Citation desperately needed. All the cases I've seen of the ACLU stepping in involved racial, religious or other types of profiling that involved profiling for groups not for behavior.
I realize that the ACLU is this conservative bogeyman that's out to prevent the government from doing its job, but let's get serious shall we. There's absolutely no evidence that the sort of profiling that you're suggesting would do anything other than harass innocent civilians for not being white enough.
I've never seen a label that said that. In large part because farmers aren't able to say that with any certainty. They themselves may not have bought GM seeds, but that doesn't mean that they weren't contaminated by the crops on the next farm over.
Precisely, the standards in place with organic produce contains a lot of stuff that people don't spend time thinking about. One of those things is that they can't be GMO, not to mention no pesticides and the fields themselves have to have been clean for a number of years before they're eligible.
If you don't force it it's unlikely that consumers will have any meaningful ability to avoid GMO products. It's not the apples and the carrots that people ought to be concerned with, those are easy enough to get organic versions of, it's the processed foods where all but the soy might not be GMO and that's not necessarily going to be listed.
It's not perpetuating hysteria, people have the right to avoid GMO products. Just because those particular batches are safe doesn't lessen the possibility of random genes collecting in other organisms and working together in completely unforeseen ways. What's worse they do the research in the open and it's hardly without precedence for the genes to end up cross contaminating other fields.
If anything the view people have of GMO products is way too relaxed.
Because they can't. Helicopters can't generate enough lift to fly out of the way of small arms fire without great difficulty in general. And in places like Afghanistan that are in the mountains and the people firing the small arms get closer they aren't able to.
The thing about cameras is that you have to have hundreds of them to cover a mile, and you have to then have dozens of people to keep track of them. Additionally there are inevitably holes in the coverage area and they don't necessarily handle the heat very well.
A predator drone can cover a large amount of ground and be back before anybody crossing would have gotten far.
Do you have any evidence to back that up? Remember that this all started when Apple decided that it owned the smartphone concept and the related rounded rectangle shape.
You do realize how ridiculous you sound, right? Apple had the option of paying for those licenses at the time, making Motorola and Google to be the bad guys in all of this because they've refused to completely lie down to some rather ridiculous patent abuse suits is pretty pathetic.
I'm sure they can pronounce it, but because they opted not to use the much more clearly spelled Latin root one has to know how to pronounce it in order to pronounce it. Which creates all sorts of headaches when trying to get people clued in.
At this point is there really any reason why we need OpenOffice? Libreoffice, stupid name aside, seems to do everything that people want and more or less all the developers jumped ship for it a long time ago.
Those are good, I'd definitely recommend Mark Twain's autobiography even though it's not yet public domain. Quite readable and really interesting look at the latter half of the 19th century as far as history goes.
It's important to have a popdown as how else is it going to learn your particular accent? The alternative would be for you to learn to speak in a way that the phone accepts. It's basically the difference between Palm's graffiti and whatever MS was using at the time.
What I heard was here posted by actual owners of iPhones. It's not at all unreasonable when you consider the fact that not only does the device have to accurately hear what's being said, but then has to interpret how to deal with it. Google's voice search and voice dial are much more keyed in as you have to state the commands that it's expecting to hear making it a much easier system to implement. On top of which Google has a much larger library of samples from which to deal with.
As far as accuracy, Google does a damn good job of it with its google voice transcriptions. I often times have a hard time understanding voice messages, but most of the time the system gets it quite right.
What's more it's almost certainly going to have an API exposed for people to add the character if they so choose. One of the advantages of Android is that things like that generally are exposed so that App developers can work around such perceived shortcomings. And if not, there's always the source so they should be able to write their own API if need be.
That's probably a much more mainstream feeling than you realize. People tend to get freaked out by the uncanny valley. Not to mention that if it sounds like a person then it is a person complete with all the downsides that entails. Most people just want the device to figure out what to do and get it done, adding emotions and jokes just muddies it up and increases the likelihood that the interaction will go wrong.
As a side note, what Google's doing is working, so I'm not really sure on what basis you're suggesting that they don't know what people want, they're wiping the floor with both MS and Apple as of late in that market.
Google's voice recognition works, if it doesn't get it right it tends to recognize it and pop down a list of possibilities.
From what I've heard about Siri, it trades accuracy for sophistication of ability and it isn't a good trade off. We'll see how things progress as it's only a 4 month old release, but still. There's some wisdom in limiting the features to what you can actually do than to overreach and come up with crap.
At the end of the day, voice recognition isn't really that useful except for people driving and possibly the blind. Most people view it as a gimmick. Personally, I'm not about to spend much time using it as when I'm out in public I'd rather not have people know what I'm searching for or whom I'm calling.
Google has tons of data from which to trawl for edge cases. What precisely did you think that the Google Voice transcription service was all about? People let Google transcribe their voicemails by algorithm and Google gets more data. I doubt very much they even bother looking at messages which aren't reported to them as inaccurate.
So, I'd venture to guess that they're actually a lot more used than Siri is. I have a hard time believing that Siri is so used that it's been used more in 4 months than Google Voice in a couple years.
As for sophistication, Google's implementation might be significantly less sophisticated, but it does work reliably, Siri from what I've heard, not so much.
I know you're joking, but most of that is because plug in developers haven't been using Jetpack, Jetpack pretty much obviates any need for that sort of concern. Unfortunately, it requires the addons to be adjusted to use it and I'm not sure how much work that entails.
Right, but that's the same basic problem that you have with trying to catch things going over the wire. You can't be sure that a particular person will ever make a typo or that they'll do so with important emails. All the cases I'm familiar with are cases where somebody got access to either computer I mentioned. Emails typically tell a lot more when combined with other emails than when their just one email.
That's mostly because sites like Yahoo aren't secure. The message only goes over the net once and it's unlikely that anybody's going to be interested in it or for those that are interested to happen upon it. Items in your inbox or other folder tend to stick around quite a bit longer.
I think the way that usually goes is national security letter, warrant or subpoena to the email provider or to whomever it is that has control over the server room. In all likelihood you won't even know about it until it's too late.
Encrypting things is all well and good, but if you don't control every step in the process, which you don't, there's not much to be gained by doing it. If the party that you're communicating with isn't as careful about it or doesn't have a similar interest in keeping it secret then it's not going to take much for the feds or whoever to get access to it.
Precisely, when news reports surface of emails being leaked or stolen, rarely if ever do those reports refer to emails being stolen en route. Almost always they're leaked by somebody with access to either the mail server for that domain or the person's own computer.
Sure one could catch an email en route, but in practice that's hit or miss without having control of the networks to which either the sending or receiving server connects and full knowledge that the email is coming. Without that it's not likely to be profitable to do so as you'd never know which emails to collect.
You have to be kidding. Fans around here get loud enough that the players can't hear the call when the QB's trying to relay it to the players. And that most certainly does have an impact beyond what the current technology can solve. Well, without giving every single player a noise cancelling headset.
Slashdot Mirror
Citation desperately needed. All the cases I've seen of the ACLU stepping in involved racial, religious or other types of profiling that involved profiling for groups not for behavior.
I realize that the ACLU is this conservative bogeyman that's out to prevent the government from doing its job, but let's get serious shall we. There's absolutely no evidence that the sort of profiling that you're suggesting would do anything other than harass innocent civilians for not being white enough.
Yeah, really, I've been badmouthing the TSA since before it was cool.
I also happen to be really into this band, but you wouldn't have heard of them.
I've never seen a label that said that. In large part because farmers aren't able to say that with any certainty. They themselves may not have bought GM seeds, but that doesn't mean that they weren't contaminated by the crops on the next farm over.
Precisely, the standards in place with organic produce contains a lot of stuff that people don't spend time thinking about. One of those things is that they can't be GMO, not to mention no pesticides and the fields themselves have to have been clean for a number of years before they're eligible.
If you don't force it it's unlikely that consumers will have any meaningful ability to avoid GMO products. It's not the apples and the carrots that people ought to be concerned with, those are easy enough to get organic versions of, it's the processed foods where all but the soy might not be GMO and that's not necessarily going to be listed.
It's not perpetuating hysteria, people have the right to avoid GMO products. Just because those particular batches are safe doesn't lessen the possibility of random genes collecting in other organisms and working together in completely unforeseen ways. What's worse they do the research in the open and it's hardly without precedence for the genes to end up cross contaminating other fields.
If anything the view people have of GMO products is way too relaxed.
Because they can't. Helicopters can't generate enough lift to fly out of the way of small arms fire without great difficulty in general. And in places like Afghanistan that are in the mountains and the people firing the small arms get closer they aren't able to.
The thing about cameras is that you have to have hundreds of them to cover a mile, and you have to then have dozens of people to keep track of them. Additionally there are inevitably holes in the coverage area and they don't necessarily handle the heat very well.
A predator drone can cover a large amount of ground and be back before anybody crossing would have gotten far.
Do you have any evidence to back that up? Remember that this all started when Apple decided that it owned the smartphone concept and the related rounded rectangle shape.
You do realize how ridiculous you sound, right? Apple had the option of paying for those licenses at the time, making Motorola and Google to be the bad guys in all of this because they've refused to completely lie down to some rather ridiculous patent abuse suits is pretty pathetic.
I'm sure they can pronounce it, but because they opted not to use the much more clearly spelled Latin root one has to know how to pronounce it in order to pronounce it. Which creates all sorts of headaches when trying to get people clued in.
At this point is there really any reason why we need OpenOffice? Libreoffice, stupid name aside, seems to do everything that people want and more or less all the developers jumped ship for it a long time ago.
Those are good, I'd definitely recommend Mark Twain's autobiography even though it's not yet public domain. Quite readable and really interesting look at the latter half of the 19th century as far as history goes.
It's important to have a popdown as how else is it going to learn your particular accent? The alternative would be for you to learn to speak in a way that the phone accepts. It's basically the difference between Palm's graffiti and whatever MS was using at the time.
What I heard was here posted by actual owners of iPhones. It's not at all unreasonable when you consider the fact that not only does the device have to accurately hear what's being said, but then has to interpret how to deal with it. Google's voice search and voice dial are much more keyed in as you have to state the commands that it's expecting to hear making it a much easier system to implement. On top of which Google has a much larger library of samples from which to deal with.
As far as accuracy, Google does a damn good job of it with its google voice transcriptions. I often times have a hard time understanding voice messages, but most of the time the system gets it quite right.
What's more it's almost certainly going to have an API exposed for people to add the character if they so choose. One of the advantages of Android is that things like that generally are exposed so that App developers can work around such perceived shortcomings. And if not, there's always the source so they should be able to write their own API if need be.
That's probably a much more mainstream feeling than you realize. People tend to get freaked out by the uncanny valley. Not to mention that if it sounds like a person then it is a person complete with all the downsides that entails. Most people just want the device to figure out what to do and get it done, adding emotions and jokes just muddies it up and increases the likelihood that the interaction will go wrong.
As a side note, what Google's doing is working, so I'm not really sure on what basis you're suggesting that they don't know what people want, they're wiping the floor with both MS and Apple as of late in that market.
Google's voice recognition works, if it doesn't get it right it tends to recognize it and pop down a list of possibilities.
From what I've heard about Siri, it trades accuracy for sophistication of ability and it isn't a good trade off. We'll see how things progress as it's only a 4 month old release, but still. There's some wisdom in limiting the features to what you can actually do than to overreach and come up with crap.
At the end of the day, voice recognition isn't really that useful except for people driving and possibly the blind. Most people view it as a gimmick. Personally, I'm not about to spend much time using it as when I'm out in public I'd rather not have people know what I'm searching for or whom I'm calling.
Google has tons of data from which to trawl for edge cases. What precisely did you think that the Google Voice transcription service was all about? People let Google transcribe their voicemails by algorithm and Google gets more data. I doubt very much they even bother looking at messages which aren't reported to them as inaccurate.
So, I'd venture to guess that they're actually a lot more used than Siri is. I have a hard time believing that Siri is so used that it's been used more in 4 months than Google Voice in a couple years.
As for sophistication, Google's implementation might be significantly less sophisticated, but it does work reliably, Siri from what I've heard, not so much.
I know you're joking, but most of that is because plug in developers haven't been using Jetpack, Jetpack pretty much obviates any need for that sort of concern. Unfortunately, it requires the addons to be adjusted to use it and I'm not sure how much work that entails.
Right, but that's the same basic problem that you have with trying to catch things going over the wire. You can't be sure that a particular person will ever make a typo or that they'll do so with important emails. All the cases I'm familiar with are cases where somebody got access to either computer I mentioned. Emails typically tell a lot more when combined with other emails than when their just one email.
That's mostly because sites like Yahoo aren't secure. The message only goes over the net once and it's unlikely that anybody's going to be interested in it or for those that are interested to happen upon it. Items in your inbox or other folder tend to stick around quite a bit longer.
I think the way that usually goes is national security letter, warrant or subpoena to the email provider or to whomever it is that has control over the server room. In all likelihood you won't even know about it until it's too late.
Encrypting things is all well and good, but if you don't control every step in the process, which you don't, there's not much to be gained by doing it. If the party that you're communicating with isn't as careful about it or doesn't have a similar interest in keeping it secret then it's not going to take much for the feds or whoever to get access to it.
Gmail allows for two factor identification. You can also use a one time pad that you can get from them in case you don't want to do that.
There may still be security vulnerabilities, but they're significantly more secure at the user level than any of the other major web mail sites AFAIK.
Precisely, when news reports surface of emails being leaked or stolen, rarely if ever do those reports refer to emails being stolen en route. Almost always they're leaked by somebody with access to either the mail server for that domain or the person's own computer.
Sure one could catch an email en route, but in practice that's hit or miss without having control of the networks to which either the sending or receiving server connects and full knowledge that the email is coming. Without that it's not likely to be profitable to do so as you'd never know which emails to collect.
You have to be kidding. Fans around here get loud enough that the players can't hear the call when the QB's trying to relay it to the players. And that most certainly does have an impact beyond what the current technology can solve. Well, without giving every single player a noise cancelling headset.