Current initiatives for municipal broadband have a lot in common with previous attempts to set up municipal cable systems, not the least of which is that the same companies (Cox, Viacom, Adelphia, etc.) are involved.
Municipal cable TV proposals aren't completely dead, they've just gone out of style. However, The city of Burlington, Vermont, is petitioning the state public service board (http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?A ID=/20050214/NEWS/502140334/1003/NEWS02) for permission to set up its own cable television service. The difference between this and the broadband proposals is that Adelphia is claiming that establishing a municipal cable network would be "overbuild," while with the broadband they're claiming that allowing a municipality to set up a broadband network would then prevent commercial companies from entering the market.
What do they want? If it's open markets, they should be willing to compete with municipal projects on a level playing field (i.e. one where the city can't subsidise their system through tax revenues).
If they champion "first-to-post" efficiency, then whoever builds the network first should be able to reap the benefits. Given government's alleged inefficiencies, that may mean that even if a city builds a cable or wireless network, they'd eventually have to sell it to a commercial provider if it becomes a liability to the city.
All it will take is one state allowing this before it becomes a national issue with a fight in Congress. The big cable companies are fighting this state to state at the moment, but Vermont is a very independent-minded state. IF they let Burlington proceed it wouldn't be the first time they've told an industry co-op to buzz off and set a precedent for any city that wants to do something similar either with cable or IP. I expect Adelphia to pull out every weapon they can find to stop them, but I'm hoping, as with the sign restriction laws, land development rules, and the non-returnable bottle ban, that Vermont holds its ground and lets Burlington take Adelphia on head to head.
They may ultimately fail, but I'd rather see them go down in a fair fight than see the project get bound, gagged, and tossed in Lake Champlain before it can get to the arena.
Oh this is bad news indeed. If SCO is delisted and their stock drops below a dollar then the junk faxers currently targeting my office fax machine with junk stock pitches will start sending me notices about the "great opportunity to buy SCO" at 62 cents.
Then I'll have to choose between buying SCO stock and the fake Disney vacation offers.
Oh the horror. Maybe I should just answer the e-mail from the nice Nigerian who wants me to transfer his millions into my bank account, instead.
On the other hand, it's nice to see SCO sinking to an appropriate level in the economic food chain.
The Linux-based cat feeder is cool high-tech, but there's still a very efficient, economical way to feed your cat.
Mount a bird feeder on a 1-foot tall pole. Fill it with birdseed. Release cat into yard.
Not only does this provide your cat with plenty of fresh food, it gets kitty some exercise and reduces the potential sources of bird droppings on your freshly buffed car.
Can I patent this, or does Bill Gates already own it?
Most of the abused children are from outside the U.S., which is why it ended up being considered an immigration issue. DHS got the job when it absorbed the old Immigration and Naturalization Service.
DHS (specifically, Immigration & Customs Enforcement) hunts down pedophiles in part becauase they track many types of smuggling: human, contraband, and money. The smugglers don't care what they carry, as long as they get paid, so the same people smuggle in immigrants, counterfeit NFL goods, sex slaves, etc. It's all money to them.
Stop thinking that. This isn't a slam at Disney about making money off of kids.
I work with people who investigate the child sex trade. It's not a surprise that those pictures showed a Disney hotel, as Disney resorts used to be a popular place for child peddlers to hand over the kids they were selling. There are so many kids running around there, who's going to notice that a little girl in a yellow dress comes in with one person and leaves with another?
Disney knew nothing of this at the time, though they're aware of it now. They have a great security team, but they're focused on pickpockets and and the garden variety perverts who want to cop a feel on Snow White, not child traders.
Child porn is a dirty business, perhaps the dirtiest. The people responsible probably get some perverse pleasure from trading their sex toys at a place like Disneyland.
Then again, one thing DHS has done right over the last 18 months is arrest and dispose of over 3,000 of the bastards who trade in kids. It's just too bad disposal only consists of deportation or detention. If any crime deserves the death penalty, sexual abuse of children is it.
(Yeah, I take it personally. I have a nine-year old daughter. If you'd seen what these bastards do with kids, you'd scratch their names on a few bullets, too.)
Sorry about the rant. But this subject touched a nerve or two.
Fingerprint systems like this seem to work as well or better than most forms of ID. Most security on credit card purchases I've made has been limited to comparing my signature on the receipt to the one on my card, which can be forged pretty easily. They don't ask for picture ID any more on credit cards. A lot of them don't even keep my card long enough to check the signature, and automatic chargers like gas pumps will take your credit card without any cross-check. In that sense, using an account activated by your fingerprint is probably an improvement.
Yes, there are concerns about the government tracking you through your fingerprints, but they could do that through your credit cards now anyway, so I'm curious what the difference would be. Besides, we're more at risk from all the commercial entities who have access to our electronic transactions. Unlike the government, they routinely do all sorts of things with the information they collect on our purchasing habits.
Here's my main concern: What if someone manages to impersonate you and establishes an electronic account that ties your financial information to their fingerprint. Someone could wreak havoc in a fairly short time if biometric systems are trusted blindly.
Then again, if the scammer impersonates a person with huge debts, maybe they'd get stuck with them.:)
Biometrics may be a miracle cure or snake oil. As with any potentially useful technology, which it becomes will depend on the implementation.
(With apologies to Wil Wheaton, but we know he'd be willing to take one for the team...)
Have an episode where Wesley Crusher time travels back to Enterprise time to take on the evil Time Lords messing with Archer's time. Open a gate to a parallel universe and have battling Jedi and Sith spill into the Enterprise universe and have one of them accidentally cut Wesley in half with a lightsaber. The resulting blast of temporal energy sends the Jedi and Sith back to their universe and locks the temporal baddies up behind a time barrier so they can't tinker with the past any more.
This would be satisfying on several levels, not the least of which would be watching Wesley get cut in half with a lightsaber, a long-time wish of everyone who really wanted a non-whiny, non-wimpy genius kid character in STtNG. That stunt alone ought to at least increase Enterprise's rating for that episode by a factor of 100, saving the show!
(Wil did a good job with what he had in the part, but the character just wasn't that cool compared to the rest of the show.)
One thing about online games, though, is that you're not guaranteed privacy. Game sysops can monitor any room in a game without the players knowing. What terrorist would risk accidental exposure because some MUD manager might get bored and start looking around for entertainment?
Besides, how many terrorist would even want to spend time in Everquest? They'd either react violently to the environment and crawl mumbling into a corner or it would consume their lives and they'd spend all their free time killing things online instead of in the real world.
Apparently prayer does work, as AOL has finally drawn and quartered itself.
Eventually, it will reduce itself to 64 small startup sized companies, 63 of which will fail. Just what I've always wanted to see: a living example of the DotCom bubble in reverse.
What's next? Maybe Microsoft will join them in self-dismemberment?
The reviewer made a comment that most Slashdotters would identify with Violet or Syndrome. In my case, though, I identified most with Mr. Incredible. I'm 47, a father of two (11 and 9), and I'm married to a nice lady who resembles Helen Parr (without the flexible limbs). I really loved how the movie showed Bob's middle-aged angst; I went through the same anxiety about aging, being out of shape, and self-doubt. However, like Bob (and perhaps inspired in part by the movie's trailers), I've started exercising again and getting back into some activities I enjoyed 20 years ago. I feel a lot better about myself now, much like our older and wiser super-hero, Mr. Incredible.
I also thought one of the understated gems of the movie was Wallace Shawn's character, Bob's insurance company boss. Did anyone else notice the irony that the guy who worked so hard to keep people from making successful claims would now have to submit his own insurance claims? Even better, he probably gets his coverage from his own heartless company. We never see what eventually happens to him, but we can only hope he gains greater insight and sympathy for his customers as a result. (Of course, then his company with fire him, too.)
I thought The Incredibles was a great movie on every level: story, characters, action, humor, and animation. As soon as the DVD comes out it will be a permanent addition to my collection.
The GOP Presidential iPod: comes in a red, white, and blue case. Only plays Pat Boone, Mel Torme, and John Phillip Sousa. Invades you're active applications on the desktop when you sync it, attempts to download and then fight as many viruses as possible, and then claims you need to keep it installed to finish what it started.
They Kerry iPod: Will play any tune, but never the same way twice. Married to a rich file-serving application that can get it any song it wants. The case is painted to look like a waffle.
The Red Sox iPod: Plays the blues for 85 years before finally blasing out "We Are the Champions."
After reading through other responses, the use of RFID appears to cut both ways. (Much like our personal use of firearms, it's all in the application.)
On the good side, reliable RFID could speed your way through computer-mediated transactions, particularly in authenticating access to facilities or systems, paying bills, driving through toll booths (EZpass comes to mind) and similar transactions.)
On the bad side, if someone steals your token (either physically or through cloning), they can do all these things, too. Also, instant ID could be used to exclude you from events if the gatekeepers have access to the database.)
"I'm sorry sir, but you can't come inside. Our system shows that you attended a Kerry rally this morning, so I'm afraid the Secret Service now considers you a threat to President Bush('s re-election)."
As with any good security schema, you need more than one element to make it secure. RFID in your driver's license is only a physical token; you need either a password/PIN or some biometric (or both) to provide additional authentication..)
What will be crucial is what information the RFID system stores and transmits and under what circumstances. For commercial transactions, maybe the RFID DL will just contain your name and a link to a database with the rest of the info needed to complete the transaction. If you've buying something at Radio Shack, they should only get verification of who you are, not your phone number or address (though they will most assuredly lobby for access to that info). If you're applying for a mortgage, the bank would probably be authorized access to more detailed information..)
And you should have the absolute right to both control how much autonomic access anyone has to your Privacy Act protected data and to turn off the RFID function whenever you want..)
However, as with any form of ID, people don't have to transact business with you if you won't provide the authentication they want. Life is full of distasteful little trade-offs.
There is a mass of people between the 20th and 80th percentiles of intelligence that corresponds to people whose IQ falls between 80 and 120, which is considered "average" for intelligence purposes. This is apparently due to statistically significant (or unsignificant) differences within this range. While it is true that there will always be a true average (mean) at 50%, there is a much wider range of what can be considered average for the purpose of judging intelligence (wisdom, common sense, etc.) for any really large group.
I'm wondering about the competence level of the readers used in the various tests. People have, in my experience, a wide range of reading ability levels ranging from those who still have to "spell out" many words letter by letter up to speed readers who can read entire phrases (or even whole sentences) as easily as most people read single words. If we divide them into three groups (phonetic readers, whole word readers, and "cognitive chunkers"), would these results be consistent from group to group?
Learning to read, like learning higher math, is a process of internalizing certain reflexes. Most people alive today do not understand calculus. Most will also never learn to read much faster than they can speak aloud.
Ultimately, 80% of the people voting in the next presidential election are of average or lower intelligence.
After reading the prior messages on this thread, there is ont other reason I'd like to submit for moving away from MS Word: forced migrations.
Software companies primarily make money two ways: selling copies of software and, once they've saturated their target market, getting current customers to buy new versions or upgrades of the same software.
MS does the latter very well. They release new versions of MS Office every 18-24 months and bundle them with the new computers your organization buys, essentially "infecting" your organization with software that constantly reminds people that there are old, "obsolete" versions hanging around impeding your computing productivity. You either upgrade or buy an enterprise license and reimage PCs to deal with the document compatibility issues.
About 10 years ago I worked in an organization with over 2,000 people at our location. Our standard word processor was MS Word 2.0 (for Windows, not Mac). Then MS released Word 6.0. (They allegedly skipped 3.x through 5.x so the Windows version would have a higher number than the Mac version and achieve numerical parity with Wordperfect.)
Twelve people in the organization got Word 6.0 and started releasing their documents into the wild. Those of us with Word 2.0 complained that they needed to save in a format we could read. The Gang of Twelve responded that the rest of us were computer Luddites that needed to upgrade so they wouldn't have to change their default settings.
Within a year, we were all on Word 6.0, despite the fact that the new word processor provided no added value for people who were simply using the software as a wysiwyg typewriter.
This system of software migration essentially takes away an organization's ability to decide when its office automation software is obsolete and replaced it with significant pressure to upgrade existing software. Aside from the technical issues, I'd like to be able to decide for myself, and my organization, when my office software no longer meets my needs. Otherwise, we will continue to pay companies like MS for the privilege of upgrading our systems whenever they decide to release a new version through PC OEMs to improve their revenue stream.
...is a reasonably complete obliviousness to marketing and fairly simple home computing needs. I know exactly where I want to go today, thank you very much.
I started on a friend's Franklin (Apple IIe clone) playing "A Bard's Tale." Mostly because the games I liked ran on Apple IIs, I bought a IIc (1987) and a IIGS (1989). In 1991 I switched to a Mac IIsi, which served me faithfully and well for seven years.
My family now owns two iMacs and an eMac. We surf the Web, do a little word processing, use e-mail, make DVDs of our home movies, and play a few games. We are content with our "simple life."
I should add, though, that my day job is as a regional director (covering 25 states) of telecommunications for a large government agency. I've worked with two different flavors of Unix, Banyan Vines wide-area networking, DOS from versions 2 through 6, and every flavor of Windows from 3.0 to 2000. (No XP yet, though.)
My experience with our use of Windows here at the office has been such that I would prefer not to deal with that level of complexity and insecurity at home. While the Federal government can afford to hire 2 million contractors to stick their fingers in all the holes in Windows' dikes, my family can't. We're happy with our simple, little niche Macintoshes.
(Though having Unix underneath now makes it a bit more fun for me.)
As the original poster, I will admit to adding "money-grubbing opportunists," etc., to the post on my own. You are correct...DeVore did not deride. However, she did make the point in the article that there are people who make a living perpetuating the myths, conspiracy theories, etc., that we see in the media. I agree with her that many of them are still around because there's still money to be made from them, so I chose to spice up the description with my own opinion of the profiterring purveyors of psuedo-science.
(Yes, I know that sounds trite, as does my other comment. Perhaps I've seen the movie trailer to "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" one time too many.):)
Re:Government involvement is a double edged sword
on
eGovOS 3 Announced
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
On the other hand, "the government," at least as it has been involved previously in software development, was the original purveyor of "free software." Everything produced by the government that isn't classified is part of the public domain, freely available for use by everyone. Unfortunately, it has been available without any protection against being co-opted by proprietary interests, resulting in a lot of government code being buried in commercial products and never seeing free use again.
Maybe this is a chance for open source advocates within government to start embedding licenses like BSD or GPL in the software they produce. This is one of the chief threats to Microsoft and their brethren: that the free software they've been profiting from will no longer be their own private gravy train. Yeah, a lot of it gets produced because MS is willing to "partner" with government to develop systems on the public's dime. But others with a more open bent will step up and be willing to do the work.
Some good can come of this conference, even if it only plants the seed of openess in the government software development environment.
You have to wonder if this announcement has something to do with Sun recently releasing its Java-based office stack. Also, factor in Steve Ballmer's recent comments on the state of MS's security problems, Apple (lot's of innovation MS can copy, but they're not taking market share), and open source.
Perhaps MS has decided its time to "embrace" Linux, attempt to "extend" it with proprietary MS code, and then litigate the hell out of the GPL to make the resulting product proprietary intellectual property.
It would be a huge gamble, particularly if the GPL holds up in court. But MS could drain a lot of money and resources out of the open source movement even if they lose, perhaps enough even to win the war despite losing the battle.
Or maybe I'm just paranoid and Mr. Gates and Company really have decided that they've made enough money, dominated enough markets, and foisted enough FUD on the world and it's time to contribute all their code to the public domain.
Did you talk to the Air Force or Navy? They tend to have a lot more advanced technology in the field where they need people in uniforms to deal with it than the Army does. Unless things have really gone nuts, contractors don't deploy on aircraft carriers (or other ships), which are floating cities with 5,000 people and all attendant services. There are jobs.
Those three recuiters sound like idiots, or else they're just trying to fill other career fields where they get extra points.
Slashdot Mirror
Current initiatives for municipal broadband have a lot in common with previous attempts to set up municipal cable systems, not the least of which is that the same companies (Cox, Viacom, Adelphia, etc.) are involved.
A ID=/20050214/NEWS/502140334/1003/NEWS02) for permission to set up its own cable television service. The difference between this and the broadband proposals is that Adelphia is claiming that establishing a municipal cable network would be "overbuild," while with the broadband they're claiming that allowing a municipality to set up a broadband network would then prevent commercial companies from entering the market.
Municipal cable TV proposals aren't completely dead, they've just gone out of style. However, The city of Burlington, Vermont, is petitioning the state public service board (http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?
What do they want? If it's open markets, they should be willing to compete with municipal projects on a level playing field (i.e. one where the city can't subsidise their system through tax revenues).
If they champion "first-to-post" efficiency, then whoever builds the network first should be able to reap the benefits. Given government's alleged inefficiencies, that may mean that even if a city builds a cable or wireless network, they'd eventually have to sell it to a commercial provider if it becomes a liability to the city.
All it will take is one state allowing this before it becomes a national issue with a fight in Congress. The big cable companies are fighting this state to state at the moment, but Vermont is a very independent-minded state. IF they let Burlington proceed it wouldn't be the first time they've told an industry co-op to buzz off and set a precedent for any city that wants to do something similar either with cable or IP. I expect Adelphia to pull out every weapon they can find to stop them, but I'm hoping, as with the sign restriction laws, land development rules, and the non-returnable bottle ban, that Vermont holds its ground and lets Burlington take Adelphia on head to head.
They may ultimately fail, but I'd rather see them go down in a fair fight than see the project get bound, gagged, and tossed in Lake Champlain before it can get to the arena.
Brilliant!
:)
I wish I'd thought of that myself, though I'm glad to have provided the setup.
Oh this is bad news indeed. If SCO is delisted and their stock drops below a dollar then the junk faxers currently targeting my office fax machine with junk stock pitches will start sending me notices about the "great opportunity to buy SCO" at 62 cents.
Then I'll have to choose between buying SCO stock and the fake Disney vacation offers.
Oh the horror. Maybe I should just answer the e-mail from the nice Nigerian who wants me to transfer his millions into my bank account, instead.
On the other hand, it's nice to see SCO sinking to an appropriate level in the economic food chain.
The Linux-based cat feeder is cool high-tech, but there's still a very efficient, economical way to feed your cat.
Mount a bird feeder on a 1-foot tall pole. Fill it with birdseed. Release cat into yard.
Not only does this provide your cat with plenty of fresh food, it gets kitty some exercise and reduces the potential sources of bird droppings on your freshly buffed car.
Can I patent this, or does Bill Gates already own it?
Most of the abused children are from outside the U.S., which is why it ended up being considered an immigration issue. DHS got the job when it absorbed the old Immigration and Naturalization Service.
DHS (specifically, Immigration & Customs Enforcement) hunts down pedophiles in part becauase they track many types of smuggling: human, contraband, and money. The smugglers don't care what they carry, as long as they get paid, so the same people smuggle in immigrants, counterfeit NFL goods, sex slaves, etc. It's all money to them.
Stop thinking that. This isn't a slam at Disney about making money off of kids.
I work with people who investigate the child sex trade. It's not a surprise that those pictures showed a Disney hotel, as Disney resorts used to be a popular place for child peddlers to hand over the kids they were selling. There are so many kids running around there, who's going to notice that a little girl in a yellow dress comes in with one person and leaves with another?
Disney knew nothing of this at the time, though they're aware of it now. They have a great security team, but they're focused on pickpockets and and the garden variety perverts who want to cop a feel on Snow White, not child traders.
Child porn is a dirty business, perhaps the dirtiest. The people responsible probably get some perverse pleasure from trading their sex toys at a place like Disneyland.
Then again, one thing DHS has done right over the last 18 months is arrest and dispose of over 3,000 of the bastards who trade in kids. It's just too bad disposal only consists of deportation or detention. If any crime deserves the death penalty, sexual abuse of children is it.
(Yeah, I take it personally. I have a nine-year old daughter. If you'd seen what these bastards do with kids, you'd scratch their names on a few bullets, too.)
Sorry about the rant. But this subject touched a nerve or two.
Fingerprint systems like this seem to work as well or better than most forms of ID. Most security on credit card purchases I've made has been limited to comparing my signature on the receipt to the one on my card, which can be forged pretty easily. They don't ask for picture ID any more on credit cards. A lot of them don't even keep my card long enough to check the signature, and automatic chargers like gas pumps will take your credit card without any cross-check. In that sense, using an account activated by your fingerprint is probably an improvement.
:)
Yes, there are concerns about the government tracking you through your fingerprints, but they could do that through your credit cards now anyway, so I'm curious what the difference would be. Besides, we're more at risk from all the commercial entities who have access to our electronic transactions. Unlike the government, they routinely do all sorts of things with the information they collect on our purchasing habits.
Here's my main concern: What if someone manages to impersonate you and establishes an electronic account that ties your financial information to their fingerprint. Someone could wreak havoc in a fairly short time if biometric systems are trusted blindly.
Then again, if the scammer impersonates a person with huge debts, maybe they'd get stuck with them.
Biometrics may be a miracle cure or snake oil. As with any potentially useful technology, which it becomes will depend on the implementation.
And I thank you for the thought.
:/
I've found, more often than not, that real life is far funnier than when we try to manufacture laughs.
Unless that person is your wife, in which case she will either distract you by pointing out everyting you're doing wrong while driving.
If you're going under the speed limit: "You can go the speed limit, you know."
If you're going over the speed limit: "You're goint too fast."
If you wait for a decent opening to turn left against traffic: "What are you waiting for, an engraved invitation?"
If you rush to turn left against traffic: "What are you trying to do, get us killed?"
However, just try flinching even a little when your wife is a little slow in putting on the brakes and you're rushing up on someone's rear bumper!
If they're going to ban cell phones in cars, they might as well forbid husbands and wives from driving together, too.
Mpeg4 or divx would be good. Most players/platforms can handle them.
I have a fondness for Quicktime, though, because releasing something in QT just flat-out annoys both Microsoft and Real.
(Yeah, I'm bigoted. But at least my bigotry is based on honest hatred and distrust, not hypocrasy.)
(With apologies to Wil Wheaton, but we know he'd be willing to take one for the team...)
Have an episode where Wesley Crusher time travels back to Enterprise time to take on the evil Time Lords messing with Archer's time. Open a gate to a parallel universe and have battling Jedi and Sith spill into the Enterprise universe and have one of them accidentally cut Wesley in half with a lightsaber. The resulting blast of temporal energy sends the Jedi and Sith back to their universe and locks the temporal baddies up behind a time barrier so they can't tinker with the past any more.
This would be satisfying on several levels, not the least of which would be watching Wesley get cut in half with a lightsaber, a long-time wish of everyone who really wanted a non-whiny, non-wimpy genius kid character in STtNG. That stunt alone ought to at least increase Enterprise's rating for that episode by a factor of 100, saving the show!
(Wil did a good job with what he had in the part, but the character just wasn't that cool compared to the rest of the show.)
Go Team!
One thing about online games, though, is that you're not guaranteed privacy. Game sysops can monitor any room in a game without the players knowing. What terrorist would risk accidental exposure because some MUD manager might get bored and start looking around for entertainment?
Besides, how many terrorist would even want to spend time in Everquest? They'd either react violently to the environment and crawl mumbling into a corner or it would consume their lives and they'd spend all their free time killing things online instead of in the real world.
Apparently prayer does work, as AOL has finally drawn and quartered itself.
Eventually, it will reduce itself to 64 small startup sized companies, 63 of which will fail. Just what I've always wanted to see: a living example of the DotCom bubble in reverse.
What's next? Maybe Microsoft will join them in self-dismemberment?
(Pray early, pray often...)
The reviewer made a comment that most Slashdotters would identify with Violet or Syndrome. In my case, though, I identified most with Mr. Incredible. I'm 47, a father of two (11 and 9), and I'm married to a nice lady who resembles Helen Parr (without the flexible limbs). I really loved how the movie showed Bob's middle-aged angst; I went through the same anxiety about aging, being out of shape, and self-doubt. However, like Bob (and perhaps inspired in part by the movie's trailers), I've started exercising again and getting back into some activities I enjoyed 20 years ago. I feel a lot better about myself now, much like our older and wiser super-hero, Mr. Incredible.
I also thought one of the understated gems of the movie was Wallace Shawn's character, Bob's insurance company boss. Did anyone else notice the irony that the guy who worked so hard to keep people from making successful claims would now have to submit his own insurance claims? Even better, he probably gets his coverage from his own heartless company. We never see what eventually happens to him, but we can only hope he gains greater insight and sympathy for his customers as a result. (Of course, then his company with fire him, too.)
I thought The Incredibles was a great movie on every level: story, characters, action, humor, and animation. As soon as the DVD comes out it will be a permanent addition to my collection.
Yeah, just what we need! More iPod flavors!
The GOP Presidential iPod: comes in a red, white, and blue case. Only plays Pat Boone, Mel Torme, and John Phillip Sousa. Invades you're active applications on the desktop when you sync it, attempts to download and then fight as many viruses as possible, and then claims you need to keep it installed to finish what it started.
They Kerry iPod: Will play any tune, but never the same way twice. Married to a rich file-serving application that can get it any song it wants. The case is painted to look like a waffle.
The Red Sox iPod: Plays the blues for 85 years before finally blasing out "We Are the Champions."
After reading through other responses, the use of RFID appears to cut both ways. (Much like our personal use of firearms, it's all in the application.)
On the good side, reliable RFID could speed your way through computer-mediated transactions, particularly in authenticating access to facilities or systems, paying bills, driving through toll booths (EZpass comes to mind) and similar transactions.)
On the bad side, if someone steals your token (either physically or through cloning), they can do all these things, too. Also, instant ID could be used to exclude you from events if the gatekeepers have access to the database.)
"I'm sorry sir, but you can't come inside. Our system shows that you attended a Kerry rally this morning, so I'm afraid the Secret Service now considers you a threat to President Bush('s re-election)."
As with any good security schema, you need more than one element to make it secure. RFID in your driver's license is only a physical token; you need either a password/PIN or some biometric (or both) to provide additional authentication..)
What will be crucial is what information the RFID system stores and transmits and under what circumstances. For commercial transactions, maybe the RFID DL will just contain your name and a link to a database with the rest of the info needed to complete the transaction. If you've buying something at Radio Shack, they should only get verification of who you are, not your phone number or address (though they will most assuredly lobby for access to that info). If you're applying for a mortgage, the bank would probably be authorized access to more detailed information..)
And you should have the absolute right to both control how much autonomic access anyone has to your Privacy Act protected data and to turn off the RFID function whenever you want..)
However, as with any form of ID, people don't have to transact business with you if you won't provide the authentication they want. Life is full of distasteful little trade-offs.
There is a mass of people between the 20th and 80th percentiles of intelligence that corresponds to people whose IQ falls between 80 and 120, which is considered "average" for intelligence purposes. This is apparently due to statistically significant (or unsignificant) differences within this range. While it is true that there will always be a true average (mean) at 50%, there is a much wider range of what can be considered average for the purpose of judging intelligence (wisdom, common sense, etc.) for any really large group.
Intellectual performance, like mileage, may vary.
I'm wondering about the competence level of the readers used in the various tests. People have, in my experience, a wide range of reading ability levels ranging from those who still have to "spell out" many words letter by letter up to speed readers who can read entire phrases (or even whole sentences) as easily as most people read single words. If we divide them into three groups (phonetic readers, whole word readers, and "cognitive chunkers"), would these results be consistent from group to group?
:)
Learning to read, like learning higher math, is a process of internalizing certain reflexes. Most people alive today do not understand calculus. Most will also never learn to read much faster than they can speak aloud.
Ultimately, 80% of the people voting in the next presidential election are of average or lower intelligence.
The rest of us are Slashdot members.
I think, therefore I am.
Linux computes, therefore it is.
But if SCO falls in a forest of futile legal filings, did it really make a sound or was that just wind breaking?
After reading the prior messages on this thread, there is ont other reason I'd like to submit for moving away from MS Word: forced migrations.
Software companies primarily make money two ways: selling copies of software and, once they've saturated their target market, getting current customers to buy new versions or upgrades of the same software.
MS does the latter very well. They release new versions of MS Office every 18-24 months and bundle them with the new computers your organization buys, essentially "infecting" your organization with software that constantly reminds people that there are old, "obsolete" versions hanging around impeding your computing productivity. You either upgrade or buy an enterprise license and reimage PCs to deal with the document compatibility issues.
About 10 years ago I worked in an organization with over 2,000 people at our location. Our standard word processor was MS Word 2.0 (for Windows, not Mac). Then MS released Word 6.0. (They allegedly skipped 3.x through 5.x so the Windows version would have a higher number than the Mac version and achieve numerical parity with Wordperfect.)
Twelve people in the organization got Word 6.0 and started releasing their documents into the wild. Those of us with Word 2.0 complained that they needed to save in a format we could read. The Gang of Twelve responded that the rest of us were computer Luddites that needed to upgrade so they wouldn't have to change their default settings.
Within a year, we were all on Word 6.0, despite the fact that the new word processor provided no added value for people who were simply using the software as a wysiwyg typewriter.
This system of software migration essentially takes away an organization's ability to decide when its office automation software is obsolete and replaced it with significant pressure to upgrade existing software. Aside from the technical issues, I'd like to be able to decide for myself, and my organization, when my office software no longer meets my needs. Otherwise, we will continue to pay companies like MS for the privilege of upgrading our systems whenever they decide to release a new version through PC OEMs to improve their revenue stream.
...is a reasonably complete obliviousness to marketing and fairly simple home computing needs. I know exactly where I want to go today, thank you very much.
I started on a friend's Franklin (Apple IIe clone) playing "A Bard's Tale." Mostly because the games I liked ran on Apple IIs, I bought a IIc (1987) and a IIGS (1989). In 1991 I switched to a Mac IIsi, which served me faithfully and well for seven years.
My family now owns two iMacs and an eMac. We surf the Web, do a little word processing, use e-mail, make DVDs of our home movies, and play a few games. We are content with our "simple life."
I should add, though, that my day job is as a regional director (covering 25 states) of telecommunications for a large government agency. I've worked with two different flavors of Unix, Banyan Vines wide-area networking, DOS from versions 2 through 6, and every flavor of Windows from 3.0 to 2000. (No XP yet, though.)
My experience with our use of Windows here at the office has been such that I would prefer not to deal with that level of complexity and insecurity at home. While the Federal government can afford to hire 2 million contractors to stick their fingers in all the holes in Windows' dikes, my family can't. We're happy with our simple, little niche Macintoshes.
(Though having Unix underneath now makes it a bit more fun for me.)
As the original poster, I will admit to adding "money-grubbing opportunists," etc., to the post on my own. You are correct...DeVore did not deride. However, she did make the point in the article that there are people who make a living perpetuating the myths, conspiracy theories, etc., that we see in the media. I agree with her that many of them are still around because there's still money to be made from them, so I chose to spice up the description with my own opinion of the profiterring purveyors of psuedo-science.
:)
(Yes, I know that sounds trite, as does my other comment. Perhaps I've seen the movie trailer to "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" one time too many.)
On the other hand, "the government," at least as it has been involved previously in software development, was the original purveyor of "free software." Everything produced by the government that isn't classified is part of the public domain, freely available for use by everyone. Unfortunately, it has been available without any protection against being co-opted by proprietary interests, resulting in a lot of government code being buried in commercial products and never seeing free use again.
Maybe this is a chance for open source advocates within government to start embedding licenses like BSD or GPL in the software they produce. This is one of the chief threats to Microsoft and their brethren: that the free software they've been profiting from will no longer be their own private gravy train. Yeah, a lot of it gets produced because MS is willing to "partner" with government to develop systems on the public's dime. But others with a more open bent will step up and be willing to do the work.
Some good can come of this conference, even if it only plants the seed of openess in the government software development environment.
You have to wonder if this announcement has something to do with Sun recently releasing its Java-based office stack. Also, factor in Steve Ballmer's recent comments on the state of MS's security problems, Apple (lot's of innovation MS can copy, but they're not taking market share), and open source.
Perhaps MS has decided its time to "embrace" Linux, attempt to "extend" it with proprietary MS code, and then litigate the hell out of the GPL to make the resulting product proprietary intellectual property.
It would be a huge gamble, particularly if the GPL holds up in court. But MS could drain a lot of money and resources out of the open source movement even if they lose, perhaps enough even to win the war despite losing the battle.
Or maybe I'm just paranoid and Mr. Gates and Company really have decided that they've made enough money, dominated enough markets, and foisted enough FUD on the world and it's time to contribute all their code to the public domain.
Yeah, right.
Did you talk to the Air Force or Navy? They tend to have a lot more advanced technology in the field where they need people in uniforms to deal with it than the Army does. Unless things have really gone nuts, contractors don't deploy on aircraft carriers (or other ships), which are floating cities with 5,000 people and all attendant services. There are jobs.
Those three recuiters sound like idiots, or else they're just trying to fill other career fields where they get extra points.