have to rely on funny little small art council grants to keep ticking over. This could spark a renaissance in short films - YouTube doesn't have to be all about spotty teenagers lighting farts!
I feel more productive and a whole load happier and comfortable. Forget the bottom line for a moment and spare a thought for workers well-being. And, big screens are great if a bunch of people need to crowd round the screen and discuss something.
When Katrina hit in August 2005, Bock's house was flooded and she moved temporarily to Texas before returning to Louisiana last June. Court papers that Scheff and her attorney David H. Pollack mailed to Bock were returned to Pollack's office in Miami.
I wonder how much of that $11m was due to her not making court? My guess is that if she had been there with even some form of token legal representation, dressed appropriately and maybe shed a token tear things would have been much different. An awful lot goes on appearance.
Not only that but this idea seems to miss one important aspect of exercise - destressing by just going and applying your brain to something different for a while.
Not to mention the kids who get started with social sites early and then just grow up with them.
Now this will be fascinating to watch. Older adopters of social networking sites will most likely have been embedded in real-world social networks first. Kids who use social networking sites will mature into the world with mates scattered across the globe. This brings a whole new dimension to long-term friendship, one which is both mediated by IT and marketable.
Technology can help enourmously - giving mobile phones to African fisherman allow them to find the best market for their catch before making land means food does not go to waste and fishermen get the best price. A little bit of technology can go a long way. But sometimes overly enthusiastic philanthropists can impose what they regard as the best solution without proper research. There's great stories about African villigers being bought tractors without any thought on where they were going to get fuel from... they ended up taking the thing apart and dragging the plough across fields with cattle.
I agree with your sentiments. But one thig that can help is communication, access to the net. Giving kids these computer skills early on will mean that when it comes to later life choices they won't just look around at the local area and think, "well that's that then"... they might well look further afield and explore opportunities for education and employment which they may never have been exposed to otherwise. It's not a cure-all, but it might help make a difference.
So, if the US signed up to the Koyoto Protocol could they offset reproduction by getting children in the third world to plant trees? Or even better, plant trees while reproducing... there's a whole carbon-neutral fetish thing here just waiting to be tapped.
Re:any real users of this tech ?
on
A GUI For Books
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
This could be great for braille readers - the unsighted have a pretty hard time with the net. This technology could at least guide them to suitable media content.
The best form of protection is to instill a sense of responsibility in children. But, the willingness of children to heed their mentors is countered by their strong desire to learn through experience. And that's how it should be, most of the time. Imagine an adult whose only knowledge of social interaction was gained through parental tutelage and micromanagement rather than developing meaningful social relationships in a peer group?
We have fences in zoos to keep the predators away from all but the most curious. Similarly, with naïve, unsuspecting minds who are allowed to explore the internet we are obliged to do as much as we can to dissuade online predators and protect the vulnerable. Child abuse does not provide a constructive learning experience. The question is the degree to which we should invade a child's privacy to enable this. An internet savvy teen, hungry to explore the world, may have the skills to navigate the web but not neccessarily the expertise to discriminate between a genuine online chum and a predator who is seeking something else, whether it is physical contact or just a few kinky webcam shots to bounce round the net.
So as much as I do not like the idea, I do think that some way of leaving kids to explore the web but in a safe environment is the best way forward. And the most realistic way of achieving this is not through telling them there's a few monsters out there, not by relying on thier sense of responsibility but by imposing a 'technical solution' that facilitates thier freedom to explore safely. Sure, they'll get car keys one day, after they've learnt to drive. And sure, they'll get complete freedom to use the net in any way they want, as soon as they are big enough and resiliant enough to cope with possible online predation.
Nurturing and protecting a developing child is both rewarding and fully justified.
It's what Formula One racing is to the average street car. No one would want to routinely drive an open top racing car down most city streets. But the research that goes into getting a racing car to perform at those levels does eventually trickle down to consumers. Perhaps someone should properly organise a F1 download competition?
I think an issue here is *who* should be bashing the bigot. If corporations do this on our behalf then we (or our community) lose the capacity to fight bigotry. It's up to us, not faceless corporations, to challege these people. And it is through the process of open discussion that we come to understand what is right - lest we end up in some Orwellian void where PayPal et al do all the thinking for us.
And you just know that in 20 years time they'll be showing school kids photos of this machine... from the days when they needed a whole room to do the computations your regular PS4 can do in a fraction of the space.
Someone sufficiently savvy to stay out of jail long enough to make this much money will more than likely vanish to somewhere with no extradition treaty as soon as you take your eyes off him... and if he's realy smart he'd have had his flit all thought through well in advance.
While I don't dispute the need to study behavioural models of depression as a means of unlocking and treating human misery I am a little concerned that reports such as this offer misleading insights into the nature of depression. There's a fair bit of work [c.f. Parducci] showing that affect is relative. For example, one way that a stimulus that elicits misery is through comparing that stimulus with a reference set. Losing $100 will elicit greater misery for someone who has $100 in the bank than someone who has $10,000 in the bank.
Although these mice might appear happy it is unlikely that the relationship between stimuli governing their affective state change. Knocking out a gene doesn't double the number of nuggets in their bowl. This, I think, highlights the important interaction between genes and environment and suggests that changing one without the other is not sufficient to 'cure' depression.
I can understand why physicists should be kept busy, but other than that I cannot see a good reason why we need the size and age of the universe. We're hardly going to jump in the car on a Sunday and drive round the galaxy's periphery, nevermind the universe, to see ancient stars and what not. Why can't these physicists be pointed at projects which might have some use value?
Slashdot Mirror
This may be because working out how CCTV affects crime is so very difficult. Some stats seem to suggest it reduces crime but others seem to suggest it pushes crime to places without CCTV. And there's more studies suggesting that it does sweet FA. It's pretty hard to implement the 'near perfect' study to assess the relationship - unfortunately.
While there are certainly many many cameras in the UK watching the population go about it's day to day business no one seems to have noticed that there are very few operators watching the feed. Even in a busy police CCTV room there's only a couple of officers keeping an eye on potentially hundreds of live feeds. Yes, the number of cameras is increasing but, no, the level of surveillance has changed little. What is more, people might be surprised over how much surveillance is routinely recorded and, even when it is recorded often those tapes are reused after a couple of months.
But! We could see a whole of talented animators start putting some really neat little pieces on YouTube - there's a hole bunch of them who have to rely on funny little small art council grants to keep ticking over. This could spark a renaissance in short films - YouTube doesn't have to be all about spotty teenagers lighting farts!
I feel more productive and a whole load happier and comfortable. Forget the bottom line for a moment and spare a thought for workers well-being. And, big screens are great if a bunch of people need to crowd round the screen and discuss something.
Of course food, shelter and education should be prioritised and in Libya there's already a fair bit going on http://www.undp-libya.org/index.php?option=com_con tent&task=view&id=33&Itemid=42. So long as providing windup laptops does not prevent poverty reduction surely they are a good thing?
I wonder how much of that $11m was due to her not making court? My guess is that if she had been there with even some form of token legal representation, dressed appropriately and maybe shed a token tear things would have been much different. An awful lot goes on appearance.
Indeed - superglue was invented to close wounds http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superglue#Medicine and is still used in hospitals around the world
Not only that but this idea seems to miss one important aspect of exercise - destressing by just going and applying your brain to something different for a while.
Not to mention the kids who get started with social sites early and then just grow up with them.
Now this will be fascinating to watch. Older adopters of social networking sites will most likely have been embedded in real-world social networks first. Kids who use social networking sites will mature into the world with mates scattered across the globe. This brings a whole new dimension to long-term friendship, one which is both mediated by IT and marketable.
Technology can help enourmously - giving mobile phones to African fisherman allow them to find the best market for their catch before making land means food does not go to waste and fishermen get the best price. A little bit of technology can go a long way. But sometimes overly enthusiastic philanthropists can impose what they regard as the best solution without proper research. There's great stories about African villigers being bought tractors without any thought on where they were going to get fuel from... they ended up taking the thing apart and dragging the plough across fields with cattle.
I agree with your sentiments. But one thig that can help is communication, access to the net. Giving kids these computer skills early on will mean that when it comes to later life choices they won't just look around at the local area and think, "well that's that then"... they might well look further afield and explore opportunities for education and employment which they may never have been exposed to otherwise. It's not a cure-all, but it might help make a difference.
Why has time extinguished all but a handful of the truly monstorous creatures?
So, if the US signed up to the Koyoto Protocol could they offset reproduction by getting children in the third world to plant trees? Or even better, plant trees while reproducing... there's a whole carbon-neutral fetish thing here just waiting to be tapped.
This could be great for braille readers - the unsighted have a pretty hard time with the net. This technology could at least guide them to suitable media content.
We have fences in zoos to keep the predators away from all but the most curious. Similarly, with naïve, unsuspecting minds who are allowed to explore the internet we are obliged to do as much as we can to dissuade online predators and protect the vulnerable. Child abuse does not provide a constructive learning experience. The question is the degree to which we should invade a child's privacy to enable this. An internet savvy teen, hungry to explore the world, may have the skills to navigate the web but not neccessarily the expertise to discriminate between a genuine online chum and a predator who is seeking something else, whether it is physical contact or just a few kinky webcam shots to bounce round the net.
So as much as I do not like the idea, I do think that some way of leaving kids to explore the web but in a safe environment is the best way forward. And the most realistic way of achieving this is not through telling them there's a few monsters out there, not by relying on thier sense of responsibility but by imposing a 'technical solution' that facilitates thier freedom to explore safely. Sure, they'll get car keys one day, after they've learnt to drive. And sure, they'll get complete freedom to use the net in any way they want, as soon as they are big enough and resiliant enough to cope with possible online predation.
Nurturing and protecting a developing child is both rewarding and fully justified.
It's what Formula One racing is to the average street car. No one would want to routinely drive an open top racing car down most city streets. But the research that goes into getting a racing car to perform at those levels does eventually trickle down to consumers. Perhaps someone should properly organise a F1 download competition?
I think an issue here is *who* should be bashing the bigot. If corporations do this on our behalf then we (or our community) lose the capacity to fight bigotry. It's up to us, not faceless corporations, to challege these people. And it is through the process of open discussion that we come to understand what is right - lest we end up in some Orwellian void where PayPal et al do all the thinking for us.
And you just know that in 20 years time they'll be showing school kids photos of this machine... from the days when they needed a whole room to do the computations your regular PS4 can do in a fraction of the space.
Someone sufficiently savvy to stay out of jail long enough to make this much money will more than likely vanish to somewhere with no extradition treaty as soon as you take your eyes off him... and if he's realy smart he'd have had his flit all thought through well in advance.
I'm already counting my baud rate on one hand
"Dell [wanted to] Quietly Leave MP3 Market" but then it got a mention on /.
In other news... bag full of cats escape
While I don't dispute the need to study behavioural models of depression as a means of unlocking and treating human misery I am a little concerned that reports such as this offer misleading insights into the nature of depression. There's a fair bit of work [c.f. Parducci] showing that affect is relative. For example, one way that a stimulus that elicits misery is through comparing that stimulus with a reference set. Losing $100 will elicit greater misery for someone who has $100 in the bank than someone who has $10,000 in the bank.
Although these mice might appear happy it is unlikely that the relationship between stimuli governing their affective state change. Knocking out a gene doesn't double the number of nuggets in their bowl. This, I think, highlights the important interaction between genes and environment and suggests that changing one without the other is not sufficient to 'cure' depression.
I can understand why physicists should be kept busy, but other than that I cannot see a good reason why we need the size and age of the universe. We're hardly going to jump in the car on a Sunday and drive round the galaxy's periphery, nevermind the universe, to see ancient stars and what not. Why can't these physicists be pointed at projects which might have some use value?