Interesting story, but I think the question shouldn't be whether the University has the right to look at your profiles online....you're putting them in a public forum - one must assume that the information you present in said public forum is viewable by the public. I mean seriously, it's like having a loud conversation in an airport terminal and suing someone for overhearing your conversation.
This is not a privacy issue, it's an issue of the university overreacting in a way that I'm sure would be inconsistent with their code of conduct. If it's not, then the student needs to bring suit and talk to his student union about policy changes.
SEE what happens when there's too much traffic on the intarnets? The tubes get overloaded, and here you are trying to type with a phone. What's next? Speech-to-text and user-friendly portable interfaces that anyone can use for free? What do you think this is, a big truck?
it prevents the government from "unreasonable" (that is to say more or less irrational) seizures and searches.
I think the issue here is that the searches they're conducting do seem, to most of us, unreasonable. Where is that line (the determination that a search is unreasonable) drawn? It looks as if the courts have drawn it just on the other side of "we can look at whatever we damned well please, whenever we damned well please." If they can do this in an airport, there's little problem extending that capability to other areas.
The original amendments were left vague such as to err on the side of limiting specific government controls, allowing for further establishment where needed later on. That being said, the founding fathers expected to have a new constitution drawn up every 50 years or so - I think they'd be surprised to see how we do things today. Just my two cents.
I wasn't referring to selling insurance, I was referring to being investigated/arrested for bits of data picked off automatically by a computer. Of course, profiling is useful for determining insurance premiums and whether or not you're MIT material, but when it comes to determining whether or not you've broken the law, it's a different story.
Just wanted to be clear, I'm well aware that this is in Beijing, and that profiling may not be illegal there (like it is where I sit). I'm simply referring to general principle, not local law.
...and on some level, that's called profiling, and it's illegal. The grey area here is a wide one with steep, slippery slopes. I'd like to think we have the capacity to exist in a world where I don't have to be inside my home in order to not be on camera, but I think too many people mistake surveillance for safety.
The problem isn't that tasers are painful. The problem is controlling the humans who use the tasers, forcing them only to use them when appropriate . When a person wields that kind of power over another, significant implications exist for the probable outcome of use of force (see the Stanford Prison Experiment, it ought to at least make you say 'hmm').
I would go with this one - here in Ohio we have pretty strict laws on what the cops can and can't do in terms of citations/arrests. For example, they aren't allowed to pull you over in an unmarked car, they aren't allowed to sit without their running lights on to conceal themselves, etc. There's quite a bit of law requiring them to be visible and labeled as police. Moreover, you can't be cited for speeding by a machine (this is currently under scrutiny in Cleveland)
That being said, this vehicle's design was focused on providing an undetectable solution, but the problem becomes when they use it for more than just speedtraps. Remember kids, if Tasers moved from being useful tools to take down bank robbers to 'donttasemebro', this technology can do the same thing.
I'd say it's less clear that the republicans will lose. Again, we have the capacity in these primaries to put forward nominees that will reduce us Americans' choices to deciding between a Giant Douche (tm) and a Turd Sandwich (tm). Again. Honestly, can you represent the opinions and beliefs of 300 million people with the "bichromatic rainbow" (to quote Jon Stewart) presented here?
Most Americans don't understand things in meters. I could very accurately describe to you how big a few thousandths of an inch is, but it would take me some thinking to show you what a millimeter looks like, because I do all my engineering work in inches. It has more to do with our established infrastructure than anything else (go ahead, find me a meterstick at a local store...good luck with that). Conversions don't really get hairy until you're doing a thermodynamics problem anyways.
Your'e right about coal - it's currently about two-thirds (more, actually) of our power production, and we can run off of that alone, given the growth model of the energy industry for another 200 years. Should be plenty of time to act, but we have got to be cutting consumption and exploring new technologies with some sense of urgency.
Coal is being made cleaner, and wind is definitely hot at the moment. What I've found though, is that I can live comfortably off of very little energy if I make a concerted effort. People live in West Africa with no power at all, and they're perfectly happy, and in many respects, have a perfectly good quality of life.
Agreed. If for no other reason than my real book is mine. No copyright issues, no DRM (if it comes to that), no subscription costs, etc. I have a print copy of my book, and I can write in it, spill coffee on it, and do whatever the hell else I want with it (short of photocopy and sell it).
This does raise another question...why are the primaries in Iowa so weighted as opposed to Ohio then? Ohio is noted for being an accurate amalgam of different demographics of the country (see wikipedia article).
Also interesting that while we would apparently give away this, one of our most basic rights, because we don't seem to care, it's notable that the rest of the world probably knows more about our candidates than the average American:
From sustainabletechnologies.blogspot.com:
"Know what's funny about the rest of the world? They know a whole lot about us, even though we don't know much about them. I can't even tell you when Ghana's last national election was, but Ghanaians know who the different candidates are in ours, and their platforms. Humbled? You should be. I am."
Even more unfortunate is the fact that our government will arrest any such rebels with far superior military force than any local militia could hope to muster, and send them to a prison to be tortured, interrogated, and likely tried as terrorists.
"What's the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter? A freedom fighter won."
Speaking as a Navy veteran, I hardly think that the military is a good way of putting yourself through university. Programmes like the G.I. Bill give you enough money for a second-rate state school. You can't easily get through four years at a decent private university through the military.
I went to a cheap state school, and I submit I have a pretty much equal education, if not better than, your average "decent private university". The GI bill wasn't designed to send GI Joe to Harvard. It was designed to allow them a general education they would have likely missed over the course of World War II. It's all about expectations, I gather.
I totally agree - it's not only our right as Americans, but outlined as a duty. Democracy only works if the people participate. If you don't participate, you lose your right to complain. Personally, the only way I would join any military would be if these rights were at stake, and if they were, I would join up in a heartbeat.
Where I go to school, your account simply gets disabled until you call to find out why. When I was an undergrad here, you got emails notifying you if you were sharing copyrighted material. Now, if you're simply running a p2p client (doesn't matter what you're sharing), your account is disabled, and you have to seek out the reasoning yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
How is that news?
...Seriously, I nearly soiled myself. What is this, Monty Python?
Interesting story, but I think the question shouldn't be whether the University has the right to look at your profiles online....you're putting them in a public forum - one must assume that the information you present in said public forum is viewable by the public. I mean seriously, it's like having a loud conversation in an airport terminal and suing someone for overhearing your conversation.
This is not a privacy issue, it's an issue of the university overreacting in a way that I'm sure would be inconsistent with their code of conduct. If it's not, then the student needs to bring suit and talk to his student union about policy changes.
SEE what happens when there's too much traffic on the intarnets? The tubes get overloaded, and here you are trying to type with a phone. What's next? Speech-to-text and user-friendly portable interfaces that anyone can use for free? What do you think this is, a big truck?
:-D
I think the issue here is that the searches they're conducting do seem, to most of us, unreasonable. Where is that line (the determination that a search is unreasonable) drawn? It looks as if the courts have drawn it just on the other side of "we can look at whatever we damned well please, whenever we damned well please." If they can do this in an airport, there's little problem extending that capability to other areas.
The original amendments were left vague such as to err on the side of limiting specific government controls, allowing for further establishment where needed later on. That being said, the founding fathers expected to have a new constitution drawn up every 50 years or so - I think they'd be surprised to see how we do things today. Just my two cents.
I wasn't referring to selling insurance, I was referring to being investigated/arrested for bits of data picked off automatically by a computer. Of course, profiling is useful for determining insurance premiums and whether or not you're MIT material, but when it comes to determining whether or not you've broken the law, it's a different story.
Just wanted to be clear, I'm well aware that this is in Beijing, and that profiling may not be illegal there (like it is where I sit). I'm simply referring to general principle, not local law.
...and on some level, that's called profiling, and it's illegal. The grey area here is a wide one with steep, slippery slopes. I'd like to think we have the capacity to exist in a world where I don't have to be inside my home in order to not be on camera, but I think too many people mistake surveillance for safety.
The problem isn't that tasers are painful. The problem is controlling the humans who use the tasers, forcing them only to use them when appropriate . When a person wields that kind of power over another, significant implications exist for the probable outcome of use of force (see the Stanford Prison Experiment, it ought to at least make you say 'hmm').
I would go with this one - here in Ohio we have pretty strict laws on what the cops can and can't do in terms of citations/arrests. For example, they aren't allowed to pull you over in an unmarked car, they aren't allowed to sit without their running lights on to conceal themselves, etc. There's quite a bit of law requiring them to be visible and labeled as police. Moreover, you can't be cited for speeding by a machine (this is currently under scrutiny in Cleveland)
That being said, this vehicle's design was focused on providing an undetectable solution, but the problem becomes when they use it for more than just speedtraps. Remember kids, if Tasers moved from being useful tools to take down bank robbers to 'donttasemebro', this technology can do the same thing.
I'd say it's less clear that the republicans will lose. Again, we have the capacity in these primaries to put forward nominees that will reduce us Americans' choices to deciding between a Giant Douche (tm) and a Turd Sandwich (tm). Again. Honestly, can you represent the opinions and beliefs of 300 million people with the "bichromatic rainbow" (to quote Jon Stewart) presented here?
In Soviet Russia, they sieze dissidents. What, you were expecting a joke? 'Cuz this isn't funny.
Most Americans don't understand things in meters. I could very accurately describe to you how big a few thousandths of an inch is, but it would take me some thinking to show you what a millimeter looks like, because I do all my engineering work in inches. It has more to do with our established infrastructure than anything else (go ahead, find me a meterstick at a local store...good luck with that). Conversions don't really get hairy until you're doing a thermodynamics problem anyways.
Your'e right about coal - it's currently about two-thirds (more, actually) of our power production, and we can run off of that alone, given the growth model of the energy industry for another 200 years. Should be plenty of time to act, but we have got to be cutting consumption and exploring new technologies with some sense of urgency.
Coal is being made cleaner, and wind is definitely hot at the moment. What I've found though, is that I can live comfortably off of very little energy if I make a concerted effort. People live in West Africa with no power at all, and they're perfectly happy, and in many respects, have a perfectly good quality of life.
Agreed. If for no other reason than my real book is mine. No copyright issues, no DRM (if it comes to that), no subscription costs, etc. I have a print copy of my book, and I can write in it, spill coffee on it, and do whatever the hell else I want with it (short of photocopy and sell it).
It would be a much more effective quesiton if it was less general than "old tech". What, specifically, are you looking to recycle?
Wrong. The answer is Bangkok^(1/3).
Actually, that's not her. The actress was Amy Benedict, but you're right, still pretty darn good-looking.
This does raise another question...why are the primaries in Iowa so weighted as opposed to Ohio then? Ohio is noted for being an accurate amalgam of different demographics of the country (see wikipedia article).
Also interesting that while we would apparently give away this, one of our most basic rights, because we don't seem to care, it's notable that the rest of the world probably knows more about our candidates than the average American: From sustainabletechnologies.blogspot.com:
"Know what's funny about the rest of the world? They know a whole lot about us, even though we don't know much about them. I can't even tell you when Ghana's last national election was, but Ghanaians know who the different candidates are in ours, and their platforms. Humbled? You should be. I am."
hear hear
Even more unfortunate is the fact that our government will arrest any such rebels with far superior military force than any local militia could hope to muster, and send them to a prison to be tortured, interrogated, and likely tried as terrorists.
"What's the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter? A freedom fighter won."
I totally agree - it's not only our right as Americans, but outlined as a duty. Democracy only works if the people participate. If you don't participate, you lose your right to complain. Personally, the only way I would join any military would be if these rights were at stake, and if they were, I would join up in a heartbeat.
Where I go to school, your account simply gets disabled until you call to find out why. When I was an undergrad here, you got emails notifying you if you were sharing copyrighted material. Now, if you're simply running a p2p client (doesn't matter what you're sharing), your account is disabled, and you have to seek out the reasoning yourself.