Is it just me, or is the whole "pay for" credit monitoring industry a big con?
You have to PAY to find out what information may or may not be stored about you? It may be correct; it may be erroneous: you don't find out until you've stumped up the cash (and yes, I realise that the credit companies are required to make information available in the event that you are turned down for credit... but what about those who are just curious?).
And in this instance, what happens when that year is up?
Appalling numbers of Iraqis are being killed by what some would define as "terrorists."
I think the purpose of Grunwald's experiment was to demonstrate that this technology was by no means foolproof and indeed that the current, non-encrypted implementation, would permit people to quickly copy data.
The introduction of RFID-passports has been driven by the current US administration: countries included in the visa waiver programme have had to meet these American standards to continue in the programme.
Meanwhile, the American fear of Johnny Foreigner continues.
What's the consensus on this board, guys? Will Mr. McKinnon receive a trial of comparable fairness in the US as in the UK? If found guilty, will his sentence be proportionate to his crime (the DoJ has indicted him on seven counts of computer fraud, each with a maximum of ten years imprisonment and a $250,000 fine)?
I never met Geir Ivarsøy, but I use Opera every day. I use it because it makes my life easier. I'm sure there are millions of other people who do the same thing.
Clearly, Geir has made life just that bit nicer for a lot of people, all over the world.
I, for one, will think of him every time I open Opera. My thoughts are with his family.
Quite. I'd be curious to see how the Commerce Department would intend collecting on the civil penalties it imposed on sites not based in the United States...
You're absolutely right: the problem does indeed lie deeper than gun control laws. Look at Switzerland: the US has 2.6 times more gun related deaths than Switzerland, despite the Swiss legal requirement that all adult men own a gun.
Guns are not the underlying issue; there are deep social issues that need to be addressed.
In the meantime, getting rid of the guns will still reduce the amount of gun related deaths. It's a much easier problem to solve.
Quite right on the car point. We do ignore the terrible numbers of accidents and deaths caused by cars. And improvements in the safety of cars generally looks more at the people inside the car, rather than those outside it. These are issues that need to be addressed. The reason that we generally ignore the car issue is that cars offer a massive convenience.
Go on, I'll take the gun subject. Lies, damn lies and statistics maybe, but here's some figures from 1994 - the number of gun-related deaths per 100,000 people:
United States 14.24
Brazil 12.95
Mexico 12.69
Estonia 12.26
Argentina 8.93
Northern Ireland 6.63
Finland 6.46
Switzerland 5.31
France 5.15
Canada 4.31
Norway 3.82
Austria 3.70
Portugal 3.20
Israel 2.91
Belgium 2.90
Australia 2.65
Slovenia 2.60
Italy 2.44
New Zealand 2.38
Denmark 2.09
Sweden 1.92
Kuwait 1.84
Greece 1.29
Germany 1.24
Hungary 1.11
Republic of Ireland 0.97
Spain 0.78
Netherlands 0.70
Scotland 0.54
England and Wales 0.41
Taiwan 0.37
Singapore 0.21
Mauritius 0.19
Hong Kong 0.14
South Korea 0.12
Japan 0.05.
Note the US at the top of the list with its laissez-faire attitude to guns; Japan at the bottom with its rigid control. At the end of the day, if there are less guns available, then there'll be less instances of their use. (Here's the source of the numbers, by the way: http://www.guncite.com/cnngunde.html).
Quite so. But in that case, the caption should have read "despite having its current government for 15 months." I'm not trying to be pedantic or anything, but the statement was just wrong.
Thanks for answering my question, deinol. Yes, I've thought the same thing myself whilst living overseas. I've been wondering for a while if I was the only one who would be happy to pay such a fee.
Good point, jd3nn1s. I'm hoping they'll find ways to solve these problems on an international basis if they discover that there is an overseas audience who is willing to pay for their content.
Have you ever heard the pride in Nicholas Parsons' voice when he points out on Radio 4's Just a Minute that people are listening in China?
Thanks for your detailed response to my question! I'm always interested to know how people regard the BBC. Just as a side note: didn't know that Richard Quest had gone over to CNN. I've noticed a lot of exchange between the two over the years. Quest is quite a character and a definite asset.
That's quite true. Yet it gives the BBC independence from commercial interests. They don't cancel programmes because advertisers disapprove of them. They don't have shareholders to report to.
They do produce quality entertainment, news and arts programming across seven terrestrial television channels, five national analogue radio stations, about a dozen digital radio stations, even more local radio stations, sustain several orchestras and on top of that broadcast to the world in 43 languages.
"Nation Shall Speak Peace Unto Nation" is the motto of BBC News. Seems quite admirable to me.
The Beeb has been talking about doing this for a while (and trials have apparently started). It will be interesting to see if they can allow non-UK residents access to such a service.
It's not a technological issue preventing this; it's actually the BBC's Royal Charter, which states that any overseas venture has to be paid for with money that is not derived from the license fee (also, there could be potential international copyright issues; however, the fact that the World Service broadcasts music, amongst other things, to the four corners of the world suggests that the BBC is in a position where it can come to reasonable agreements with copyright holders).
So on that basis, a serious question: how many people outside of the UK would be willing to pay for access to BBC programming over the web?
Interesting point made there by the build chicken. Curiously, the Beeb ran an article yesterday about how the current "Ipod Generation" are worse off than their parents' generation (Ipod here being an acronym for "Insecure, Pressured, Overtaxed and Debt-ridden").
The flip side to this is that you don't really need bar codes. At petrol (gasoline) stations in the UK, where you pump your petrol before paying for it, some companies are now employing technology that uses a camera to read your license plate and convert it into text (rather than keeping it as an unprocessed image). You can actually see it in operation behind the counter and it appears to be fast and accurate: presumably, such a display has a deterrent value to those considering driving away without paying.
Anonymous Coward may have a point, there. An interesting piece of information is to be found at the very end of this BBC article:
Although XML is an established open standard driven by the Worldwide Web Consortium (W3C), Microsoft is introducing its own flavour of the specifications under a royalty free licence.
Slashdot Mirror
Is it just me, or is the whole "pay for" credit monitoring industry a big con?
You have to PAY to find out what information may or may not be stored about you? It may be correct; it may be erroneous: you don't find out until you've stumped up the cash (and yes, I realise that the credit companies are required to make information available in the event that you are turned down for credit... but what about those who are just curious?).
And in this instance, what happens when that year is up?
Appalling numbers of Iraqis are being killed by what some would define as "terrorists."
I think the purpose of Grunwald's experiment was to demonstrate that this technology was by no means foolproof and indeed that the current, non-encrypted implementation, would permit people to quickly copy data.
The introduction of RFID-passports has been driven by the current US administration: countries included in the visa waiver programme have had to meet these American standards to continue in the programme.
Meanwhile, the American fear of Johnny Foreigner continues.
Thanks for that, erroneus! Never thought of that triad as a Venn diagram before! Interesting insight: I'll definitely remember that one!
What's the consensus on this board, guys? Will Mr. McKinnon receive a trial of comparable fairness in the US as in the UK? If found guilty, will his sentence be proportionate to his crime (the DoJ has indicted him on seven counts of computer fraud, each with a maximum of ten years imprisonment and a $250,000 fine)?
The web is in a constant state of evolution! Please don't fall for this awful marketing phrase!
Ok, I feel better now. I'll go and sit down for a while...
Clearly, Geir has made life just that bit nicer for a lot of people, all over the world.
I, for one, will think of him every time I open Opera. My thoughts are with his family.
And also because it wouldn't work, for two reasons:
i) it wouldn't apply to porn sites originating outside of the US;
ii) how do you define "porn"? Who gets to write that definition?
Quite. I'd be curious to see how the Commerce Department would intend collecting on the civil penalties it imposed on sites not based in the United States...
Guns are not the underlying issue; there are deep social issues that need to be addressed.
In the meantime, getting rid of the guns will still reduce the amount of gun related deaths. It's a much easier problem to solve.
Guns do not. Guns do no good.
- United States 14.24
- Brazil 12.95
- Mexico 12.69
- Estonia 12.26
- Argentina 8.93
- Northern Ireland 6.63
- Finland 6.46
- Switzerland 5.31
- France 5.15
- Canada 4.31
- Norway 3.82
- Austria 3.70
- Portugal 3.20
- Israel 2.91
- Belgium 2.90
- Australia 2.65
- Slovenia 2.60
- Italy 2.44
- New Zealand 2.38
- Denmark 2.09
- Sweden 1.92
- Kuwait 1.84
- Greece 1.29
- Germany 1.24
- Hungary 1.11
- Republic of Ireland 0.97
- Spain 0.78
- Netherlands 0.70
- Scotland 0.54
- England and Wales 0.41
- Taiwan 0.37
- Singapore 0.21
- Mauritius 0.19
- Hong Kong 0.14
- South Korea 0.12
- Japan 0.05.
Note the US at the top of the list with its laissez-faire attitude to guns; Japan at the bottom with its rigid control. At the end of the day, if there are less guns available, then there'll be less instances of their use. (Here's the source of the numbers, by the way: http://www.guncite.com/cnngunde.html).Quite so. But in that case, the caption should have read "despite having its current government for 15 months." I'm not trying to be pedantic or anything, but the statement was just wrong.
Iraq has been a "sovereign nation" for considerably longer than 15 months.
Thanks for answering my question, Councilor Hart. I think what you said about an iTunes like system is very interesting.
Thanks for answering my question, deinol. Yes, I've thought the same thing myself whilst living overseas. I've been wondering for a while if I was the only one who would be happy to pay such a fee.
Have you ever heard the pride in Nicholas Parsons' voice when he points out on Radio 4's Just a Minute that people are listening in China?
Thanks for your detailed response to my question! I'm always interested to know how people regard the BBC. Just as a side note: didn't know that Richard Quest had gone over to CNN. I've noticed a lot of exchange between the two over the years. Quest is quite a character and a definite asset.
They do produce quality entertainment, news and arts programming across seven terrestrial television channels, five national analogue radio stations, about a dozen digital radio stations, even more local radio stations, sustain several orchestras and on top of that broadcast to the world in 43 languages.
"Nation Shall Speak Peace Unto Nation" is the motto of BBC News. Seems quite admirable to me.
It's not a technological issue preventing this; it's actually the BBC's Royal Charter, which states that any overseas venture has to be paid for with money that is not derived from the license fee (also, there could be potential international copyright issues; however, the fact that the World Service broadcasts music, amongst other things, to the four corners of the world suggests that the BBC is in a position where it can come to reasonable agreements with copyright holders).
So on that basis, a serious question: how many people outside of the UK would be willing to pay for access to BBC programming over the web?
Interesting point made there by the build chicken. Curiously, the Beeb ran an article yesterday about how the current "Ipod Generation" are worse off than their parents' generation (Ipod here being an acronym for "Insecure, Pressured, Overtaxed and Debt-ridden").
The flip side to this is that you don't really need bar codes. At petrol (gasoline) stations in the UK, where you pump your petrol before paying for it, some companies are now employing technology that uses a camera to read your license plate and convert it into text (rather than keeping it as an unprocessed image). You can actually see it in operation behind the counter and it appears to be fast and accurate: presumably, such a display has a deterrent value to those considering driving away without paying.
Quite right, TrippTDF. I have none to give, but for what it's worth, I've just given you five pseudo-points.
I thought it was just the case that everyone had been making really lousy comments for a couple of days...