TOKYO - Residents have reported that giant reptile, Godzilla, was just struck down and apparently killed by a misdirected microwave beam from Japan's orbiting power generation satellite. The giant lizard fell in a residential area and caused substantial damage. Hundreds of people are missing and presumed dead.
The Greenpeace and the International Humane Society have issued a joint statement criticizing the Japanese government for allowing their satellite to destroy the last specimen of this endangered species.
Godzilla had a long history of appearing in Japanese cities, and often caused much damage with each visit. Typically, the creature appeared when some other monstrous threat appeared. Apart from the Windows 7 launch in Tokyo, no one is aware of any significant events that would have drawn the creature to the city.
Because of his history as a destructive source, many people are glad to see the death of the giant lizard. A representative of the Japanese tourism ministry, however, is reported to have said that, "Godzilla's passing will have a profound affect on the people of Japan, and upon the Japanese tourist economy."
Japanese street vendor, Aido Hawishinna, witnessed the event and reported, "It hit the buildings as it fell, and crashed just beyond my stand. It smells like baked fish. I wanted to be the first merchant in the city to sell Godzilla-burgers, but the police and army will not let me harvest the meat before it spoils."
The Japanese government, in an official statement issued hours after the incident, announced that it plans to conduct an autopsy on the remains, to determine if Godzilla's death was related to problems on the orbital microwave power platform.
The study, funded by Tetris' makers and authored by investigators at the Mind Research Network in New Mexico...
Most people are familar with the Golden Rule (Do unto others as you would have them do unto you), and most in business are familiar with the other golden rule (He who has the gold makes the rules). I would just be cautious about any study that is funded by a game producer that concludes that games are good for you.
I don't doubt that such a positive correllation is possible. I just am leary of any study that finds in favor of the payor. It's like those periodic news stories you see where it is touted that businesses are moving back toward formal attire, that "the suit is back", or similar sentiments. The most common sources for those news items (if they are even worthy of being called "news") are PR firms associated with menswear retailers like The Men's Warehouse. All the statistics in the press releases seem well researched and are accepted as valid, but the conclusions are being made while the menswear retailer(s) hold(s) the purse strings.
The only reassuring thing about this particular study is the research entity, the Mind Research Network. They appear to be a legitimate non-profit corporation whose mission centers around understanding mental illness and cognitive processes. I couldn't find any serious criticisms of their other work. It will be interesting to see how this study fares as it is reviewed by peers and colleagues.
Right. To be more convincing, the laptops could have been shipped with glossy marketing materials that gush over the newest bells and whistles. They could have been sent as examples of the types of laptops that could be deployed to school children, loaded with electronic textbooks. If the sender really wanted these units powered on and used, they would have provided a plausible cover story.
My guess? Some security-minded grad student's research project to see what the rate of using unknown and unexpected hardware might be.
The flame of the article is based on the phrasing of the general question. If you click the "Learn More" link, it is clear that the warning is about downloading via P2P file sharing networks. The use of P2P networks is a violation of the DOD Information Systems network use. That's the thrust of the training.
It may not be clear from the phrasing in the question, but in the context (i.e., when administered to people who are constantly exposed to DOD Information Systems training and reminders), it will likely be understood by the reader. Chances are, there is likely a prohibition against personal software (including *legal* music downloads) too.
Thank the boss for the offer, but make it clear that you don't want to blur the lines of ownership regarding your laptop and the associated software licenses. Suggest that, if he still wants to compensate you for all you do using your personal equipment on your own time, if he would consider making the payment a one-time cash bonus. That way, the payment is associated with wages and cannot be construed as being an employer reimbursement for business equipment to be used at home.
The incidence of such genetic anomalies is such that cases are very rare. With AIS, the medical field appears to define them as female. Clearly, with any test, there must be an appeals process to account for atypical gender mutations.
The point of my post was that it was easy to understand why some would look at the runner and question her gender. I presented my simplistic view of testing to make it clear that whatever test is presented, it must be required of all, and not just targeted at this woman, or others in similar situations in the future.
The only reason this is an issue right now--regardless of the jump in performance--is that her looks appear predominately male to the average observer. It goes far beyond just being muscular, trim, and having an athletic female bosom. The set of her shoulders and her facial characteristics would likely cause a casual observer to assume she was male. I thought my wife was reading about a male runner when I first saw her picture, before I knew about the controversy.
I know that there are many of each gender whose characteristics might cause them to be misidentified at first. Take this initial misidentification in conjunction with the recent exceptional results, and it is easy to see why some might wonder. I don't know that calling for such testing is necessary. I assume she already has a physician or trainer who can make an attestation.
If it does come down to a genetic test, then it should be strictly XY vs. XX and it should be a standard test for all competitors. Otherwise, they'll only be testing those whose physical traits suggest they might be different gendered. Those whose physical traits already closer match the other gender would go without suspicion.
Pulling the credit report under a given SSN gives the collector information that may be helpful in collecting a debt, including:
Other names associated with the SSN (thus the territorial borrower's SSN shows the US resident/citizen's name if that person has a credit history)
Current and prior addresses
Phone numbers
Current and former employers
and in some cases, banking information
All of this information could help a collector track down a delinquent borrower. In the case described in the article, however, that's exactly why people are getting wrongly associated with these territorial debts. Collectors will call current and former employers, to find out if anyone there has a way of reaching you, or to try to talk to you directly. Any information they can scrape together to help collect brings them closer to a potential pay day.
I've been on the owing end one too many times and know that, when the dollar amounts owed are high enough, they pull all the info they can, including data from the credit bureaus. I've had them quote it to me over the phone. $30 is a small price to pay for the agency's share of a potential large dollar settlement. With aid loans, we're not talking about collecting on a $70 bad check, or on a small dollar credit card.
No. The article notes that the information that ties the territorial lender to the US citizens is the SSN in the credit file. The territorial SSN was padded by the credit beureaus, causing the credit entries on the now defaulted loans to show up as bad debts on the record of the US resident/citizen. When the collector pulls the credit report (something commonly done since it will often show other names and addresses used when securing credit), they assume that the individuals on the record are one in the same because they share the same SSN.
The majority of information in a credit report comes from lenders, not collection agencies. When you open a credit account with a bank or other major financial institution or agency, they automatically send updates to the credit beureaus on a regular basis (e.g., quarterly, monthly). That's likely how the territorial loan information got mis-associated with the non-territorial US citizens. When the loan information was entered, the credit beureau software needed all digits of the SSN field filled, and the padding zeroes were added. Thus, when the collectors pulled the credit history on the borrower with the territorial SSN, they ended up getting the record of someone who lived in the NE United States.
Why would it ever come down to the opinion of a collector or a judge. If the consumer files a complaint regarding the do not call registry, the agency will contact the alleged offender (the collection agency). The collection agency will reply by stating that the person they called owes them money based on the SSN listed on the debt and on the credit record. The agency, whose job does not include verifying whether or not the information used by the agency is error free, notes that the company has a legitimate claim and the complaint is dimsissed.
The only way an affected individual can use the do not call registry would be if s/he first notified the collector, in writing per the provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, attesting that s/he is not the person associated with the debt (and including as much information supporting that claim as possible), and then flagged his or her credit report with similar information (consumers are allowed to place comments in their credit file). If that information were in place, it might be possible for a consumer to invoke the use of the do not call registry.
Even simpler, however, the letter to the collector can explicitly state that the targeted individual does not wish to receive phone calls about the alleged debt. Then, if further calls are received, the collector is in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, providing the consumer with options for further recourse.
The only time a judge would be involved, barring proactive litigation on the part of the accused, would be if the collector decided to initiate a suit against the alleged debtor. In such a case, the defendant would present evidence supporting his/her innocence based on documented reports of territorial SSNs being entered incorrectly by the credit beureaus. Of course, it would remain to be seen if the accused would have the financial resources to mount such a defense.
The fact that one person may write in the style of another is nothing new. While the use of such writing-style analysis may still have a valid use in some cases, it is clear that it, like any other forensic tool (even DNA analysis) can be beaten.
Prior to contemporary times, I believe the number of people who would have had access to enough writing samples (of persons other than authors, columnists, and other published figures) to successfully mimic another's style would have been limited to family members, friends, and confidants. Today, with broad use of blogs and social networking sites, many more people are exposed to those writers' styles. In workplaces, a small subset of individuals are often called upon to produce a majority of documentation. While such writing samples may well vary from the style a person may use in personal correspondance, each will share characteristics that, together, are unique to the writer's preferred style.
I've been one who has been called on to create much documentation by my employers. Bits of my memos, procedures, and instructional materials would get lifted and used by other departments (my departmental IT writings were most often copied and used by our central IT department). When they did so, other employees would approach me and ask if I wrote the memo, web page, or training manual, because they could recognize my writing style.
Even here on Slashdot, there are those posters who have been around for a long time, who have posted often, and who have identifiable writing styles. Anyone with enough familiarity, if given the opportunity to post under such another's screen name, would likely be able to post something that would seem to be the words of another. Of course, if the context of the message were a great departure from the copied target's known views, the post would be suspect. If it were in line with such views, it might not raise suspicion.
If anything, the number of available sources of writing samples today increases the likelihood that someone else could learn and mimic a writing style. Of course, this could be a handy defense so long as the accused has produced loads of writing that is accessible to others.
It won't work. The incorrect SSN entry makes it appear that the target person is the one with the bad debts. To the collector, that is proof of a prexisting relationship and it won't stop the calls.
It won't matter that the information in the credit file is incorrect. To the collectors, it will be viewed as legitimate. I'd recommend that anyone with leading zeroes in their SSN have a consumer statement added to their report, stating something like "I have never lived in Micronesia. SSNs issued in such US territories, when entered by credit beureaus, are padded with extra zeros, making them match SSNs of US citizens who were born in the NE United States. Please ask the credit beureaus to update and correct their records."
The problems with porting games really come down to getting through customs. If they would just declare everything, and not try to sneak in those exotic fruits, everything would be okay. Maybe next time they should just fly in, instead of sea passage...
I just hope I never meet up with a sniffer dog with an over-active nose while in an airport and carrying a wad of cash.
That chuckle aside, I wonder how long it will be before someone challenges a sniffer dog alerting on them by claiming it was due to cocaine contamination on the cash. If that argument were accepted, any subsequent search could be thrown out as fruit of the forbidden tree.
Even if a pay-to-email system were enacted, do you think the mail server hosts would drop their other anti-spam technologies, like those that monitor for unusual mail patterns, or those that freeze account activity if more than x messages are sent in a given 24 hour period?
The compromised bots would not likely ever incur the "postage" charge, because they're not going to relay through the Yahoo! mail server. They are going to run on a shadow server, sending out as many messages as they can. The only way the pay-per-email message might snag spammers and bots is if this were done at the ISP level, and if it were done by monitoring the SMTP traffic flows. [I, for one, don't think that would be a good situation.]
My guess is that they risk losing more licensing fees through patent reform than they lose to the legal process of fighting the trolls. In other words, if patent reform went through, they could stand to lose more than they gain.
It may not be true for all, but it likely will be true for some, and if those "some" have the cash to support lobbying efforts...
I guess you've not been car shopping in recent years. All of the American auto makers improved tremendously over the past decade. Ford has done especially well. Notice who has been winning various awards lately? It's no longer a Japanese-or-German-only market for auto quality.
The biggest obstacle any of the U.S. automakers faces is that very attitude: that U.S.-built cars are crap.
Slashdot Mirror
TOKYO - Residents have reported that giant reptile, Godzilla, was just struck down and apparently killed by a misdirected microwave beam from Japan's orbiting power generation satellite. The giant lizard fell in a residential area and caused substantial damage. Hundreds of people are missing and presumed dead.
The Greenpeace and the International Humane Society have issued a joint statement criticizing the Japanese government for allowing their satellite to destroy the last specimen of this endangered species.
Godzilla had a long history of appearing in Japanese cities, and often caused much damage with each visit. Typically, the creature appeared when some other monstrous threat appeared. Apart from the Windows 7 launch in Tokyo, no one is aware of any significant events that would have drawn the creature to the city.
Because of his history as a destructive source, many people are glad to see the death of the giant lizard. A representative of the Japanese tourism ministry, however, is reported to have said that, "Godzilla's passing will have a profound affect on the people of Japan, and upon the Japanese tourist economy."
Japanese street vendor, Aido Hawishinna, witnessed the event and reported, "It hit the buildings as it fell, and crashed just beyond my stand. It smells like baked fish. I wanted to be the first merchant in the city to sell Godzilla-burgers, but the police and army will not let me harvest the meat before it spoils."
The Japanese government, in an official statement issued hours after the incident, announced that it plans to conduct an autopsy on the remains, to determine if Godzilla's death was related to problems on the orbital microwave power platform.
Tweet...tweet...tweet...tweet...tweet...tweet...
Would someone hurry up and give those baby birds some chewed up worm pieces? I'm trying to get some rest here.
Most people are familar with the Golden Rule (Do unto others as you would have them do unto you), and most in business are familiar with the other golden rule (He who has the gold makes the rules). I would just be cautious about any study that is funded by a game producer that concludes that games are good for you.
I don't doubt that such a positive correllation is possible. I just am leary of any study that finds in favor of the payor. It's like those periodic news stories you see where it is touted that businesses are moving back toward formal attire, that "the suit is back", or similar sentiments. The most common sources for those news items (if they are even worthy of being called "news") are PR firms associated with menswear retailers like The Men's Warehouse. All the statistics in the press releases seem well researched and are accepted as valid, but the conclusions are being made while the menswear retailer(s) hold(s) the purse strings.
The only reassuring thing about this particular study is the research entity, the Mind Research Network. They appear to be a legitimate non-profit corporation whose mission centers around understanding mental illness and cognitive processes. I couldn't find any serious criticisms of their other work. It will be interesting to see how this study fares as it is reviewed by peers and colleagues.
Wow. Can't take a joke?
Right. To be more convincing, the laptops could have been shipped with glossy marketing materials that gush over the newest bells and whistles. They could have been sent as examples of the types of laptops that could be deployed to school children, loaded with electronic textbooks. If the sender really wanted these units powered on and used, they would have provided a plausible cover story.
My guess? Some security-minded grad student's research project to see what the rate of using unknown and unexpected hardware might be.
And, given the current unemployment rate, I'd guess there would be plenty of interested applicants.
Not a bad idea unless the firmware is poisoned.
The flame of the article is based on the phrasing of the general question. If you click the "Learn More" link, it is clear that the warning is about downloading via P2P file sharing networks. The use of P2P networks is a violation of the DOD Information Systems network use. That's the thrust of the training.
It may not be clear from the phrasing in the question, but in the context (i.e., when administered to people who are constantly exposed to DOD Information Systems training and reminders), it will likely be understood by the reader. Chances are, there is likely a prohibition against personal software (including *legal* music downloads) too.
Thank the boss for the offer, but make it clear that you don't want to blur the lines of ownership regarding your laptop and the associated software licenses. Suggest that, if he still wants to compensate you for all you do using your personal equipment on your own time, if he would consider making the payment a one-time cash bonus. That way, the payment is associated with wages and cannot be construed as being an employer reimbursement for business equipment to be used at home.
The incidence of such genetic anomalies is such that cases are very rare. With AIS, the medical field appears to define them as female. Clearly, with any test, there must be an appeals process to account for atypical gender mutations.
The point of my post was that it was easy to understand why some would look at the runner and question her gender. I presented my simplistic view of testing to make it clear that whatever test is presented, it must be required of all, and not just targeted at this woman, or others in similar situations in the future.
The only reason this is an issue right now--regardless of the jump in performance--is that her looks appear predominately male to the average observer. It goes far beyond just being muscular, trim, and having an athletic female bosom. The set of her shoulders and her facial characteristics would likely cause a casual observer to assume she was male. I thought my wife was reading about a male runner when I first saw her picture, before I knew about the controversy.
I know that there are many of each gender whose characteristics might cause them to be misidentified at first. Take this initial misidentification in conjunction with the recent exceptional results, and it is easy to see why some might wonder. I don't know that calling for such testing is necessary. I assume she already has a physician or trainer who can make an attestation.
If it does come down to a genetic test, then it should be strictly XY vs. XX and it should be a standard test for all competitors. Otherwise, they'll only be testing those whose physical traits suggest they might be different gendered. Those whose physical traits already closer match the other gender would go without suspicion.
In any other industry, you'd wonder if the earlier news release was part of a marketing build up for this bit of news.
Then again, is there any reason why we should believe anyone would be beyond such a stunt?
All of this information could help a collector track down a delinquent borrower. In the case described in the article, however, that's exactly why people are getting wrongly associated with these territorial debts. Collectors will call current and former employers, to find out if anyone there has a way of reaching you, or to try to talk to you directly. Any information they can scrape together to help collect brings them closer to a potential pay day.
I've been on the owing end one too many times and know that, when the dollar amounts owed are high enough, they pull all the info they can, including data from the credit bureaus. I've had them quote it to me over the phone. $30 is a small price to pay for the agency's share of a potential large dollar settlement. With aid loans, we're not talking about collecting on a $70 bad check, or on a small dollar credit card.
No. The article notes that the information that ties the territorial lender to the US citizens is the SSN in the credit file. The territorial SSN was padded by the credit beureaus, causing the credit entries on the now defaulted loans to show up as bad debts on the record of the US resident/citizen. When the collector pulls the credit report (something commonly done since it will often show other names and addresses used when securing credit), they assume that the individuals on the record are one in the same because they share the same SSN.
The majority of information in a credit report comes from lenders, not collection agencies. When you open a credit account with a bank or other major financial institution or agency, they automatically send updates to the credit beureaus on a regular basis (e.g., quarterly, monthly). That's likely how the territorial loan information got mis-associated with the non-territorial US citizens. When the loan information was entered, the credit beureau software needed all digits of the SSN field filled, and the padding zeroes were added. Thus, when the collectors pulled the credit history on the borrower with the territorial SSN, they ended up getting the record of someone who lived in the NE United States.
Why would it ever come down to the opinion of a collector or a judge. If the consumer files a complaint regarding the do not call registry, the agency will contact the alleged offender (the collection agency). The collection agency will reply by stating that the person they called owes them money based on the SSN listed on the debt and on the credit record. The agency, whose job does not include verifying whether or not the information used by the agency is error free, notes that the company has a legitimate claim and the complaint is dimsissed.
The only way an affected individual can use the do not call registry would be if s/he first notified the collector, in writing per the provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, attesting that s/he is not the person associated with the debt (and including as much information supporting that claim as possible), and then flagged his or her credit report with similar information (consumers are allowed to place comments in their credit file). If that information were in place, it might be possible for a consumer to invoke the use of the do not call registry.
Even simpler, however, the letter to the collector can explicitly state that the targeted individual does not wish to receive phone calls about the alleged debt. Then, if further calls are received, the collector is in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, providing the consumer with options for further recourse.
The only time a judge would be involved, barring proactive litigation on the part of the accused, would be if the collector decided to initiate a suit against the alleged debtor. In such a case, the defendant would present evidence supporting his/her innocence based on documented reports of territorial SSNs being entered incorrectly by the credit beureaus. Of course, it would remain to be seen if the accused would have the financial resources to mount such a defense.
The fact that one person may write in the style of another is nothing new. While the use of such writing-style analysis may still have a valid use in some cases, it is clear that it, like any other forensic tool (even DNA analysis) can be beaten.
Prior to contemporary times, I believe the number of people who would have had access to enough writing samples (of persons other than authors, columnists, and other published figures) to successfully mimic another's style would have been limited to family members, friends, and confidants. Today, with broad use of blogs and social networking sites, many more people are exposed to those writers' styles. In workplaces, a small subset of individuals are often called upon to produce a majority of documentation. While such writing samples may well vary from the style a person may use in personal correspondance, each will share characteristics that, together, are unique to the writer's preferred style.
I've been one who has been called on to create much documentation by my employers. Bits of my memos, procedures, and instructional materials would get lifted and used by other departments (my departmental IT writings were most often copied and used by our central IT department). When they did so, other employees would approach me and ask if I wrote the memo, web page, or training manual, because they could recognize my writing style.
Even here on Slashdot, there are those posters who have been around for a long time, who have posted often, and who have identifiable writing styles. Anyone with enough familiarity, if given the opportunity to post under such another's screen name, would likely be able to post something that would seem to be the words of another. Of course, if the context of the message were a great departure from the copied target's known views, the post would be suspect. If it were in line with such views, it might not raise suspicion.
If anything, the number of available sources of writing samples today increases the likelihood that someone else could learn and mimic a writing style. Of course, this could be a handy defense so long as the accused has produced loads of writing that is accessible to others.
It won't work. The incorrect SSN entry makes it appear that the target person is the one with the bad debts. To the collector, that is proof of a prexisting relationship and it won't stop the calls.
It won't matter that the information in the credit file is incorrect. To the collectors, it will be viewed as legitimate. I'd recommend that anyone with leading zeroes in their SSN have a consumer statement added to their report, stating something like "I have never lived in Micronesia. SSNs issued in such US territories, when entered by credit beureaus, are padded with extra zeros, making them match SSNs of US citizens who were born in the NE United States. Please ask the credit beureaus to update and correct their records."
The problems with porting games really come down to getting through customs. If they would just declare everything, and not try to sneak in those exotic fruits, everything would be okay. Maybe next time they should just fly in, instead of sea passage...
I just hope I never meet up with a sniffer dog with an over-active nose while in an airport and carrying a wad of cash.
That chuckle aside, I wonder how long it will be before someone challenges a sniffer dog alerting on them by claiming it was due to cocaine contamination on the cash. If that argument were accepted, any subsequent search could be thrown out as fruit of the forbidden tree.
BTW, IANALNDIPOOTV [...nor do I play one on TV.]
Even if a pay-to-email system were enacted, do you think the mail server hosts would drop their other anti-spam technologies, like those that monitor for unusual mail patterns, or those that freeze account activity if more than x messages are sent in a given 24 hour period?
The compromised bots would not likely ever incur the "postage" charge, because they're not going to relay through the Yahoo! mail server. They are going to run on a shadow server, sending out as many messages as they can. The only way the pay-per-email message might snag spammers and bots is if this were done at the ISP level, and if it were done by monitoring the SMTP traffic flows. [I, for one, don't think that would be a good situation.]
My guess is that they risk losing more licensing fees through patent reform than they lose to the legal process of fighting the trolls. In other words, if patent reform went through, they could stand to lose more than they gain.
It may not be true for all, but it likely will be true for some, and if those "some" have the cash to support lobbying efforts...
I guess you've not been car shopping in recent years. All of the American auto makers improved tremendously over the past decade. Ford has done especially well. Notice who has been winning various awards lately? It's no longer a Japanese-or-German-only market for auto quality.
The biggest obstacle any of the U.S. automakers faces is that very attitude: that U.S.-built cars are crap.
When I saw this guy's defense, I couldn't help but wonder if he read Slashdot when a post featured a device to let cats click your EULAs for you. http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/09/02/18/1817221/Dont-Like-EULAs-Get-Your-Cat-To-Agree-To-Them?art_pos=1