I'm not saying I agree with it. But I don't understand the arguments that say, "It's possible and even easy to do, so it should be legal."
Speeding is also illegal even though cars easily can exceed the speed limit and all I have to do is press down on the gas pedal a bit more. Why is that illegal?
It's like they said said some said thousand said times.
Not to mention the 10% or so of the patent that describes a COMPUTER in its constituent parts. It seems to me, if this is necessary, then perhaps the patent is describing an algorithm. But, of course, IANAL.
I've been thinking about automated cars since I was about 10.
I'm guessing that Car-to-Car communication will be required at some point, along with the other radar, vision, and infrared sensors. I think that infrared will be important to distinguish between a rock and a person. It's not perfect, but may be required in failure scenarios.
I've also dreamt about the possibilities of never stopping for a stoplight, flying through just inches from the other cars. If that ever does come true, then the cars would have to block out the windows, so that the passengers don't have heart attacks and DIE. Like someone else mentioned...this could be the killer-app for cars. I wonder how long that would take to get used to?
OTOH, this may also be one of those intractable problems and may never ever happen. I know that it will not be possible in my lifetime.
They built a plant similar (or maybe identical) to the one you are describing. It was billed as a recycling plant that burned trash to generate electricity.
The HUGE problem was that the ash was extremely toxic being full of heavy metals.
It cost many hundreds of millions of dollars to build and they eventually scrapped the whole thing.
Hey. I wonder if you can recycle a slightly used recycling plant?
I believe the confusion about efficiency is generated because TFA doesn't contain any useful technical specifications, like gallons of fuel consumed per watt of electricity generated.
Not that I would have understood this better...but *someone else* may have been able to explain it to my feeble mind.
While I agree that the 2nd Amendment (should) allows us to have guns, I *don't* believe that is the most important right.
The Freedoms of Speech, Assembly, Press, and Religion are ALL more important to keep this country together. I would even add that the Right to Privacy (if this is even a right) is more important than gun ownership.
If there is a revolution in this country, it will certainly not be done with guns.
That being said, right now, I can't imagine me ever voting for Hillary.
(My wife just noticed this morning that all of the signs at her campaign stops say "Hillary" and not "Clinton". I wonder why?)
1) A switch that can fail 2) Wires that can short out or open 3) An electric motor that can fail...and all of these are never cheap or easy to replace.
A manual window has...
1) A hand crank that I can and have replaced. (I don't remember the cost. I'm an old geezer with limited memory) 2) Gears and slides that are (hopefully) made of metal, which can last for decades.
Yes, electric windows are convenient, but they are also more expensive and difficult to repair.
The doors that automatically lock at over 5 mph and then don't unlock until you manually unlock them really annoy the living shit out of me. I can understand the motivation - fear of lawsuits if someone carjacks you at a stop, but please provide an easy way to turn this misfeature off!
I'm all for simplicity. I buy too many things with too many knobs that I NEVER push.
The problem with your wish, is that most companies don't consider durability important. Like you said, they would rather have us buy their low quality product again.
Uh...yes...you certainly *can* use gmail to do what you are doing with your own domain.
Step 1...get a gmail account. Step 2...invite yourself to join gmail and create an "amazon.me@gmail.com" account. Step 3...Forward amazon.me@gmail.com to your primary account. Step 4...Rinse...Lather...Repeat.
Now you can do it for free without the hassles of maintaining your own domain.
Good posting. First, it is appearent that you have indeed been thinking about this for a long time. Keep it up. We need more ideas like these and the other detailed posting.
I personally haven't decided if electronic voting is the way to go or not. It seems like we *should* be headed that way, but...
Real paper ballots marked with a pen and optically scanned also seem just too darn simple.
My only comment about your proposal concerns the receipt that the voter places in the second machine. If the voter actually has the receipt in his hand, then it becomes possible to either sell your vote or to be forced to vote for a particular candidate. The voter could take the receipt out of the voting booth and then show it to someone else, who takes it to the booth and puts it into the second machine (after having voted on the first machine and taking the receipt that will in turn be shown to someone outside.)
Of course the submaring captain should not need a warrant. But you already knew that no one would disagree with it. (Not necessarily disagreeing with you...)
There is a huge difference between fighting the military from a different country and the need to gather intelligence about possible terrorists.
I always thought that the CIA and NSA could do just about anything they wanted...as long as a USA citizen was not involved. In that case, the FBI would have jurisdiction and would require (a possibly secret warrant) to do any surveillence.
To me this is a good and clear distinction.
I'll never understand what's wrong with going to (a likely friendly) judge and getting a warrant. Perhaps the judge will become less friendly if it seems that your suspicions are well...warrantless.
Slashdot Mirror
OK...I'll bite.
It's illegal because there is a law against it.
I'm not saying I agree with it. But I don't understand the arguments that say, "It's possible and even easy to do, so it should be legal."
Speeding is also illegal even though cars easily can exceed the speed limit and all I have to do is press down on the gas pedal a bit more. Why is that illegal?
If you don't like the law, change it.
Randy - betterlogoffbeforethecopsseeme
OK...I'll bite.
Why would Xerox care about this more than any other company that files offensive and defensive patents?
Does this have something to do with their historically GREAT decisions on what to market and sell?
Sometimes, I play Mr. Obvious and you have to hit me on the head with a hammer.
Randy.
It's like they said said some said thousand said times.
Not to mention the 10% or so of the patent that describes a COMPUTER in its constituent parts. It seems to me, if this is necessary, then perhaps the patent is describing an algorithm. But, of course, IANAL.
I said,
Randy.
I've been thinking about automated cars since I was about 10.
I'm guessing that Car-to-Car communication will be required at some point, along with the other radar, vision, and infrared sensors. I think that infrared will be important to distinguish between a rock and a person. It's not perfect, but may be required in failure scenarios.
I've also dreamt about the possibilities of never stopping for a stoplight, flying through just inches from the other cars. If that ever does come true, then the cars would have to block out the windows, so that the passengers don't have heart attacks and DIE. Like someone else mentioned...this could be the killer-app for cars. I wonder how long that would take to get used to?
OTOH, this may also be one of those intractable problems and may never ever happen. I know that it will not be possible in my lifetime.
Oh well,
Randy.
ROTFLMAO.
Best Sig All Month.
Thanks!
Was this Rochester, NY?
They built a plant similar (or maybe identical) to the one you are describing. It was billed as a recycling plant that burned trash to generate electricity.
The HUGE problem was that the ash was extremely toxic being full of heavy metals.
It cost many hundreds of millions of dollars to build and they eventually scrapped the whole thing.
Hey. I wonder if you can recycle a slightly used recycling plant?
Enjoy,
Randy.
I believe the confusion about efficiency is generated because TFA doesn't contain any useful technical specifications, like gallons of fuel consumed per watt of electricity generated.
Not that I would have understood this better...but *someone else* may have been able to explain it to my feeble mind.
Enjoy,
Randy
While I agree that the 2nd Amendment (should) allows us to have guns, I *don't* believe that is the most important right.
The Freedoms of Speech, Assembly, Press, and Religion are ALL more important to keep this country together. I would even add that the Right to Privacy (if this is even a right) is more important than gun ownership.
If there is a revolution in this country, it will certainly not be done with guns.
That being said, right now, I can't imagine me ever voting for Hillary.
(My wife just noticed this morning that all of the signs at her campaign stops say "Hillary" and not "Clinton". I wonder why?)
Happing voting,
Randy.
Well, let's see...an electric window has...
...and all of these are never cheap or easy to replace.
1) A switch that can fail
2) Wires that can short out or open
3) An electric motor that can fail
A manual window has...
1) A hand crank that I can and have replaced. (I don't remember the cost. I'm an old geezer with limited memory)
2) Gears and slides that are (hopefully) made of metal, which can last for decades.
Yes, electric windows are convenient, but they are also more expensive and difficult to repair.
Enjoy,
Randy.
-b.
Sorry. That would make it more complicated.Enjoy,
Randy.
Do you mind if I join your club?
I'm all for simplicity. I buy too many things with too many knobs that I NEVER push.
The problem with your wish, is that most companies don't consider durability important. Like you said, they would rather have us buy their low quality product again.
Enjoy,
Randy.
Excellent post!
I was going to post that exact sentiment, but then realized that I was two days late.
Good Job,
Randy.
LOST Post!
AMEN AMEN, I say, AMEN!
Can I vote for you today?
Randy.
I don't think a hash should be used.
If the hash algorithm is public, then you could prove who you voted for.
Which then allows your vote to be sold or coerced.
Just face it: technolgy and voting do not mix.
Enjoy,
Randy.
DAMN.
/. ...
I was hoping that the drugs would help me stop reading
I forgot what I was doing...
Randy.
I nominate this as the best Uranus joke in this thread.
Good Work!
Boo. That's ugly.
Here's my submission:
O F F I C E
P
E
N
That's much better.
Please mail the check to 100 Main St, Beverly Hills, CA 90210.
Thank you,
Randy.
Yes sir...I must be a moron...or maybe it's you.
Uh...yes...you certainly *can* use gmail to do what you are doing with your own domain.
Step 1...get a gmail account.
Step 2...invite yourself to join gmail and create an "amazon.me@gmail.com" account.
Step 3...Forward amazon.me@gmail.com to your primary account.
Step 4...Rinse...Lather...Repeat.
Now you can do it for free without the hassles of maintaining your own domain.
If my spam gets bad...maybe I'll try this.
Enjoy,
Randy.
Good posting. First, it is appearent that you have indeed been thinking about this for a long time. Keep it up. We need more ideas like these and the other detailed posting.
I personally haven't decided if electronic voting is the way to go or not. It seems like we *should* be headed that way, but...
Real paper ballots marked with a pen and optically scanned also seem just too darn simple.
My only comment about your proposal concerns the receipt that the voter places in the second machine. If the voter actually has the receipt in his hand, then it becomes possible to either sell your vote or to be forced to vote for a particular candidate. The voter could take the receipt out of the voting booth and then show it to someone else, who takes it to the booth and puts it into the second machine (after having voted on the first machine and taking the receipt that will in turn be shown to someone outside.)
Happy Voting,
Randy.
You wouldn't happen to be an 11 year old girl who had her cell phone taken away? (Just checking.)
You don't have children, do you?
It's not a right. It's a privildge. It's a punishment. Or maybe the family just can't afford it any longer.
*still shaking head*,
Randy.
Of course the submaring captain should not need a warrant. But you already knew that no one would disagree with it.
(Not necessarily disagreeing with you...)
There is a huge difference between fighting the military from a different country and the need to gather intelligence about possible terrorists.
I always thought that the CIA and NSA could do just about anything they wanted...as long as a USA citizen was not involved. In that case, the FBI would have jurisdiction and would require (a possibly secret warrant) to do any surveillence.
To me this is a good and clear distinction.
I'll never understand what's wrong with going to (a likely friendly) judge and getting a warrant. Perhaps the judge will become less friendly if it seems that your suspicions are well...warrantless.
Enjoy,
Randy.
But I don't believe that "executive powers" should give him UNLIMITED powers.
Enjoy,
Randy
HEY! Are you being sarcastic? :-)
I think what you are saying is that users should be involved while writing the *Requirements* and *Use Cases*.
--
Sorry I don't have a sig.
Randy.
I know I don't want my users doing that for my code.
Besides, whatever happened to "Test First"?
Enjoy, Randy.