The only thing eBay being in the U.S. has to do with this is that they are more willing to bend to the pressure of the IRS pushing for this information. eBay is not being taxed. Sales are not being taxed. Even if eBay moves off-shore, the fact remains that when the sale completes and the seller receives cash for the transaction... that is by definition "income".
While it is unarguably legitimate income that is required to be reported for U.S. residents, eBay is only one of COUNTLESS sources of non-employment based income that are absolutely untracable by the IRS. Tax evasion of this sort probably only amounts to a relatively small adjustment to the overall taxable income that the IRS handles. My guess is that IRS is just going for the "low hanging fruit" with eBay since all the transactions are recorded in a database and are easily deliverable; it is unlikely that they will be met with the same success in many other venues.
"(...) oh wait you want cutting edge performance AND low heat production."
Why yes, I do.
"What the fuck DO you think power supplies do, baring some minimal constant loss?"
Funny you should mention it right after suggesting a laptop. The power supply for my laptop, a transformer with DC rectifier, does not in fact match consumption with load. Neither do the millions of others like it.
How about something a little more constructive next time?
...a traditional heat engine like a Stirling Engine. I just trust something I can take a wrench to more than a convoluted biological solution that has biosystem requirements.
While we're wishing, how about a decent performing processor that doesn't put out waste heat or require a heat sink? How about a power supply that only draws as much power as is required to run the attached equipment? How about a respectably sized solid state hard drive to replace the millions of spindles running between 5000 and 15000 RPM around the world?
DC power would be dandy if it weren't cost prohibitive to convert older, massive, well-established operating systems to it. And small incremental additions to such an existing, large installation don't justify the added expense of DC power on their own. As a result, it's not so easy for data centers to do this conversion. If it were able to pay for itself in 8 weeks, you might see more activity...
Agreed - I scrolled through the whole thread to see if anyone else would mention this.
The other thing that tickles me is, "Such 'power skins' could also be used to coat future human bases on Mars, where they could produce energy from the Martian wind."
There's no way a jillion, zillion interconnected piezo-electric protein boogers are going to match the brutish output of a typical 10MW wind turbine for power generation. What space agency in their right mind would even consider the idea of something like this when superior, simpler tried and true technology is available?
Why would you experiment with neural logic in hardware when software is infinitely scalable and programmable and arguably more valuable in the reserch of neural networks? Of course software is a degree slower in response time, but speed is not of the essence for researching the "how" of neural nets.
I would think that in the hardware world, generally you would want a working software model and then duplicate it with the more expensive hardware for performance. The same principal applies when ASIC engineers design in the less expensive, disposable FPGA format and when they get something working, eventually migrate the design to ASIC technology for increased performance.
It doesn't seem like there is discovery value in the hardware when the discovery should have been made in advance through software and at dramatically reduced cost. I have a feeling this guy's just trying to make headlines for himself...
But you think $10M was enough to put Scaled Composites' Spaceship One into LEO? It's a token offering to inspire the imagination. Don't knock a generous and genuine offer just because you have not been inspired.
Is it even worth pointing out that some people are born with hearing impairment? Having the use of your ears does not make or break your ability to safely navigate through city streets. Having a fully operational brain is what accomplishes that.
"The only solution is a total overhaul of the patent system."
I agree that change is needed, but I return this question: is there even a benefit in a patent system any more?
As I once understood it, patents were awarded to protect in inventor's original, hard-discovered idea for some period of time so that they may build a business around it without interference from copy-cats who have much less vested. But in today's age, if a "little guy" (financially) has a patent that "big guy" wants, they seem to just get steam-rolled right over.
I can't tell you how many times I've done patent searches for some idea and found several or DOZENS of seemingly identical patents that were all awarded to their respective applicants.
The patent system seems to be nothing more than a breeding ground for litigation, affording little, if any, protection to the little guy any more. Given its seemingly futile nature, does it make any more sense to overhaul it than to simply eliminate it?
Neat - It makes me wonder how it could have been covered up so well. Letting my imagination run wild... what if Olympus Mons let loose a cataclysmic eruption so powerful that it:
1) put enough sediment into the atmosphere to cover the entire surface,
2) put larger rocks into orbit which eventually decayed and came back down to form the rock-strewn surface we are accustomed to seeing, possibly forming some of the ounger crater impact sites, and
3) blocked out sunlight, killing off any shred of life on the planet at the time of the event
"How" this could come to pass is the first thing that pops into my mind - no speculation in the article though which I always enjoy hearing from NASA.
A couple responses from the feedback on this topic so far...
First, to the above, I've heard of this use for RFID and I've also heard of permanent magnets as invisible "tracks" embedded in the pavement. A quick glance at the CIA World Factbook reveals that there is about 6.4M km of paved roadways in the U.S. I just prefer the approach of a smarter information processing system that can make decisions as intelligently as a human driver without retrofitting that much pavement with something that, for all it's merits, is still a) temporary, and b) not fool proof.
Somebody else mentioned that I have the benefit of binocular vision. While I believe that helps, I am certain that there are plenty of one-eyed drivers out there who would take exception to that comment. As attached to my two eyes as I am, I have personally had eye injuries where I was reduced to one eye and yet still managed to navigate safely (albeit with diminished capacity for depth perception). Smart processing, I think, makes that possible. I think binocular vision would greatly improve the ability of a software processing system to determine distances visually, even beyond the natural spectrum of the human eye (low light, or foggy conditions?), and there is no reason not to build that into such a system. In fact, I would take that a step further I think in providing binocular vision with a 360 degree of view - why not?
Another poster mentioned something about my foreknowledge (thank you so much to the individual who corrected my spelling - this conversation would be lost without your contribution) in travelling from Sacramento to Manhattan bearing more information than I admit to. Right you are, in fact. When I travel, I consult a map. But I do not use GPS to find myself on that map. I read signs to identify my surroundings and then narrow in on my position in the map given my general idea of approximately where I am based on the route I have chosen.
And so, I agree that a map IS required to select a route and come up with alternatives for road closures and such. What I disagree with however in the DARPA challenge events is the mapping of a route that effectively traces a line on the pavement for the robot to follow. This allows the robot to safely navigate things like clover-style freeway ramps without even being "aware" that it is on such a specialized part of the roadway which, in my book, is cheating. When I look at a map for directions and I see that I need to take Highway 4 East to Highway 50 North, I am not confused and don't need special directions when I approach the clover leaf - I know just what to do.
I want an automation system capable of navigating with generalized route information, and able to travel safely without reliance on space-based satellite systems. It should be able to operate from exactly the same amount of information that I operate from.
Sorry for the novella - I find this topic quite interesting.:)
but, while as a software engineer and electromechanical hobbyist I fully appreciate all the challenges involved with these robotic drivers, I'm just not impressed by systems that have courses plotted into them and use GPS and high resolution maps and intimate fore-knowledge of the landscape, etc. As a driver, -I- don't need that fore-knowledge to get from Sacramento to Manhattan - thousands of miles successfully navigated without any more fore-knowledge than that I have to travel generally North East through many states.
I will be impressed when driving automation systems can start with a general idea of where their source and destination locations are and can read the signs to figure out how to get there. They must use perceptive powers to avoid colliding with other drivers or running down pedestrians and following the rules of the road instead of range finders and lasers and GPS-based speed limit adherance and other such nonsense.
Until the system can be boiled down to a pair of eyes and a pwerful set of smarts driving , in my view, it's just an elaborate obstacle course being followed by the likes of this robot. I understand "baby steps", but "they" tend to avoid tackling these big challenges and instead continue to focus on these contraptions that just, plain aren't smart enough.
This sounds exactly like that you used to hear "them" saying about T.V. to me. My guess is that anyone who has the perpensity for escapism is going to find themselves a solution no matter what the activity...
That's a pretty big 'if' there, don't you think? Who are you going to trust to tell you that it's safe to consume? The government/military who forces G.I.'s to consume experimental medications? The FDA who allows for the consumption of tobacco and alcohol despite the known detrimental effects? How "safe" is Botox to consume? How safe are any of the hundreds of other products that have historically been released and then pulled off the shelves after it was later found that they were indeed NOT safe to consume?
I take very serious issue with the tampering of the gene pool. Genetically plants and animals - and humans - have arrived at where they are today through a VERY thorough natural selection process. Human experimentation with DNA for purposes of research is OK in my book - knowledge is power. Human experimentation with the DNA of the food supply of the general populous is NOT OK.
What am I worried about? Well one thing's for sure: it's not knocking 5 years off my lifespan or anything so trivial. It's my cautionary imagination of a future where we or various species of plants or livestock are rendered sterile from too much tampering and we don't notice until the very last naturally fertile breeder is extinct. Too far fetched? Who can give me a guarantee?
"They" don't remotely understand well enough the effects of DNA manipulation to label this as safe for consumption.
"How they came out with only 89% when they selected the sites themselves is anyone's guess."
Perhaps they thought nobody would actually believe the 100% figure they had originally planned to report - after all, 89% of statistics are made up on the spot by a caucasian male under the age of 35...
your database provides a record of every message sent through the system...
The thing that's more interesting to me here is the suggested fearfulness of government and corporate figureheads that two people could communicate something to one another and have nobody else know about it. There is nothing to prevent two people from meeting at a park and quietly exchanging the same information in conversation without any stored record fo the exchanged data. I am most concerned that people who worry about such things yield to our freedoms rather than attempt to stifle them - for that reason, I support rebellious software like this.:)
As I mentioned yesterday - exactly how does 100HP translate to making a 4 door sedan "drive like a ferrari"? At 400lbs for the ultracap itself (about the same weight as a full sized 4-banger ICE, by the way) it's not exactly coming in as an ultra-light contender.
I have to wonder whether this type of public criticism is exactly why they've chosen to remain a "stealth" company until they have something real and deployable with real world metrics to talk about and back up...
Funny you should mention that bit about 145Kwh as the first thing I was interested in when I saw this article was just how much energy it can actually store up. I started searching around for info on this "stealth company" (what a pain!) and came up with an interesting piece from bacn in January on The Energy Blog where in their sleuthing they determined the thing holds 52Kwh and weighs 400lbs.
Now call me crazy, but when run a quick transformation of 52Kwh to horsepower I'm only seeing just under 70 horsepower. So... 70 horsepower for an hour, or 140 horsepower for 30 minutes? Obviously either:
* It's more than the 52Kwh mentioned in the link above, or
* This thing won't remotely make a four-passenger sedan drive like a Ferrari
Frankly, I'm more interested in a comprehensive set of photos of our own solar system's planets, such as Pluto and the various "Planet X" candidates that pop on and off the public debate radar from over the years. At least we have the technology to actually visit these places today were we so inclined.
I'm not saying it's unimportant to continue with research like this, only that I wish more effort were put into slightly less glamorous subjects like Pluto that could actually do us some tangible good one day...
Bingo. I've personally only seen a handful of cases brought forward by ACLU where my reaction was, "well that's a waste of time, energy & resources". They have had Important Victories longer than most/.'ers parents have been alive.
The core issues we are up against are with the concepts of copyright and patent. Corporations want ownership of materials; Private individuals want free access those materials. Therein lies the battle. This is as perpetual as bipartisanship.
"The state wants the source code to everything running on the voting machines."
If that's true, then Diebold certainly has validity in their opposition to unreasonable demands. The government should not be permitted to get rid of whomever they don't like just by crafting an arbitrary and unanswerable demand such as, "if you don't disclose the precise chemical formula used to generate the shade of blue ink on your business cards within 24 hours, we're shutting you down." As far as I'm concerned, this is an equally unanswerable demand.
If the government makes an acknowledgement that certain components of the working system, including hardware and software, are proprietary materials owned by unrelated third parties and that Diebold is not responsible for the intellectual property pertaining to those components, then Diebold ought to be more than willing, certainly able, to comply with the order for those materials specifically under their own control.
When I read the/. synopsis, I saw the word "relevant" used; relevancy is exactly what needs to be established within reason.
Slashdot Mirror
The only thing eBay being in the U.S. has to do with this is that they are more willing to bend to the pressure of the IRS pushing for this information. eBay is not being taxed. Sales are not being taxed. Even if eBay moves off-shore, the fact remains that when the sale completes and the seller receives cash for the transaction... that is by definition "income".
While it is unarguably legitimate income that is required to be reported for U.S. residents, eBay is only one of COUNTLESS sources of non-employment based income that are absolutely untracable by the IRS. Tax evasion of this sort probably only amounts to a relatively small adjustment to the overall taxable income that the IRS handles. My guess is that IRS is just going for the "low hanging fruit" with eBay since all the transactions are recorded in a database and are easily deliverable; it is unlikely that they will be met with the same success in many other venues.
"(...) oh wait you want cutting edge performance AND low heat production."
Why yes, I do.
"What the fuck DO you think power supplies do, baring some minimal constant loss?"
Funny you should mention it right after suggesting a laptop. The power supply for my laptop, a transformer with DC rectifier, does not in fact match consumption with load. Neither do the millions of others like it.
How about something a little more constructive next time?
...a traditional heat engine like a Stirling Engine. I just trust something I can take a wrench to more than a convoluted biological solution that has biosystem requirements.
While we're wishing, how about a decent performing processor that doesn't put out waste heat or require a heat sink? How about a power supply that only draws as much power as is required to run the attached equipment? How about a respectably sized solid state hard drive to replace the millions of spindles running between 5000 and 15000 RPM around the world?
DC power would be dandy if it weren't cost prohibitive to convert older, massive, well-established operating systems to it. And small incremental additions to such an existing, large installation don't justify the added expense of DC power on their own. As a result, it's not so easy for data centers to do this conversion. If it were able to pay for itself in 8 weeks, you might see more activity...
Agreed - I scrolled through the whole thread to see if anyone else would mention this.
The other thing that tickles me is, "Such 'power skins' could also be used to coat future human bases on Mars, where they could produce energy from the Martian wind."
There's no way a jillion, zillion interconnected piezo-electric protein boogers are going to match the brutish output of a typical 10MW wind turbine for power generation. What space agency in their right mind would even consider the idea of something like this when superior, simpler tried and true technology is available?
Why would you experiment with neural logic in hardware when software is infinitely scalable and programmable and arguably more valuable in the reserch of neural networks? Of course software is a degree slower in response time, but speed is not of the essence for researching the "how" of neural nets.
I would think that in the hardware world, generally you would want a working software model and then duplicate it with the more expensive hardware for performance. The same principal applies when ASIC engineers design in the less expensive, disposable FPGA format and when they get something working, eventually migrate the design to ASIC technology for increased performance.
It doesn't seem like there is discovery value in the hardware when the discovery should have been made in advance through software and at dramatically reduced cost. I have a feeling this guy's just trying to make headlines for himself...
But you think $10M was enough to put Scaled Composites' Spaceship One into LEO? It's a token offering to inspire the imagination. Don't knock a generous and genuine offer just because you have not been inspired.
Is it even worth pointing out that some people are born with hearing impairment? Having the use of your ears does not make or break your ability to safely navigate through city streets. Having a fully operational brain is what accomplishes that.
"The only solution is a total overhaul of the patent system."
I agree that change is needed, but I return this question: is there even a benefit in a patent system any more?
As I once understood it, patents were awarded to protect in inventor's original, hard-discovered idea for some period of time so that they may build a business around it without interference from copy-cats who have much less vested. But in today's age, if a "little guy" (financially) has a patent that "big guy" wants, they seem to just get steam-rolled right over.
I can't tell you how many times I've done patent searches for some idea and found several or DOZENS of seemingly identical patents that were all awarded to their respective applicants.
The patent system seems to be nothing more than a breeding ground for litigation, affording little, if any, protection to the little guy any more. Given its seemingly futile nature, does it make any more sense to overhaul it than to simply eliminate it?
"If I was very cynical I would say this could end capitalism itself"
Not until it can print tea, Earl Gray, hot. Then capitalism is toast.
Neat - It makes me wonder how it could have been covered up so well. Letting my imagination run wild... what if Olympus Mons let loose a cataclysmic eruption so powerful that it:
1) put enough sediment into the atmosphere to cover the entire surface,
2) put larger rocks into orbit which eventually decayed and came back down to form the rock-strewn surface we are accustomed to seeing, possibly forming some of the ounger crater impact sites, and
3) blocked out sunlight, killing off any shred of life on the planet at the time of the event
"How" this could come to pass is the first thing that pops into my mind - no speculation in the article though which I always enjoy hearing from NASA.
A couple responses from the feedback on this topic so far...
:)
First, to the above, I've heard of this use for RFID and I've also heard of permanent magnets as invisible "tracks" embedded in the pavement. A quick glance at the CIA World Factbook reveals that there is about 6.4M km of paved roadways in the U.S. I just prefer the approach of a smarter information processing system that can make decisions as intelligently as a human driver without retrofitting that much pavement with something that, for all it's merits, is still a) temporary, and b) not fool proof.
Somebody else mentioned that I have the benefit of binocular vision. While I believe that helps, I am certain that there are plenty of one-eyed drivers out there who would take exception to that comment. As attached to my two eyes as I am, I have personally had eye injuries where I was reduced to one eye and yet still managed to navigate safely (albeit with diminished capacity for depth perception). Smart processing, I think, makes that possible. I think binocular vision would greatly improve the ability of a software processing system to determine distances visually, even beyond the natural spectrum of the human eye (low light, or foggy conditions?), and there is no reason not to build that into such a system. In fact, I would take that a step further I think in providing binocular vision with a 360 degree of view - why not?
Another poster mentioned something about my foreknowledge (thank you so much to the individual who corrected my spelling - this conversation would be lost without your contribution) in travelling from Sacramento to Manhattan bearing more information than I admit to. Right you are, in fact. When I travel, I consult a map. But I do not use GPS to find myself on that map. I read signs to identify my surroundings and then narrow in on my position in the map given my general idea of approximately where I am based on the route I have chosen.
And so, I agree that a map IS required to select a route and come up with alternatives for road closures and such. What I disagree with however in the DARPA challenge events is the mapping of a route that effectively traces a line on the pavement for the robot to follow. This allows the robot to safely navigate things like clover-style freeway ramps without even being "aware" that it is on such a specialized part of the roadway which, in my book, is cheating. When I look at a map for directions and I see that I need to take Highway 4 East to Highway 50 North, I am not confused and don't need special directions when I approach the clover leaf - I know just what to do.
I want an automation system capable of navigating with generalized route information, and able to travel safely without reliance on space-based satellite systems. It should be able to operate from exactly the same amount of information that I operate from.
Sorry for the novella - I find this topic quite interesting.
but, while as a software engineer and electromechanical hobbyist I fully appreciate all the challenges involved with these robotic drivers, I'm just not impressed by systems that have courses plotted into them and use GPS and high resolution maps and intimate fore-knowledge of the landscape, etc. As a driver, -I- don't need that fore-knowledge to get from Sacramento to Manhattan - thousands of miles successfully navigated without any more fore-knowledge than that I have to travel generally North East through many states.
I will be impressed when driving automation systems can start with a general idea of where their source and destination locations are and can read the signs to figure out how to get there. They must use perceptive powers to avoid colliding with other drivers or running down pedestrians and following the rules of the road instead of range finders and lasers and GPS-based speed limit adherance and other such nonsense.
Until the system can be boiled down to a pair of eyes and a pwerful set of smarts driving , in my view, it's just an elaborate obstacle course being followed by the likes of this robot. I understand "baby steps", but "they" tend to avoid tackling these big challenges and instead continue to focus on these contraptions that just, plain aren't smart enough.
IMHO, of course.
This sounds exactly like that you used to hear "them" saying about T.V. to me. My guess is that anyone who has the perpensity for escapism is going to find themselves a solution no matter what the activity...
Exactly - that's not a guarantee, it's a deception. I want no part in it.
"... as long as it's actually safe to consume..."
That's a pretty big 'if' there, don't you think? Who are you going to trust to tell you that it's safe to consume? The government/military who forces G.I.'s to consume experimental medications? The FDA who allows for the consumption of tobacco and alcohol despite the known detrimental effects? How "safe" is Botox to consume? How safe are any of the hundreds of other products that have historically been released and then pulled off the shelves after it was later found that they were indeed NOT safe to consume?
I take very serious issue with the tampering of the gene pool. Genetically plants and animals - and humans - have arrived at where they are today through a VERY thorough natural selection process. Human experimentation with DNA for purposes of research is OK in my book - knowledge is power. Human experimentation with the DNA of the food supply of the general populous is NOT OK.
What am I worried about? Well one thing's for sure: it's not knocking 5 years off my lifespan or anything so trivial. It's my cautionary imagination of a future where we or various species of plants or livestock are rendered sterile from too much tampering and we don't notice until the very last naturally fertile breeder is extinct. Too far fetched? Who can give me a guarantee?
"They" don't remotely understand well enough the effects of DNA manipulation to label this as safe for consumption.
"How they came out with only 89% when they selected the sites themselves is anyone's guess."
Perhaps they thought nobody would actually believe the 100% figure they had originally planned to report - after all, 89% of statistics are made up on the spot by a caucasian male under the age of 35...
If the server with the database on it were to be
:)
a. stolen
b. hacked
c. confiscated
your database provides a record of every message sent through the system...
The thing that's more interesting to me here is the suggested fearfulness of government and corporate figureheads that two people could communicate something to one another and have nobody else know about it. There is nothing to prevent two people from meeting at a park and quietly exchanging the same information in conversation without any stored record fo the exchanged data. I am most concerned that people who worry about such things yield to our freedoms rather than attempt to stifle them - for that reason, I support rebellious software like this.
As I mentioned yesterday - exactly how does 100HP translate to making a 4 door sedan "drive like a ferrari"? At 400lbs for the ultracap itself (about the same weight as a full sized 4-banger ICE, by the way) it's not exactly coming in as an ultra-light contender.
I have to wonder whether this type of public criticism is exactly why they've chosen to remain a "stealth" company until they have something real and deployable with real world metrics to talk about and back up...
Funny you should mention that bit about 145Kwh as the first thing I was interested in when I saw this article was just how much energy it can actually store up. I started searching around for info on this "stealth company" (what a pain!) and came up with an interesting piece from bacn in January on The Energy Blog where in their sleuthing they determined the thing holds 52Kwh and weighs 400lbs.
Now call me crazy, but when run a quick transformation of 52Kwh to horsepower I'm only seeing just under 70 horsepower. So... 70 horsepower for an hour, or 140 horsepower for 30 minutes? Obviously either:
* It's more than the 52Kwh mentioned in the link above, or
* This thing won't remotely make a four-passenger sedan drive like a Ferrari
Just interesting...
Frankly, I'm more interested in a comprehensive set of photos of our own solar system's planets, such as Pluto and the various "Planet X" candidates that pop on and off the public debate radar from over the years. At least we have the technology to actually visit these places today were we so inclined.
I'm not saying it's unimportant to continue with research like this, only that I wish more effort were put into slightly less glamorous subjects like Pluto that could actually do us some tangible good one day...
Bingo. I've personally only seen a handful of cases brought forward by ACLU where my reaction was, "well that's a waste of time, energy & resources". They have had Important Victories longer than most /.'ers parents have been alive.
The core issues we are up against are with the concepts of copyright and patent. Corporations want ownership of materials; Private individuals want free access those materials. Therein lies the battle. This is as perpetual as bipartisanship.
"The state wants the source code to everything running on the voting machines."
/. synopsis, I saw the word "relevant" used; relevancy is exactly what needs to be established within reason.
If that's true, then Diebold certainly has validity in their opposition to unreasonable demands. The government should not be permitted to get rid of whomever they don't like just by crafting an arbitrary and unanswerable demand such as, "if you don't disclose the precise chemical formula used to generate the shade of blue ink on your business cards within 24 hours, we're shutting you down." As far as I'm concerned, this is an equally unanswerable demand.
If the government makes an acknowledgement that certain components of the working system, including hardware and software, are proprietary materials owned by unrelated third parties and that Diebold is not responsible for the intellectual property pertaining to those components, then Diebold ought to be more than willing, certainly able, to comply with the order for those materials specifically under their own control.
When I read the