I wonder if these same people who complain about "the governement" being too intrusive or spending too much to fight crime/terrorism are the same ones who will scream about "the governement" not doing enough when they or their children are the ones that get victimized?
The kind of people that pay attention to Computer World are geeks who only read about and have fantasies about the real world. They would never interact with other people to the point of actually attending an event like the Super Bowl. So for all those who attended the game, the testing was still completely discrete!:)
It depends on the situation. Every sensor has weaknesses. We use a variety to try to minimize the weak spots. For these area, it is still a well trained technician that is the real asset. The machines are only aids. And just for the record, those of us working this project understand very well what to do with the information and take pride in what we do.
Unfortuantely, no one system tsts for everything and is 100% effective and accurate all the time. We use a variety of systems to try to minimize the weak spots. In this area, ultimately it is the highly trained people operating the systems that are the real asset. The hardware and technolgy are only aids. That may change in the future as the hardware and technology get better, but it is true for where we are today.
Sorry no conspiracy here.
1) The project isn't top secret or I wouldn't have given some reporter an interview on it
2) Believe it or not, the system has been in development for a few months and the regular season was over before it was ready to be field tested.
3) If the system failed, no one was endangered because in the event of failure we would just go back to the usual way of doing business.
Slashdot Mirror
Well said.
I wonder if these same people who complain about "the governement" being too intrusive or spending too much to fight crime/terrorism are the same ones who will scream about "the governement" not doing enough when they or their children are the ones that get victimized?
The kind of people that pay attention to Computer World are geeks who only read about and have fantasies about the real world. They would never interact with other people to the point of actually attending an event like the Super Bowl. So for all those who attended the game, the testing was still completely discrete! :)
We identified about a dozen such patients at the game.
It depends on the situation. Every sensor has weaknesses. We use a variety to try to minimize the weak spots. For these area, it is still a well trained technician that is the real asset. The machines are only aids. And just for the record, those of us working this project understand very well what to do with the information and take pride in what we do.
Unfortuantely, no one system tsts for everything and is 100% effective and accurate all the time. We use a variety of systems to try to minimize the weak spots. In this area, ultimately it is the highly trained people operating the systems that are the real asset. The hardware and technolgy are only aids. That may change in the future as the hardware and technology get better, but it is true for where we are today.
Sorry to disagree with your theory, but none of us working this project got into the game. Heck, most of us didn't even get to watch it on TV.
Sorry no conspiracy here. 1) The project isn't top secret or I wouldn't have given some reporter an interview on it 2) Believe it or not, the system has been in development for a few months and the regular season was over before it was ready to be field tested. 3) If the system failed, no one was endangered because in the event of failure we would just go back to the usual way of doing business.
All the sensors and detectors have been tested in other places. What is being tested here is the system to network those sensors.