It doesn't matter if you aren't buying a new car. Once this law passes, how difficult would it be to add the requirement of a functioning breathalizer as part of the state auto inspection process? They have done it for emissions.
I completely understand that presenting an idea in a friendly way is more likely to succeed. But I am also saying that a manager should not reject ideas based solely on their method of presentation. If a manager lets their ego get in the way of making good decisions then that is not a good manager. A really good manager would evaluate the idea on its merits and instruct the brash person who presented the idea "inappropriately" on how to better communicate in the future.
The reason why we don't take your suggestions is because most people make them in an assaulting or inappropriate manner.
Thats BS. A good idea is a good idea. If a manager is so insecure in their position as a manager that they need it to be presented in a difference way and can't recognize an idea on its merits, then they shouldn't be in management.
Not every situation allows for a motorcyclist to maneuver that well. My commute consists of hundreds of cars all approximately one carlength apart 4 lanes wide for a 20 mile stretch. And the motorcycle was just one example. Hell, even a Mini Cooper is probably small enough to fit inside the blind spot that still exists with the mirror configuration mentioned. The point is, it does not eliminate the blind spot as the poster claimed. It only makes it small enough that it is safe to ignore the majority of the time which would naturally lead to people ignoring it all of the time and thus being the cause of the accidents that don't fit the majority cases.
You still have a blind spot. It is just slightly less than the size of a car. That probably works pretty well in most cases, but I think it just gives a false sense of security. The first motorcyclist you crunch under your back tire because he doesn't fit your forumula would probably prefer you not fool yourself into thinking you don't have a blind spot.
If done correctly I would assume that the port would only open for the IP that issued the knock. TCP Wrappers has been limiting ports based on rules for years, adding secret knock functionality, especially if you have Wrappers listening on all your ports would probably not be that difficult.
The consequences of a "thought mic" could be pretty catastrophic. If you don't think so, try speaking aloud every thought you have for an entire day. If you haven't been fired, beaten up, dumped by your SO, arrested or something along those lines, then you probably aren't interesting enough that people want to talk to you on the phone anyway.
A friend of mine whose first language was not English is constantly inadvertantly coming up with weird mutations of colloquialisms (like taking the "small roads" instead of the "back roads"). One day we were talking about someone getting overexcited about something and this guy says they raised a "human cry". We tried to tell him the phrase was "hue and cry", but because he was able to find at least one page through Google in which the words "human" and "cry" were next to each other it must be a common phrase.
When the unit is pallete you track the ID of the pallete. Only when you get to the part of the process where the unit becomes smaller do you track the individual items.
For instance, when a car dealer gets a shipment of new 2004 models, does he get an invoice for car: 1, VIN zyx1234 or does he get lines items like Wheels: 4, VIN zyx1234, Windshield: 1, VIN zyx1234 etc..
What about the OPEC nations who sell 42 gallon barrels of oil? Or how about Volvo, BMW, Honda, Toyota etc. whose automobiles measure performance in horsepower? And what about your furnaces that are probably rated in BTUs. And there are probably a bunch of other units I am forgetting. If you think your country has gone totally metric you are fooling yourself.
And then of course there is time. Is there a single country that has converted to metric time?
Follow along with me a moment, and you'll see why I think this way. First, the Internet is, by definition, a "network of networks", a large anarchy run by a very large number of system administrators (greater than 10,000) who make private decisions about who and how they allow to access their bandwidth, systems, and services...
The Internet community has decided on standards of behavior, and each system operator trusts every other system operator in the pool to conform to the rules of society, and to ensure that the users conform to the community rules...
Let me modernize those paragraphs for you:
The Internet is, by definition, a "network of networks", a large anarchy owned by corporations who make private economic decisions about who and how they allow to access their bandwidth, systems, and services.
The owners of the networks establish TOS to limit liability and help ensure profitability.
Do you really believe that the techies at the ISPs still have the authority to decide who does or does not remain a customer?
No it wouldn't. You could assume that all chips which arrive simultaneously are being carried by the same player. Also, you can give out chips in a manner such that they are grouped at the time they are given out. You could also use triangulation, either with three receivers per pit, or three per table. Combine in the tracking which is already being done via videocamera, and this could be extremely accurate.
Do you actually gamble? You can't count on chips "arriving at the same time". When making a bet, players will frequently put out some chips, then put out some more. And what about people who just let their winnings ride? They have doubled their bet without any action by themselves. Being able to tell the difference between a win or an increase in bet would be nearly impossible with RFID. If you are talking about when they get to the table, that isn't consistant either. Considering that some blackjack players will play standing back from the table and other hunched over their chips. You would have to define the play area too broadly because it would catch spectators, giving you all sorts of bogus data. And if you have ever seen a husband and wife gamble, chips may arrive at, or leave the table without the player moving. And as far as grouping, the same chip could belong to several different players over the course of just a few minutes. And there is no way that the tray could be kept organized based on ID. So anyone who buys in at the table would get chips from every player who lost at that table recently.
And tracking the chips through the cameras is pretty accurate. Using some of the same principles of facial recognition (size shape and color) a stack of chips can be evaluated immidiately to figure out its worth with no centralized lookups.
And triangulation probably isn't very feasible. RTLS usually uses battery operated tags, which are going to be too bulky for casino chips.
To be able to properly track individual chips in relation to particular players the range on the RFID would have to be very limited so your chips signal doesn't bleed over into the spot for the player next to you. They would have to add hardware RFID scanners to every betting spot (between 5 to 7 per table for blackjack). Then to be able to match the identifier sent by the chip to the denomination would require a lookup to a central database which means all your blackjack tables need a network drop. You could suggest wireless, but as security conscious as casinos are, I would guess they would be reluctant to allow any kind of wireless access to the in-house systems. And even the computer supported tables like Let-It-Ride and Carribean Stud aren't connected to the network. There is usually a printer sitting under the table for printing reports which are then re-entered somewhere else.
Facial recognition and card tracking can be done remotely, all handled through the video cameras from the security center. And if they really wanted real-time chip tracking, they could do it the same way, remotely with the cameras. RFID is not the right answer for chip tracking.
Re:Ouch for card counters...
on
RFID Casino Chips
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The article talks mainly about being able to identify the chips as being authentic. I think that installing the equipment at each betting spot on the table to read the different IDs, lookup the dollar value in a central database and do the math to figure out total bet would be a little much. It would take some serious hardware to do real-time tracking of every chip in play. Considering that dealers, pit-bosses and the eye in the sky already are fairly good at catching counters (who can't take the casino for too much if they don't want to get banned), I don't think the ROI would be there for such a massive system.
Having a few readers in the cage to verify authenticity before giving out cash in exchange, would be a much more efficient use of RFID.
If someone is interested in robots and is somehow not familiar with the fictional works ralted to them by the most famous Sci-Fi writer ever, I doubt they are going to read them now. They may however go see the movie, which I have been surprised has not shown up as a story here, considering it would seem more news for nerds than spiderman.
Do not claim ownership of your employees' thoughts. Do not claim ownership of projects done by your employees on their own time that are unrelated to what they do at work. Do not try to impose non-compete agreements that are not legal.
One would presume that this person is after the data in my machine, or wants to cause problems for me. Why else would they be trying to break in and gain root access?
I wouldn't presume that. An attacker could be after your computer to use it as a spam proxy, part of a distributed child porn archive, zombie for DoS attacks, or even just another link in the chain to further cover tracks of some other nefarious activity (e.g. ordering goods with a stolen credit card is something they probably wouldn't want to do from their own connection).
Then of course there is the fact that some people break in to others' computers because they find it an interesting thing to do to amuse themselves and they consider it more of an intellectual exercise than a crime. And why should I settle for your hardware when I can keylog your access to your banking site and empty your entire account? The risk vs reward ratio for compter crime is much better than that of traditional B&E type stuff.
And are you sure the assumption that it is a wireless attack in your immediate vicinity valid? When cable internet access fist came out a lot of people didn't realize they were on the same network as everyone else in their neighborhood and had open shares that anyone could access.
If UseNet were really dying then no one would run stories about @Home getting the UDP. And @Home wouldn't care if they got the UDP. It is true that UseNet attracts proportionately fewer new Internet users each year, but I have always gone to UseNet for quality of information, not quantity.
The root being that the laws can't keep up with the technology.
I don't think this is as big a problem as some make it out to be. There are lawmakers out there demanding laws to protect children from Internet predators and things like that. There are already laws on the books governing what is and what is not allowed through postal mail, on the phone etc. Just because it's data packets instead of ink or sound being sent doesn't change a whole lot. Intellectual property law also has a an existing body of law and precedent that will for the vast majority of issues cover new stuff too. It is because everyone is so dead set on treating new technology differently than the old that causes the problem.
In Netrek a borg is a computer generated enhancement to the client that would give you an advantage over other players. In the netrek community there are frequent debates as to how "borgish" a feature may or may not be. Examples are things like auto-aiming, auto-dodging, or so-called info-borgs that give more info on the HUD like range or speed indicators.
I have always wondered why the laws regarding merchantability of products do not apply to commercial software. I believe most locales (at least in the US) have an implied warranty of merchantability of goods sold. That means that if you sell me something I have every right to expect it to work in the manner it is intended. The only way to avoid that is to sell something "as is". I didn't think that a company could just decide that it is going to sell their entire product line "as is" without getting into some legal trouble. The GPL specifically disclaims the warranty of merchantability and says that the software is provided as is, but this is usually acceptable in things that are given away. Any lawyers out there that can give us some insight?
It seems most people have forgotten about Microsoft Plays Linux Games at Work. From that article you could reach the conclusion that the average computer user just wants to double-click and go. Sure, most Linux users are more sophisticated but that may not always be the case. Loki is a business and it is in their best financial interest that their products and the operating system they run on are accessible to the average computer user. For those who are complaining that there are package managers to use, yes there are. But they are all different and supporting each one takes more resources. If someone came up with a cross-distribution package management system that could use rpm and deb files then I would understand people being upset if it wasn't used but there is no such thing. You can't expect commercial software houses to have the same goals as the traditional Linux contributors and if you don't like the way they do things then you don't have to buy their product.
Slashdot Mirror
For a second there I thought the F in FTA was the same F as in RTFA and I thought "Man, I know people don't read the articles, but open contempt?"
It doesn't matter if you aren't buying a new car. Once this law passes, how difficult would it be to add the requirement of a functioning breathalizer as part of the state auto inspection process? They have done it for emissions.
I completely understand that presenting an idea in a friendly way is more likely to succeed. But I am also saying that a manager should not reject ideas based solely on their method of presentation. If a manager lets their ego get in the way of making good decisions then that is not a good manager. A really good manager would evaluate the idea on its merits and instruct the brash person who presented the idea "inappropriately" on how to better communicate in the future.
Thats BS. A good idea is a good idea. If a manager is so insecure in their position as a manager that they need it to be presented in a difference way and can't recognize an idea on its merits, then they shouldn't be in management.
Not every situation allows for a motorcyclist to maneuver that well. My commute consists of hundreds of cars all approximately one carlength apart 4 lanes wide for a 20 mile stretch. And the motorcycle was just one example. Hell, even a Mini Cooper is probably small enough to fit inside the blind spot that still exists with the mirror configuration mentioned. The point is, it does not eliminate the blind spot as the poster claimed. It only makes it small enough that it is safe to ignore the majority of the time which would naturally lead to people ignoring it all of the time and thus being the cause of the accidents that don't fit the majority cases.
You still have a blind spot. It is just slightly less than the size of a car. That probably works pretty well in most cases, but I think it just gives a false sense of security. The first motorcyclist you crunch under your back tire because he doesn't fit your forumula would probably prefer you not fool yourself into thinking you don't have a blind spot.
If done correctly I would assume that the port would only open for the IP that issued the knock. TCP Wrappers has been limiting ports based on rules for years, adding secret knock functionality, especially if you have Wrappers listening on all your ports would probably not be that difficult.
What you need is a sub-vocal mic.
The consequences of a "thought mic" could be pretty catastrophic. If you don't think so, try speaking aloud every thought you have for an entire day. If you haven't been fired, beaten up, dumped by your SO, arrested or something along those lines, then you probably aren't interesting enough that people want to talk to you on the phone anyway.
A friend of mine whose first language was not English is constantly inadvertantly coming up with weird mutations of colloquialisms (like taking the "small roads" instead of the "back roads"). One day we were talking about someone getting overexcited about something and this guy says they raised a "human cry". We tried to tell him the phrase was "hue and cry", but because he was able to find at least one page through Google in which the words "human" and "cry" were next to each other it must be a common phrase.
When the unit is pallete you track the ID of the pallete. Only when you get to the part of the process where the unit becomes smaller do you track the individual items.
For instance, when a car dealer gets a shipment of new 2004 models, does he get an invoice for car: 1, VIN zyx1234 or does he get lines items like Wheels: 4, VIN zyx1234, Windshield: 1, VIN zyx1234 etc..
What about the OPEC nations who sell 42 gallon barrels of oil? Or how about Volvo, BMW, Honda, Toyota etc. whose automobiles measure performance in horsepower? And what about your furnaces that are probably rated in BTUs. And there are probably a bunch of other units I am forgetting. If you think your country has gone totally metric you are fooling yourself.
And then of course there is time. Is there a single country that has converted to metric time?
Let me modernize those paragraphs for you:
The Internet is, by definition, a "network of networks", a large anarchy owned by corporations who make private economic decisions about who and how they allow to access their bandwidth, systems, and services.
The owners of the networks establish TOS to limit liability and help ensure profitability.
Do you really believe that the techies at the ISPs still have the authority to decide who does or does not remain a customer?
No it wouldn't. You could assume that all chips which arrive simultaneously are being carried by the same player. Also, you can give out chips in a manner such that they are grouped at the time they are given out. You could also use triangulation, either with three receivers per pit, or three per table. Combine in the tracking which is already being done via videocamera, and this could be extremely accurate.
Do you actually gamble? You can't count on chips "arriving at the same time". When making a bet, players will frequently put out some chips, then put out some more. And what about people who just let their winnings ride? They have doubled their bet without any action by themselves. Being able to tell the difference between a win or an increase in bet would be nearly impossible with RFID. If you are talking about when they get to the table, that isn't consistant either. Considering that some blackjack players will play standing back from the table and other hunched over their chips. You would have to define the play area too broadly because it would catch spectators, giving you all sorts of bogus data. And if you have ever seen a husband and wife gamble, chips may arrive at, or leave the table without the player moving. And as far as grouping, the same chip could belong to several different players over the course of just a few minutes. And there is no way that the tray could be kept organized based on ID. So anyone who buys in at the table would get chips from every player who lost at that table recently.
And tracking the chips through the cameras is pretty accurate. Using some of the same principles of facial recognition (size shape and color) a stack of chips can be evaluated immidiately to figure out its worth with no centralized lookups.
And triangulation probably isn't very feasible. RTLS usually uses battery operated tags, which are going to be too bulky for casino chips.
To be able to properly track individual chips in relation to particular players the range on the RFID would have to be very limited so your chips signal doesn't bleed over into the spot for the player next to you. They would have to add hardware RFID scanners to every betting spot (between 5 to 7 per table for blackjack). Then to be able to match the identifier sent by the chip to the denomination would require a lookup to a central database which means all your blackjack tables need a network drop. You could suggest wireless, but as security conscious as casinos are, I would guess they would be reluctant to allow any kind of wireless access to the in-house systems. And even the computer supported tables like Let-It-Ride and Carribean Stud aren't connected to the network. There is usually a printer sitting under the table for printing reports which are then re-entered somewhere else.
Facial recognition and card tracking can be done remotely, all handled through the video cameras from the security center. And if they really wanted real-time chip tracking, they could do it the same way, remotely with the cameras. RFID is not the right answer for chip tracking.
The article talks mainly about being able to identify the chips as being authentic. I think that installing the equipment at each betting spot on the table to read the different IDs, lookup the dollar value in a central database and do the math to figure out total bet would be a little much. It would take some serious hardware to do real-time tracking of every chip in play. Considering that dealers, pit-bosses and the eye in the sky already are fairly good at catching counters (who can't take the casino for too much if they don't want to get banned), I don't think the ROI would be there for such a massive system.
Having a few readers in the cage to verify authenticity before giving out cash in exchange, would be a much more efficient use of RFID.
Yes, bubble at the end of a branch theory has been widely published.
Yop!
If someone is interested in robots and is somehow not familiar with the fictional works ralted to them by the most famous Sci-Fi writer ever, I doubt they are going to read them now. They may however go see the movie, which I have been surprised has not shown up as a story here, considering it would seem more news for nerds than spiderman.
Do not claim ownership of your employees' thoughts. Do not claim ownership of projects done by your employees on their own time that are unrelated to what they do at work. Do not try to impose non-compete agreements that are not legal.
You been living in a cave? Microsoft bought NCompass quite a while ago.
I wouldn't presume that. An attacker could be after your computer to use it as a spam proxy, part of a distributed child porn archive, zombie for DoS attacks, or even just another link in the chain to further cover tracks of some other nefarious activity (e.g. ordering goods with a stolen credit card is something they probably wouldn't want to do from their own connection).
Then of course there is the fact that some people break in to others' computers because they find it an interesting thing to do to amuse themselves and they consider it more of an intellectual exercise than a crime. And why should I settle for your hardware when I can keylog your access to your banking site and empty your entire account? The risk vs reward ratio for compter crime is much better than that of traditional B&E type stuff.
And are you sure the assumption that it is a wireless attack in your immediate vicinity valid? When cable internet access fist came out a lot of people didn't realize they were on the same network as everyone else in their neighborhood and had open shares that anyone could access.
If UseNet were really dying then no one would run stories about @Home getting the UDP. And @Home wouldn't care if they got the UDP. It is true that UseNet attracts proportionately fewer new Internet users each year, but I have always gone to UseNet for quality of information, not quantity.
In Netrek a borg is a computer generated enhancement to the client that would give you an advantage over other players. In the netrek community there are frequent debates as to how "borgish" a feature may or may not be. Examples are things like auto-aiming, auto-dodging, or so-called info-borgs that give more info on the HUD like range or speed indicators.
I have always wondered why the laws regarding merchantability of products do not apply to commercial software. I believe most locales (at least in the US) have an implied warranty of merchantability of goods sold. That means that if you sell me something I have every right to expect it to work in the manner it is intended. The only way to avoid that is to sell something "as is". I didn't think that a company could just decide that it is going to sell their entire product line "as is" without getting into some legal trouble. The GPL specifically disclaims the warranty of merchantability and says that the software is provided as is, but this is usually acceptable in things that are given away. Any lawyers out there that can give us some insight?
It seems most people have forgotten about Microsoft Plays Linux Games at Work. From that article you could reach the conclusion that the average computer user just wants to double-click and go. Sure, most Linux users are more sophisticated but that may not always be the case. Loki is a business and it is in their best financial interest that their products and the operating system they run on are accessible to the average computer user. For those who are complaining that there are package managers to use, yes there are. But they are all different and supporting each one takes more resources. If someone came up with a cross-distribution package management system that could use rpm and deb files then I would understand people being upset if it wasn't used but there is no such thing. You can't expect commercial software houses to have the same goals as the traditional Linux contributors and if you don't like the way they do things then you don't have to buy their product.