Yes, but current RFID tags aren't currently intended to be imbeded in people and used for identification.
And actually, reprogrammable RFID tags might be the key to making them secure. Analogy time: my garage door opener has a remote. The remote has three buttons, so it can work with three different garage doors. I assumed that when the remote was programmed to work with the garage door opener, it simply registered the remote's ID with the opener unit, so I didn't understand what made three buttons necessary. So I asked the guy who installed the opener why I couldn't just register the same button with several garage door openers. He told me that for the sake of security, every time the remote sends its signal to the opening unit, the opener sends back a signal telling the remote what code to use next time. So the garage door remote changes keys every time it communicates with the opener. I'd think with a little effort, something like that could make RFID tags relatively secure.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but generally exporting PDFs from a word processing standpoint is fairly different from print drivers. I have PDF995 for windows (a print driver that creates a PDF), and the PDF is basically a picture of the document. OpenOffice, on the other hand, will let me export straight from a document to PDF. The file is smaller and renders better on a larger scale because it uses text rather than an image.
I've not used KDE's PDF printer, but since you get to it from the print menu, I'd think the result would be more similar to a PDF995 PDF than exporting straight to PDF using OpenOffice.
We used regular actors, not so much for their resemblance - as you can't copy a bunch of yellow characters - but becuase you can easily identify with them.
I don't know about you all, but the Simpsons aren't exactly a family I want to relate to in the first place. They're funny to watch, but when homer suddenly becomes a genius after getting a crayon removed from his brain through his nose, that's not exactly something I can identify with.
To quote myself: Provided it's difficult to falsify RFID tags (and I think that's the idea). If the system is falable, then any security uses go out the window. Current RFID may not be difficult to clone, but I doubt we'd see it used for wide spread security and penpointing criminals if it were easy to trick.
Let me start by stating I'm not thrilled about the idea of having such an identification system, but I think it might not be as bad as you think. There are a number of things that such an identfication system would be useful for:
Preventing identity theft. Provided it's difficult to falsify RFID tags (and I think that's the idea), you don't have to worry about losing credit cards.
Security Clearance. Whether it's to allow someone to drive your car, enter your house, turn on your computer, or enter a highly classified government facility, it would be a useful means of accurately identifying someone.
Alibi. In the case that you're accused of a crime (and innocent), records of your RFID tag could be used to verify your location at the time of the crime.
I could come up with a huge list of other novelties that would make life easier if we could be identified by a wave of our hands.
That said, I think such an identification system needs to be introduced at a time when citizens are weary of their government. Under the right circumstances, I can see citizens demanding that petty, victimless crimes be done away with, or sentences reduced. If the government is capable of catching every crime that is committed, and politicians still have to be concerned of what citizens want, citizens will not accept enforcement of the minor crimes that are committed without malice by all of us. I certainly would not want such an identification system implemented by a government that has no need to listen to its citizens.
Lastly, I remember reading some time back about a man who had an RFID tag in his hand, and used it to conrol everything in his house, from the security system to the light switches. He argued that an RFID tagging system kept Big Brother at bay. An RFID tag can be removed with a knife and some determination. Other identification systems that may be developed, such as eye scans (a la Minority Report) or DNA comparisons (GATTACA comes to mind), would be harder to circumvent.
So Google shouldn't create a useful tool because it might be abused? There are plenty of ways that employees can share data that employers would have a hard time stopping, but every one of them is deliberate. If an employee is sharing data they shouldn't be sharing, that's the employee's fault, not Google's.
From a networking standpoint, Google Desktop is as easy to block as any other protocol. I have no problem with companies banning Google desktop on their systems, but isn't it a bit extreme to say Google shouldn't have made a product that many people are using quite productively, just because they have to take efforts after their own employees abuse it?
I'm sure I'm about to get flamed, but I'm a proponent of outsourcing. Here's the bulldozer analogy I frequently use when discussing this topic:
Outsourcing is like a bulldozer. Not just because it's unstoppable, but because it's a tool that reduces the amount of resources necessary to complete a task. Before bulldozers, it would take dozens of men with shovels several days to clear the foundation for a new building. Once the bulldozer came around, the job could be done much more quickly and efficiently, so the men who had historically used shovels lost their jobs. However since the job could be completed more quickly with fewer men, that meant their could be more buildings built for less money. You don't hear people complaining about the invention of bulldozer's because men who used shovels lost their jobs, do you?
People act like all the money saved from every job that goes over seas goes straight into lining the pockets of business executives. While I'm sure the business execs are getting some extra cash out of the deal, most of the money is being reinvested in their company. So if a project can be completed for 1/3 the cost, likely there will be two projects instead of just one. That means there will be more coordinating positions, which are higher paying than the grunt work positions were in the first place.
Yes, some people lose their jobs in the process, and that's a pitty, but just as you can't expect contractors not to use bulldozers so that men with shovels will still have jobs, you can't expect business executives to ignore a powerful tool to keep people with a less valuable skill employed.
All that said, I do one a problem with outsourcing. As the countries we outsource to become more developed, that resource disappears.
When I was registering for college, my school promoted Dells. When you asked for specific information about computer details, you'd be directed to the University's Dell page, no matter what the question. The laptops Dell had available didn't meet my needs at the best price. I'm a bit of gamer and a programmer, and I wanted more power than Dell made available within my price range. I took a look at Compaq, however, and settled on a Presario X6000. If you don't know the X6000, it's a monster. It weighs in about 10 lbs and takes up a big portion of my backpack (it's a laptop with a numpad, if that gives you any idea). It's nice to be able to take my computer when I travel (which I often do), but you can imagine I seldom take it to class.
If my school had been telling me I had to take my laptop to class, then I'd probably be looking at two computers. If a computer is small enough to take everywhere, it probably doesn't have the resources for gaming, and compiling large programs would be a bear. Granted, I would have gone with a desktop for the second computer, as it's cheaper to get more power when it's not portable, but I wouldn't want my school telling me what needs my computer should meet.
Granted, the number of people in these circumstances will be relatively limited, but it still doesn't seem the university ought to be making such requirements.
I think the intellectual property concern is that users of proprietary software aren't (generally) going to be sued if the maker of that proprietary software gets in trouble for IP, whereas users of OSS are less likely to have the software provider as a shield.
It'll be an improvement on Windows. That doesn't really say much.
Personally I use Windows for a my Laptop and Linux for a server. When vista comes out I'm going to take a look at it. Unless vista really suprises me, I'm switching my laptop to linux and never looking back.
I'm in the process of setting up a zoneminder system, and the setup is fairly easy. It's extremely configurable for the knowledgeable, and for the newbies they have FC3 and Mandriva install CDs that install Linux and include Zoneminder, requiring only minimal configuration. For a relatively small price, there are even people willing to configure install CD's to your needs.
The system I'm setting up will be running only 3 cameras, but the whole project, computer, cameras, cabeling, etc. is looking like it will cost me under $1,000. I think zoneminder is a very good solution for security needs.
In my opinion this is completely absurd. I worked in a bookstore during the height of Davinci Code's success, and I sold tons of copies of HBHG to people who had read Davinci Code and wanted to get more factual information on the subject. Davinci Code was doing nothing to hurt the sales of HBHG, and from what I saw sales skyrocketed with help from Dan Brown's novel. Davinci Code even mentioned HBHG as a place to read up on the idea.
That said, it doesn't suprise me in the least that they'd sue. I mean, they might conceivably win their case, and who wouldn't want more money?
From what I'm hearing, anybody who buys any music of any kind is a sucker. FTA:
Will the consumer once again have to someday replace their iTunes track just like they had to replace their LP, cassette, and CD
They name every past form of music that has more or less gone obsolete. Were my parents suckers for buying LP's? What about cassettes? Was I a sucker to buy a CD? No, I was just a sucker for buying music with DRM - which I can burn to a CD as many times as I like. I can only burn the same CD 6 times, which is a logical step to prevent piracy, you can't create a CD and make enough copies to sell a ton, but for personal use that's more than enough.
I can see the argument that iTunes uses a lossy format, but the quality of the songs I bought from iTunes is better than any cassettes I've ever owned, better than any LPs after being played a hundred times (I have listened to some songs that many times), and there's no concern of getting them scratched like with CD's.
That's not to say DRM isn't annoying. I'd like to leave windows behind and switch to Linux, but I'm bound to Windows (or OSX) by Apple's DRM. However going back to past musical formats, I'm still doing pretty well. LPs could only be played on turntables, cassettes in tape decks, CD's opened up the computer as a feasible way to play music, but it was still focused on CD players. My iTunes music, conversely, can be played from my computer, my iPod (which goes everywhere), it can be burned and played in a CD player, if you have a casette adapter for your iPod, it can play in a casette player. I'd go so far as to say iTunes is the most versatile form of music ever to take root in our culture.
The author of the article seems to think that the appropriate way to get music is to buy a CD from your local music store, rip it, and return it. I don't see that as any different from pirating on BitTorrent or other p2p clients, except you paid a little bit (to the music store rather than the artist) and you have more control over the format of the file than if you donwload it.
Me? I'm sticking with iTunes. It's a good service with lots of music at a fair price. Perhaps it's not as great as I could wish it to be, but in my opinion it's the best way to date to get music in a way that is fair to the people responsible for making it.
Yes, but who gets further in life? The person who can produce an A by skill, and consequently have more time for other things, or the person who spends all of their time focused on the A? You can bet when Alice gets to the workplace, her boss isn't going to be upset that she's getting her work done faster than Bob.
I go to college in a town about 4 hours away from my home. The first few trips, while I was learning the route back and forth, I used mapquest directions. In order to see what came next, I would have to take my eyes off the road, search for my directions, then try to read my directions while I was driving. About 2 months after I left, my parents got me a Garmin StreetPilot i3 as a late highschool graduation present.
The street pilot uses a suction cup to stick to my windshield, and has a chord that plugs into my cigarette lighter. The controls are simple, just a wheel and two buttons. It has a map that shows where I am. When it's not navigating, it shows my speed and direction. When it is navigating, it shows my estimated arrival time, and the distance to my next turn. It also speaks outloud with instructions like "Go 103 miles, then turn left." And then when you get close to the next turn it will say "Go 500 feet and then turn left." It's quick to glance up and see how far I have until I need to be concerned about getting ready to turn/exit. If I forget to tell it where I'm going before I leave, it takes me about 10 seconds to reach up and pick a location from my favorites. I can't imagine typing in an address while driving, but picking a location from a list is much less distracting than trying to read directions on paper while driving.
After getting my GPS, I decided to take an unfamiliar route back to college. I was able to keep my eyes on the road the whole time and I didn't get the least bit lost. Now I take it anytime I go someplace new, and I feel very confident that I'm a safer driver with it than without it.
You're exactly right. The number one named brand of 2005 defied the United States Government, risking all sorts of possible reprecussions just to get more recognition. Surely they're not actually trying to uphold their customers' trust... That would be ludicrous.
FTA: Can you imagine world without data compression? And where you never have to back anything up?
I see how this lends itself to no data compression (in a world where everything originates on your computer, and nothing has to be transfered over a network or the internet), but is there a reason these drives are incapable of failing?
Wouldn't giving up be buying a license to use their patents? If the patents are valid until Jobs proves otherwise, buying Burst.com would mean acquiring the rights to license out those patents, which could mean income for Apple. If other people decide to license it from them, it would be profitable.
I'm not saying Apple will, or even should buy Burst.com, but buying Burst seems like less of a loss than licensing their patent.
I'm with you on that. Personally I seldom buy singles from the iTMS, even if I think the album only has a couple of songs I want. Some of my favorite songs are the ones that I didn't know I was getting. I have a total of 0 songs on my iPod that I haven't listened to and rated. I buy full albums and force myself to listen to every song all the way through even if I decide I don't like it. Once I've listened to everything, I mix things up a bit.
I couldn't really care less about ripping CDs, except that a lot of the music I listen to is older, and iTMS doesn't seem to carry it. Ever heard of The Beatles? Led Zeppelin? AC/DC? iTunes has covers of some of their music by other bands, but you can't download it by the original band. My local CD store has plenty of stuff by these bands.
If the RIAA is able to make everything available through the online music stores, I might consider bowing down to this (after ripping every CD I already own but haven't ripped).
I do think the RIAA's argument, if successful, will be the death of CDs. How often do you see somebody carrying a portable CD player? Occasionally, but my guess is they've usually got mixed CDs anyway. Nobody wants to listen to one band for an hour any more, and they don't want to have to switch CD's and hunt down the next track they want to listen to.
Portable music players are also becoming increasingly popular as home music players. My iPod hooks up to a set of speakers and plays my music in my house, my car, or anywhere else I can plug it in. As Apple pointed out in a marketing scheme a while back, the iPod (or other portable music devices, if you're not apple's marketing team) is the easiest way to carry around a ton of music. Nobody wants to carry around 60+ CD's to compensate for an iPod filled less than 20% to capacity.
And of course if the RIAA succeeds in making this the norm, CD sales will plummet, and they'll blame it on piartes, rather than their own stupidity.
The reason to run the cable out to 62000 miles (far beyond geosynchronous orbit) is to be able to hang a counterweight on the outboard end and to have that provide sufficient tension to keep the cable up
That explains it. I read there was a counterweight in space, and I was thinking the idea was that would function like a pulley system, the weight falls and brings things up the elevator. That obviously didn't make sense, so I did a few quick calculations to find that gravity would be about 1 millionth as strong at that range. But I guess that's the idea, if we're trying to use something that won't fall back to Earth, even when we pull on it.
The summary mentions that computer addictions are akin to gambling addictions, rather than drug addictions. Try telling a recovering gambler that they aren't addicted. Perhaps you're right that it's not quite the right word, but I certainly think they fall into similar categories:
Drugs are, by and large, addictive on a chemical level. There are, as you stated, physical withdrawl symptons. While the effects of gambling addictions or internet addictions may not be chemical, they can both be a serious detriment to the rest of a person's lifestyle, and be incredibly hard to give up, even just for a short period.
Slashdot Mirror
And actually, reprogrammable RFID tags might be the key to making them secure. Analogy time: my garage door opener has a remote. The remote has three buttons, so it can work with three different garage doors. I assumed that when the remote was programmed to work with the garage door opener, it simply registered the remote's ID with the opener unit, so I didn't understand what made three buttons necessary. So I asked the guy who installed the opener why I couldn't just register the same button with several garage door openers. He told me that for the sake of security, every time the remote sends its signal to the opening unit, the opener sends back a signal telling the remote what code to use next time. So the garage door remote changes keys every time it communicates with the opener. I'd think with a little effort, something like that could make RFID tags relatively secure.
I've not used KDE's PDF printer, but since you get to it from the print menu, I'd think the result would be more similar to a PDF995 PDF than exporting straight to PDF using OpenOffice.
I don't know about you all, but the Simpsons aren't exactly a family I want to relate to in the first place. They're funny to watch, but when homer suddenly becomes a genius after getting a crayon removed from his brain through his nose, that's not exactly something I can identify with.
To quote myself: Provided it's difficult to falsify RFID tags (and I think that's the idea). If the system is falable, then any security uses go out the window. Current RFID may not be difficult to clone, but I doubt we'd see it used for wide spread security and penpointing criminals if it were easy to trick.
Preventing identity theft. Provided it's difficult to falsify RFID tags (and I think that's the idea), you don't have to worry about losing credit cards.
Security Clearance. Whether it's to allow someone to drive your car, enter your house, turn on your computer, or enter a highly classified government facility, it would be a useful means of accurately identifying someone.
Alibi. In the case that you're accused of a crime (and innocent), records of your RFID tag could be used to verify your location at the time of the crime.
I could come up with a huge list of other novelties that would make life easier if we could be identified by a wave of our hands.
That said, I think such an identification system needs to be introduced at a time when citizens are weary of their government. Under the right circumstances, I can see citizens demanding that petty, victimless crimes be done away with, or sentences reduced. If the government is capable of catching every crime that is committed, and politicians still have to be concerned of what citizens want, citizens will not accept enforcement of the minor crimes that are committed without malice by all of us. I certainly would not want such an identification system implemented by a government that has no need to listen to its citizens.
Lastly, I remember reading some time back about a man who had an RFID tag in his hand, and used it to conrol everything in his house, from the security system to the light switches. He argued that an RFID tagging system kept Big Brother at bay. An RFID tag can be removed with a knife and some determination. Other identification systems that may be developed, such as eye scans (a la Minority Report) or DNA comparisons (GATTACA comes to mind), would be harder to circumvent.
From a networking standpoint, Google Desktop is as easy to block as any other protocol. I have no problem with companies banning Google desktop on their systems, but isn't it a bit extreme to say Google shouldn't have made a product that many people are using quite productively, just because they have to take efforts after their own employees abuse it?
Outsourcing is like a bulldozer. Not just because it's unstoppable, but because it's a tool that reduces the amount of resources necessary to complete a task. Before bulldozers, it would take dozens of men with shovels several days to clear the foundation for a new building. Once the bulldozer came around, the job could be done much more quickly and efficiently, so the men who had historically used shovels lost their jobs. However since the job could be completed more quickly with fewer men, that meant their could be more buildings built for less money. You don't hear people complaining about the invention of bulldozer's because men who used shovels lost their jobs, do you?
People act like all the money saved from every job that goes over seas goes straight into lining the pockets of business executives. While I'm sure the business execs are getting some extra cash out of the deal, most of the money is being reinvested in their company. So if a project can be completed for 1/3 the cost, likely there will be two projects instead of just one. That means there will be more coordinating positions, which are higher paying than the grunt work positions were in the first place.
Yes, some people lose their jobs in the process, and that's a pitty, but just as you can't expect contractors not to use bulldozers so that men with shovels will still have jobs, you can't expect business executives to ignore a powerful tool to keep people with a less valuable skill employed.
All that said, I do one a problem with outsourcing. As the countries we outsource to become more developed, that resource disappears.
Just like people won't be loyal to the windows-idea no matter what.
If my school had been telling me I had to take my laptop to class, then I'd probably be looking at two computers. If a computer is small enough to take everywhere, it probably doesn't have the resources for gaming, and compiling large programs would be a bear. Granted, I would have gone with a desktop for the second computer, as it's cheaper to get more power when it's not portable, but I wouldn't want my school telling me what needs my computer should meet.
Granted, the number of people in these circumstances will be relatively limited, but it still doesn't seem the university ought to be making such requirements.
I think the intellectual property concern is that users of proprietary software aren't (generally) going to be sued if the maker of that proprietary software gets in trouble for IP, whereas users of OSS are less likely to have the software provider as a shield.
Personally I use Windows for a my Laptop and Linux for a server. When vista comes out I'm going to take a look at it. Unless vista really suprises me, I'm switching my laptop to linux and never looking back.
The system I'm setting up will be running only 3 cameras, but the whole project, computer, cameras, cabeling, etc. is looking like it will cost me under $1,000. I think zoneminder is a very good solution for security needs.
That said, it doesn't suprise me in the least that they'd sue. I mean, they might conceivably win their case, and who wouldn't want more money?
I think the idea is that the tissue may not be as healthy as it's supposed to be.
Maybe Apple will finally decide to port iTunes to Linux if they see that there's a market.
Will the consumer once again have to someday replace their iTunes track just like they had to replace their LP, cassette, and CD
They name every past form of music that has more or less gone obsolete. Were my parents suckers for buying LP's? What about cassettes? Was I a sucker to buy a CD? No, I was just a sucker for buying music with DRM - which I can burn to a CD as many times as I like. I can only burn the same CD 6 times, which is a logical step to prevent piracy, you can't create a CD and make enough copies to sell a ton, but for personal use that's more than enough.
I can see the argument that iTunes uses a lossy format, but the quality of the songs I bought from iTunes is better than any cassettes I've ever owned, better than any LPs after being played a hundred times (I have listened to some songs that many times), and there's no concern of getting them scratched like with CD's.
That's not to say DRM isn't annoying. I'd like to leave windows behind and switch to Linux, but I'm bound to Windows (or OSX) by Apple's DRM. However going back to past musical formats, I'm still doing pretty well. LPs could only be played on turntables, cassettes in tape decks, CD's opened up the computer as a feasible way to play music, but it was still focused on CD players. My iTunes music, conversely, can be played from my computer, my iPod (which goes everywhere), it can be burned and played in a CD player, if you have a casette adapter for your iPod, it can play in a casette player. I'd go so far as to say iTunes is the most versatile form of music ever to take root in our culture.
The author of the article seems to think that the appropriate way to get music is to buy a CD from your local music store, rip it, and return it. I don't see that as any different from pirating on BitTorrent or other p2p clients, except you paid a little bit (to the music store rather than the artist) and you have more control over the format of the file than if you donwload it.
Me? I'm sticking with iTunes. It's a good service with lots of music at a fair price. Perhaps it's not as great as I could wish it to be, but in my opinion it's the best way to date to get music in a way that is fair to the people responsible for making it.
Yes, but who gets further in life? The person who can produce an A by skill, and consequently have more time for other things, or the person who spends all of their time focused on the A? You can bet when Alice gets to the workplace, her boss isn't going to be upset that she's getting her work done faster than Bob.
The street pilot uses a suction cup to stick to my windshield, and has a chord that plugs into my cigarette lighter. The controls are simple, just a wheel and two buttons. It has a map that shows where I am. When it's not navigating, it shows my speed and direction. When it is navigating, it shows my estimated arrival time, and the distance to my next turn. It also speaks outloud with instructions like "Go 103 miles, then turn left." And then when you get close to the next turn it will say "Go 500 feet and then turn left." It's quick to glance up and see how far I have until I need to be concerned about getting ready to turn/exit. If I forget to tell it where I'm going before I leave, it takes me about 10 seconds to reach up and pick a location from my favorites. I can't imagine typing in an address while driving, but picking a location from a list is much less distracting than trying to read directions on paper while driving.
After getting my GPS, I decided to take an unfamiliar route back to college. I was able to keep my eyes on the road the whole time and I didn't get the least bit lost. Now I take it anytime I go someplace new, and I feel very confident that I'm a safer driver with it than without it.
You're exactly right. The number one named brand of 2005 defied the United States Government, risking all sorts of possible reprecussions just to get more recognition. Surely they're not actually trying to uphold their customers' trust... That would be ludicrous.
I see how this lends itself to no data compression (in a world where everything originates on your computer, and nothing has to be transfered over a network or the internet), but is there a reason these drives are incapable of failing?
I'm not saying Apple will, or even should buy Burst.com, but buying Burst seems like less of a loss than licensing their patent.
I'm with you on that. Personally I seldom buy singles from the iTMS, even if I think the album only has a couple of songs I want. Some of my favorite songs are the ones that I didn't know I was getting. I have a total of 0 songs on my iPod that I haven't listened to and rated. I buy full albums and force myself to listen to every song all the way through even if I decide I don't like it. Once I've listened to everything, I mix things up a bit.
I do think the RIAA's argument, if successful, will be the death of CDs. How often do you see somebody carrying a portable CD player? Occasionally, but my guess is they've usually got mixed CDs anyway. Nobody wants to listen to one band for an hour any more, and they don't want to have to switch CD's and hunt down the next track they want to listen to.
Portable music players are also becoming increasingly popular as home music players. My iPod hooks up to a set of speakers and plays my music in my house, my car, or anywhere else I can plug it in. As Apple pointed out in a marketing scheme a while back, the iPod (or other portable music devices, if you're not apple's marketing team) is the easiest way to carry around a ton of music. Nobody wants to carry around 60+ CD's to compensate for an iPod filled less than 20% to capacity.
And of course if the RIAA succeeds in making this the norm, CD sales will plummet, and they'll blame it on piartes, rather than their own stupidity.
That explains it. I read there was a counterweight in space, and I was thinking the idea was that would function like a pulley system, the weight falls and brings things up the elevator. That obviously didn't make sense, so I did a few quick calculations to find that gravity would be about 1 millionth as strong at that range. But I guess that's the idea, if we're trying to use something that won't fall back to Earth, even when we pull on it.
Drugs are, by and large, addictive on a chemical level. There are, as you stated, physical withdrawl symptons. While the effects of gambling addictions or internet addictions may not be chemical, they can both be a serious detriment to the rest of a person's lifestyle, and be incredibly hard to give up, even just for a short period.