I think the US needs to tell Chinese companies the same thing when they are putting lead paint on toys or melamine in milk or whatever other things they are trying to pass off to the American public.
While I respect the right of the Chinese to decide their own laws and policies, I am pretty frustrated with the US's lack of courage to take a stance against the kind of things that the Chinese are trying to get away with, including tainted products and intellectual property theft.
I think this is an exaggeration, but the US is heavily reliant on China to keep the dollar strong. The economy of both countries would suffer miserably because China would no longer be able to export goods to the US and the dollar would be incredibly weak. Eventually, the US manufacturing base would grow, US exports would soar, and the economy would recover. Unfortunately, in the mean time, unemployment would also sky rocket, and the standard of living would rapidly fall.
The problem is that content providers often want the best of both worlds. I bet if your disk becomes corrupted or unreadable, they will make you pay for another one. If they want to claim they are licensing it, they should be required to allow you to receive a working copy if yours becomes corrupted. This is rarely the case. Either it should be a license or it should be a sale, and it should only be tied to physical media if it is a sale. Try getting a free replacement download of a game or song if it becomes corrupted.
So, content providers want to prevent you from selling content by saying it's licensed, but they won't replace the copy if it becomes corrupted.
I think the more proper analogy, if you buy into the RIAA's philosophy, would be renting a car. If the rental car dies, you'll get another one because you are paying for the use of the car, not the actual car. Now, if the RIAA wants to sell us the media, we should be able to make a copy of it in case of failure. If we are licensing the use of it, they should replace it. They shouldn't be able to have it both ways.
While this robot is pretty neat and may work for one or so people, I don't believe it will be practical enough to become widespread. It seems that widespread videoconferencing would cheaper and more practical than deploying more than a few of these per organization. I can just see everyone watching video of everyone else's robot. Also, my broadband seems to be down on the order of minutes/day, so I can imagine what it would be doing or where it would be stuck during such downtime.
Don't get me wrong, I think that this guy is clever and inventive and that such robots definitely have their place. I just don't think it's presently a viable solution for telecommuting.
You're partially right that the "official voice" should be a sanctioned message, but a blanket ban on all underlings being quoted is a bit fascist.
I work for the federal government, and reporters conduct interviews with our staff quite often. These interviews are usually arranged through a public affairs official, and I'm sure someone saying something not inline with the "official voice" would face reprimand.
However, we can also expect (in most cases) whistle-blower protection if we report improprieties, especially after efforts to correct them through official channels.
Maybe it's just the particular system I'm running for my media pc (WinXP with an old Radeon 9600Pro video card), but I cannot get flash video to run full screen on my TV. Essentially all other video has no problem fitting nicely on my TV by simply specifying theater mode in ATI Catalyst for the TV, which is set as a secondary monitor. Does anyone else have this problem or know of a work-around?
At one time or another, I'm sure that the RIAA has done good deeds and even bolstered some artists' careers, but the modern-day RIAA epitomizes the self-serving, greedy corporate monsters that it represents. They have negotiated unreasonably exorbitant royalties including royalties for blank recording media that may not even contain music. The artists usually get a disproportionately small cut of those royalties, which are (or at least appear to be) allotted to overpaid executives, armies of lawyers, and other self-serving corporate interests.
I don't condone the 'theft' of intellectual property, but I definitely can't feel sorry for the corporate dinosaurs who only pretend to care about the artists. I truly believe that the RIAA would better serve its members by using the money they spend fighting unauthorized music downloads to instead develop better business models. The typical music down-loader is willing to spend money on entertainment and isn't just trying to cheat the recording company.
If you watched the HBO Documentary, then you would know that the machines that count paper ballots can also be hacked. The only advantage to paper ballots is that they can be audited using a hand-count. The solution for a fair and secure election process is not related to the voting format but to the process by which votes are collected, counted, and tallied. The process needs to be open, transparent, and auditable to ensure a fair count.
There is NO WAY anybody in their right mind would choose a chip that's clocked 200 mhz higher, but with 512k of cache over one with 1024k, but clocked 200 mhz lower. Can you tell the diffrence between a chip thats 2.4 ghz and one thats 2.6? Probably not. Can you tell the diffrence between a chip with 512k cache and one with 1024k? Uh, yeah.
Have you looked at the benchmarks? In many cases, the opposite is true of what you are saying for AMD processors because the memory controller is on the chip. Look at the pronounced difference between AM2 X2 3800+ & 4200+. They both have 2x512KB L2 caches, but the 4200 is clocked at 2.2GHz v. 2.0GHz for 3800+. However, the X2 4000+ runs at 2.0GHz and has 2x1MB L2 caches, but it barely outperforms the 3800+.
I really hate when people pull numbers or results out of their ass.
Brand loyalty, especially for smaller companies (underdogs), can promote competition. While I don't completely subscribe to brand loyalty, if a smaller company offers a comparable product at a competitive price, I will tend to buy from them. Smaller companies often cater to the customer's needs to encourage brand loyalty.
Despite previously buying AMD processors ~90% of the time, I cannot justify buying an AMD X2 over an Intel Core 2 Duo. I do applaud AMD for cutting the price for their processors, but Intel has definitely regained the price/performance edge. Hopefully, AMD will answer before I buy a Core 2 Duo.
No, they don't take back your old battery, then give you a new one. They first send you a new one, then you send the old one back in the provided box using a pre-paid shipping label. The instructions I received from Dell with my replacement battery even said the shipment would be refused if more than one battery was included. It's not like they're dying to get the old ones back since they (ultimately Sony, I'm sure) have to pay for disposal.
While implementing RFID does add a layer of forgery protection, it is only a matter of time until someone finds a way to exploit the security features. Currently, if someone forges a passport, they only need to incorporate their picture into it. Once cracked, a forged or hacked RFID chip can simply be incorporated into a forged passport.
Although I'm not too keen about passports containing RFID chips, I'm pleasantly surprised that the gov't actually considered public feedback and did a decent job of implementing security features. The problem, however, is that people tend to become overly confident and reliant in such technology. Image the possibilities if (when) the ability to alter the RFID chip is realized. One scenario that's not often considered is one in which a hacker could cause an unsuspecting victim to be scrutinized by authorities by modifying the RFID data to differ from the printed info. Although this example may not be as dangerous as those involving forgery, it sure could provide an advantage to an unscrupulous business competitor.
The State Dept. has only confirmed that one the 13 or 14 passport agencies, the Colorado Passport Agency, is issuing passports with RFID chips. This agency began issuing them on Aug 14, and since all agencies are expected to be issuing them this year, there may be more agencies doing so.
How are other analogous situations handled? Let's say someone is 'tricked' into giving up their ATM card pin #, and someone withdraws money from their account without consent. Who's liable? Shouldn't the liability be similar online as offline?
Also, the criminals should be the ones paying restitution.
Financial institutions have the responsibility to protect us from unauthorized access to our accounts. It should then be the burden of the institution to show that the account holder was at fault.
However, We ALL have to take responsibility
As a consumer,
1) never enter personal information in response to e-mail initiated requests, etc.
2) report suspicious emails, websites, etc.
3) Use common sense (nevermind, that'll never work)
As for the banks,
1) Provide security measures to reduce chances of phising losses; while authentication is not perfect, it's a decent start (althoug I find it pretty annoying)
2) Educate their customers
3) Need to offer an easy, user-friendly way to report phishing (PayPal does a good job of this)
4) Make their policies clear; if they won't cover losses due to phishing attacks, we should know before putting our money in their hands
5) If they can't sustain the losses, then they need a new business model; what do banks do with those $30 fees that they love to ambush everyone with
Now the Government,
1) NEEDS TO PROSECUTE OFFENDERS by enforcing existing laws; it's amazing how apathetic the authorities are towards identity theft, etc.
2) Ensure laws are adequate for protecting consumers and prosecuting offenders
3) Educate the people
As far as I can tell, IE doesn't really get uninstalled (or at least this used to be the case). It's more like it's hidden instead of being removed from the hard drive.
Slashdot Mirror
Your logic and numbers are flawed. As fewer people are vaccinated, the chance of getting it will increase dramatically.
Yep! My first thought when reading the /. article was "That sounds miserable."
I think the US needs to tell Chinese companies the same thing when they are putting lead paint on toys or melamine in milk or whatever other things they are trying to pass off to the American public. While I respect the right of the Chinese to decide their own laws and policies, I am pretty frustrated with the US's lack of courage to take a stance against the kind of things that the Chinese are trying to get away with, including tainted products and intellectual property theft.
ITA. That's just what I was about to write.
And you'd be producing a million widgets a day by tomorrow, right? YOU gotta be kidding ME.
I think this is an exaggeration, but the US is heavily reliant on China to keep the dollar strong. The economy of both countries would suffer miserably because China would no longer be able to export goods to the US and the dollar would be incredibly weak. Eventually, the US manufacturing base would grow, US exports would soar, and the economy would recover. Unfortunately, in the mean time, unemployment would also sky rocket, and the standard of living would rapidly fall.
The problem is that content providers often want the best of both worlds. I bet if your disk becomes corrupted or unreadable, they will make you pay for another one. If they want to claim they are licensing it, they should be required to allow you to receive a working copy if yours becomes corrupted. This is rarely the case. Either it should be a license or it should be a sale, and it should only be tied to physical media if it is a sale. Try getting a free replacement download of a game or song if it becomes corrupted. So, content providers want to prevent you from selling content by saying it's licensed, but they won't replace the copy if it becomes corrupted.
You're joking right? The question you pose is: "is the capability to actually image chemical structures practically useful?"
It's the frequency shift of the cantilever from its natural resonance frequency. And, yes, the scale bar is angstroms.
I think the more proper analogy, if you buy into the RIAA's philosophy, would be renting a car. If the rental car dies, you'll get another one because you are paying for the use of the car, not the actual car. Now, if the RIAA wants to sell us the media, we should be able to make a copy of it in case of failure. If we are licensing the use of it, they should replace it. They shouldn't be able to have it both ways.
Are we sure this is a good idea?
While this robot is pretty neat and may work for one or so people, I don't believe it will be practical enough to become widespread. It seems that widespread videoconferencing would cheaper and more practical than deploying more than a few of these per organization. I can just see everyone watching video of everyone else's robot. Also, my broadband seems to be down on the order of minutes/day, so I can imagine what it would be doing or where it would be stuck during such downtime.
Don't get me wrong, I think that this guy is clever and inventive and that such robots definitely have their place. I just don't think it's presently a viable solution for telecommuting.
You're partially right that the "official voice" should be a sanctioned message, but a blanket ban on all underlings being quoted is a bit fascist.
I work for the federal government, and reporters conduct interviews with our staff quite often. These interviews are usually arranged through a public affairs official, and I'm sure someone saying something not inline with the "official voice" would face reprimand.
However, we can also expect (in most cases) whistle-blower protection if we report improprieties, especially after efforts to correct them through official channels.
Maybe it's just the particular system I'm running for my media pc (WinXP with an old Radeon 9600Pro video card), but I cannot get flash video to run full screen on my TV. Essentially all other video has no problem fitting nicely on my TV by simply specifying theater mode in ATI Catalyst for the TV, which is set as a secondary monitor. Does anyone else have this problem or know of a work-around?
I don't condone the 'theft' of intellectual property, but I definitely can't feel sorry for the corporate dinosaurs who only pretend to care about the artists. I truly believe that the RIAA would better serve its members by using the money they spend fighting unauthorized music downloads to instead develop better business models. The typical music down-loader is willing to spend money on entertainment and isn't just trying to cheat the recording company.
The RIAA needs to wake-up to the digital age!
If you watched the HBO Documentary, then you would know that the machines that count paper ballots can also be hacked. The only advantage to paper ballots is that they can be audited using a hand-count. The solution for a fair and secure election process is not related to the voting format but to the process by which votes are collected, counted, and tallied. The process needs to be open, transparent, and auditable to ensure a fair count.
There is NO WAY anybody in their right mind would choose a chip that's clocked 200 mhz higher, but with 512k of cache over one with 1024k, but clocked 200 mhz lower. Can you tell the diffrence between a chip thats 2.4 ghz and one thats 2.6? Probably not. Can you tell the diffrence between a chip with 512k cache and one with 1024k? Uh, yeah.
Have you looked at the benchmarks? In many cases, the opposite is true of what you are saying for AMD processors because the memory controller is on the chip. Look at the pronounced difference between AM2 X2 3800+ & 4200+. They both have 2x512KB L2 caches, but the 4200 is clocked at 2.2GHz v. 2.0GHz for 3800+. However, the X2 4000+ runs at 2.0GHz and has 2x1MB L2 caches, but it barely outperforms the 3800+.
I really hate when people pull numbers or results out of their ass.Brand loyalty, especially for smaller companies (underdogs), can promote competition. While I don't completely subscribe to brand loyalty, if a smaller company offers a comparable product at a competitive price, I will tend to buy from them. Smaller companies often cater to the customer's needs to encourage brand loyalty.
Despite previously buying AMD processors ~90% of the time, I cannot justify buying an AMD X2 over an Intel Core 2 Duo. I do applaud AMD for cutting the price for their processors, but Intel has definitely regained the price/performance edge. Hopefully, AMD will answer before I buy a Core 2 Duo.
No, they don't take back your old battery, then give you a new one. They first send you a new one, then you send the old one back in the provided box using a pre-paid shipping label. The instructions I received from Dell with my replacement battery even said the shipment would be refused if more than one battery was included. It's not like they're dying to get the old ones back since they (ultimately Sony, I'm sure) have to pay for disposal.
While implementing RFID does add a layer of forgery protection, it is only a matter of time until someone finds a way to exploit the security features. Currently, if someone forges a passport, they only need to incorporate their picture into it. Once cracked, a forged or hacked RFID chip can simply be incorporated into a forged passport.
Although I'm not too keen about passports containing RFID chips, I'm pleasantly surprised that the gov't actually considered public feedback and did a decent job of implementing security features. The problem, however, is that people tend to become overly confident and reliant in such technology. Image the possibilities if (when) the ability to alter the RFID chip is realized. One scenario that's not often considered is one in which a hacker could cause an unsuspecting victim to be scrutinized by authorities by modifying the RFID data to differ from the printed info. Although this example may not be as dangerous as those involving forgery, it sure could provide an advantage to an unscrupulous business competitor.
The State Dept. has only confirmed that one the 13 or 14 passport agencies, the Colorado Passport Agency, is issuing passports with RFID chips. This agency began issuing them on Aug 14, and since all agencies are expected to be issuing them this year, there may be more agencies doing so.How are other analogous situations handled? Let's say someone is 'tricked' into giving up their ATM card pin #, and someone withdraws money from their account without consent. Who's liable? Shouldn't the liability be similar online as offline? Also, the criminals should be the ones paying restitution.
Financial institutions have the responsibility to protect us from unauthorized access to our accounts. It should then be the burden of the institution to show that the account holder was at fault.
However, We ALL have to take responsibility
As a consumer,
1) never enter personal information in response to e-mail initiated requests, etc. 2) report suspicious emails, websites, etc. 3) Use common sense (nevermind, that'll never work)
As for the banks,
1) Provide security measures to reduce chances of phising losses; while authentication is not perfect, it's a decent start (althoug I find it pretty annoying) 2) Educate their customers 3) Need to offer an easy, user-friendly way to report phishing (PayPal does a good job of this) 4) Make their policies clear; if they won't cover losses due to phishing attacks, we should know before putting our money in their hands 5) If they can't sustain the losses, then they need a new business model; what do banks do with those $30 fees that they love to ambush everyone with
Now the Government,
1) NEEDS TO PROSECUTE OFFENDERS by enforcing existing laws; it's amazing how apathetic the authorities are towards identity theft, etc. 2) Ensure laws are adequate for protecting consumers and prosecuting offenders 3) Educate the people
As far as I can tell, IE doesn't really get uninstalled (or at least this used to be the case). It's more like it's hidden instead of being removed from the hard drive.