"$100 bills for shims to even out that one slightly off leg on the desk"
I've had this great new idea! We could put the desk legs on flat, round metal disks that are screwed in to the leg of the desk, with a locknut to keep it where we want it. I call them "leveling pads".
Since I haven't started manufacturing them yet [the patent lawyer wants his money first before I can make anything], could you please send a stack of $100 bills over? My desk has one leg that is about an inch shorter than the others, and it is really ticking me off!
Obviously you didn't write that fanfic, because we all know that there would be no arts if there weren't strong copyright laws that reward the big money ... oops creative artists.
Now fess up, What did you do with the author? ;-)
Or maybe you forgot to copyright it? Yeah, that's the ticket!
Of course it's not negligent. They even let people run Windows and connect to the Internet! :-(
Seriously, though, on the early Internet, the whole thing was open. You used one connection to route to another. This isn't as apparent today, since routers and switches on the backbone are now dedicated devices. But we are getting back to that model with things like torrents, which let the end nodes participate in Internet physical layer connectivity.
ISPs don't like that, because they want to charge more for being a full participant on the Internet. "Whaddaya mean, I can't run my own email server on the static IP that you gave me? Watch me!" Someday, someone will sue them for false advertising, because they aren't delivering the whole Internet, but just a small slice of it.
Someday, it will be common for end nodes to control their own social network functions, too, and we will see a revival of the old Fidonet and other mail/topic networks. There is nothing new under the sun.
But that's another bee in the **AA's bonnet, isn't it?
Animals will now have to watch that they don't get injured in a manner that violates this patent, or they will owe royalties. And how is a chicken going to come up with the corn to pay this, or a cow the moolah to settle the debt?
To try to make it as easy as possible - I have addressed this in other interviews that I have had - what it amounts to is there has been a big fuss since the deliberation that prior art was not considered. Prior art was considered.
So just quit fussing, youse guyse. He knows what he's doing and you're wrong!
The truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing but the truth
Maybe next time, Samsung will be able to use ALL its evidence. I don't care how late they were, they should get to respond to last-minute evidence brought in by Apple.
I note that nicotine used to be used widely in organic farming as a pest-killer. It worked very well.
It is now no longer used in organic farming because it is too toxic. Changing delivery systems won't really help with the nicotine. It might help with the other carcinogens that smoking produces, but not with the most toxic substance in cigarettes.
I smoked for years. Loved it. I quit in 1976. Hardest thing I've ever done. Haven't had a craving for months. I suspect I should stay stopped.
You got that right. They set their rates based on the actuarial tables, and then winnow out the folks that make the actuarial tables less profitable.
My current (mis)insurance company is great at denying claims, forgetting claims for a few months, reversing denial of claims, telling me my claims are not eligible for payment because I have files too many of them, and then starting all over again. Apparently, their health care professionals, who have never seen me or talked to me, know more about my case than the professionals that are actually treating me. I keep calling that medical malpractice, but I haven't found anyone who agrees with me.
They were supposed to pay on the same rules as my previous insurance company, but their rules keep changing besides not complying with the rules that they are supposed to follow. Imagine my surprise when I found out that they are owned by my previous insurance company.
Why aren't the insurance companies sharing data with the government?
Funny that the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) isn't sharing data with the government. Trade secret, perhaps? Loss of economic advantage. maybe? Just corporate stubbornness about letting anybody else get an advantage? Did you want fries with that?
It has always baffled me that police officers want to know if you are insured. Part of the requirements of passing a law requiring me to have car insurance should be that the insurance companies open up their databases to the authorities, so that they can KNOW that I am insured without asking me. That is legal evidence, isn't it? What's the difference between subpoenaing the information versus requiring the insurance companies upfront to make it available?
In 2000, after Y2K expired and after the dotcom crisis decimated the tech market, things were still going good for tech companies here in Iowa, the capital of the insurance industry. There are more SANs in Des Moines, Iowa than you can shake a stick at. The data is there. Like most industries, they invest heavily in fraud detection, which requires humungoid datasets, and the processor horsepower to query it.
Sure, require people to carry around a small, easily counterfeited proof-of-insurance card. But then check back to the mothership to make sure.
It should be the same with any other data that the government requires from insurance companies.
Groklaw does this on occasion. The results ended up being demonstrated in court once - on an ancient system someone had in the back of a closet. I think it was an Amiga.
But it doesn't HAVE to be accurate enough for measuring cab fares.
I find it ironic that Massachusetts approves of using GPS to determine property boundaries, but not to determine how far you traveled along those boundaries. Surveyors don't use links and chains any more. They use satellite receivers.
Now to the real question: What kind of GPS is the cab company using to measure their fares?
I wouldn't trust a phone GPS as far as I could throw it.
I wouldn't even always trust a retail handheld GPS, but I would trust it a lot more than a phone.
But I would trust (mostly) a commercial GPS that had a paid subscription to a DGPS service (Differential GPS). While GPS CAN get you down to within feet - accurate enough in theory for cab fares) DGPS can get you down to inches. It's what the surveyors use and subscribe to. DGPS uses multiple GPS satellites to get a better fix on where you are. Less chance of losing signal.
My recent experience with phone GPS on a trip from Iowa to Boston showed me that phone GPS is unreliable, not there when you need it, takes you over routes that just don't make sense, and makes some incredible jumps in reality once in a while (You think I'm WHERE??!?). On many occasions, I couldn't get a fix on a GPS satellite on top of a mountain under clear skies for a half hour. On city streets, I could rarely get a fix because of buildings and trees.
I looked into GPS long ago for use on my farm, but found that it didn't work especially well under any sort of cover. I have 50 acres of timber, and many wooded ravines. The solution came up a bit short. City streets have their own form of cover.
As for the meters - just put smaller tires on the cab, save gas and make more money. Just remember that you are going slower than the speedometer says you are.
Get your mind out of the theory and into the practicality. Then you too can be a successful swindler.
Keep your physical security in line. Don't tell anyone where the Data Center is. Don't let people in without an escort.
The simple things are always, well ... simpler for the bad guys to exploit, yet they are extraordinarily unsatisfying to fix.
The best book I have ever read on computer security is by McAfee (back when he knew what he was doing) and is called "Computer viruses, worms, data diddlers, killer programs, and other threats to your system: What they are, how they work, and how to defend your PC, Mac, or mainframe". Don't be put off by McAfee Corporation's current reputation. This book came out in 1989, and covers the ENTIRE security spectrum. It is of the quality that you would expect from Schneier today.
The bottom line: if someone wants to hack you, they will. Don't be a target. Strategies to reduce your profile work. And this was back before the Internet, when Bulletin Boards and floppies were the main vectors for infection. The principles remain the same, though. Take care of the basics.
Re: Re: Because other people put my picture on sites where I am not a member
I accept that is true under CURRENT rules. But Facebook has a long history of changing their rules, either temporarily or permanently, that I have absolutely no faith that it will remain true.
If you have confidence in it, go for it. I have no problem with that. But I choose not to.
The sad fact of the matter is that a distributed network with nobody in charge, where people were able to share their information without losing control of it - has morphed into a huge body of people who are convinced that they are incapable of managing their own data. Corporations are doing it for them, and making vast amounts of money off of them.
Just think - what does Facebook own that is worth the billions of dollars that investors sunk into them since the IPO? It is your data. ISPs have helped foster this by writing contracts with you that don't match the intent and the technology capability of the Internet. They WANT you to be a passive consumer.
If you are interested in controlling your own part of the Internet, take a look at the Freedom Box [ http://freedomboxfoundation.org/ ]. If you have put a cost on your freedom, then it will look insufficient. But if your freedom is absolutely necessary, then it is priceless, and you will start trying to learn what you need in order to be free.
What we really need, of course, is privacy legislation in the US that isn't bought and paid for by the corporations.
Because other people put my picture on sites where I am not a member
I care. I am not a member of Facebook. I choose not to share my personal details with the world because you do not NEED to know that information. You have no right to it. [And I am not a mass murderer. ;-) ]
My picture is on Facebook. Family members have put it there. I would rather not have it there. But the network effect of data analysis on the Internet, and the ability to put together widely separated bits of information to reveal something that was never intended to be revealed -- now that is creepy!
Recently, I went through my links to support privacy in an organization that I belong to. I fished some out for you. I note that some of them are from Techdirt. So here they are:
1. A good article on why we should be protecting anonymous speech that looks at some of the things that
make it hard to speak anonymously. This lady has a reason to be anonymous. Her life and her family
was threatened when she published material that challenged false statements:
In Defense of Anonymous Speech ~pj http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120212133227775
1. People who care about privacy and anonymity:
New York Greater Metropolitan Area chapter of the Internet Society
ISOC-NY Event: Eben Moglen "Freedom in the Cloud" - 2/5/2010 http://isoc-ny.org/?p=1338
Everyone wants a piece of you these days: Google, Facebook, Flickr, Apple, AT&T, Bing. They'll give
you free e-mail, free photo storage, free web hosting, even a free date. They just want to listen in. And
you can't wait to let them. They'll store your stuff, they'll organize your photos, they'll keep track of
your appointments, as long as they can watch. It all goes into the "Cloud".
On the post: Pete Townshend Makes Required Annual 'Blame iTunes' Appearance, Global Deathclock Reset
$100 bills as shims
I've had this great new idea! We could put the desk legs on flat, round metal disks that are screwed in to the leg of the desk, with a locknut to keep it where we want it. I call them "leveling pads".
Since I haven't started manufacturing them yet [the patent lawyer wants his money first before I can make anything], could you please send a stack of $100 bills over? My desk has one leg that is about an inch shorter than the others, and it is really ticking me off!
;-)
On the post: Humble Bundle Launches Its First eBook Bundle; Books From Neil Gaiman, Cory Doctorow, John Scalzi & More
Re:
Now fess up, What did you do with the author? ;-)
Or maybe you forgot to copyright it? Yeah, that's the ticket!
On the post: Copyright Trolls Still Arguing That Open WiFi Is 'Negligent'
Of course it's not negligent.
Seriously, though, on the early Internet, the whole thing was open. You used one connection to route to another. This isn't as apparent today, since routers and switches on the backbone are now dedicated devices. But we are getting back to that model with things like torrents, which let the end nodes participate in Internet physical layer connectivity.
ISPs don't like that, because they want to charge more for being a full participant on the Internet. "Whaddaya mean, I can't run my own email server on the static IP that you gave me? Watch me!" Someday, someone will sue them for false advertising, because they aren't delivering the whole Internet, but just a small slice of it.
Someday, it will be common for end nodes to control their own social network functions, too, and we will see a revival of the old Fidonet and other mail/topic networks. There is nothing new under the sun.
But that's another bee in the **AA's bonnet, isn't it?
On the post: This Guy Holds Patents On Popcorn Chicken, Steak-Umms And Dozens Of Other Cuts Of Meat
It worries me...
;-)
On the post: Samsung/Apple Jury Foreman's Explanation For Verdict Shows He Doesn't Understand Prior Art
This just in -
So just quit fussing, youse guyse. He knows what he's doing and you're wrong!
On the post: Does Setting Up A Paywall Suddenly Make Your Readers Erudite & Intellectual vs. Crass & Tacky?
What a solution!
So why does my print newspaper still have them if I have to subscribe to get it?
Kiddie-porn anyone?
On the post: Samsung Routed In Apple Patent Fight; Told To Pay $1.05 Billion
Re: Update...
On the post: Samsung Routed In Apple Patent Fight; Told To Pay $1.05 Billion
The truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing but the truth
On the post: DailyDirt: Thank You For Not Smoking
Smokeless delivery systems
It is now no longer used in organic farming because it is too toxic. Changing delivery systems won't really help with the nicotine. It might help with the other carcinogens that smoking produces, but not with the most toxic substance in cigarettes.
I smoked for years. Loved it. I quit in 1976. Hardest thing I've ever done. Haven't had a craving for months. I suspect I should stay stopped.
On the post: New Documents Show That Feds Share License Plate Scanning Data With Insurance Firms
Re: Goal: Profit; Means: Deny Claims
My current (mis)insurance company is great at denying claims, forgetting claims for a few months, reversing denial of claims, telling me my claims are not eligible for payment because I have files too many of them, and then starting all over again. Apparently, their health care professionals, who have never seen me or talked to me, know more about my case than the professionals that are actually treating me. I keep calling that medical malpractice, but I haven't found anyone who agrees with me.
They were supposed to pay on the same rules as my previous insurance company, but their rules keep changing besides not complying with the rules that they are supposed to follow. Imagine my surprise when I found out that they are owned by my previous insurance company.
On the post: New Documents Show That Feds Share License Plate Scanning Data With Insurance Firms
Why aren't the insurance companies sharing data with the government?
It has always baffled me that police officers want to know if you are insured. Part of the requirements of passing a law requiring me to have car insurance should be that the insurance companies open up their databases to the authorities, so that they can KNOW that I am insured without asking me. That is legal evidence, isn't it? What's the difference between subpoenaing the information versus requiring the insurance companies upfront to make it available?
In 2000, after Y2K expired and after the dotcom crisis decimated the tech market, things were still going good for tech companies here in Iowa, the capital of the insurance industry. There are more SANs in Des Moines, Iowa than you can shake a stick at. The data is there. Like most industries, they invest heavily in fraud detection, which requires humungoid datasets, and the processor horsepower to query it.
Sure, require people to carry around a small, easily counterfeited proof-of-insurance card. But then check back to the mothership to make sure.
It should be the same with any other data that the government requires from insurance companies.
On the post: Another Olympian Lines Up At The Trademark Office: Ryan Lochte Files Trademark App For 'Jeah'
Trademarks for athletes
They seem to have franchised now. Fits in with the actions of the IOC, doesn't it? Trickledown IP, anyone?
On the post: Google Launches 'Prior Art Finder' For Patents
Re: Crowdsourcing
http://www.groklaw.net/index.php
On the post: Boston Shuts Down Uber Because Massachusetts Doesn't Approve Of The GPS
GPS CAN be accurate enough for this application
I find it ironic that Massachusetts approves of using GPS to determine property boundaries, but not to determine how far you traveled along those boundaries. Surveyors don't use links and chains any more. They use satellite receivers.
Now to the real question: What kind of GPS is the cab company using to measure their fares?
I wouldn't trust a phone GPS as far as I could throw it.
I wouldn't even always trust a retail handheld GPS, but I would trust it a lot more than a phone.
But I would trust (mostly) a commercial GPS that had a paid subscription to a DGPS service (Differential GPS). While GPS CAN get you down to within feet - accurate enough in theory for cab fares) DGPS can get you down to inches. It's what the surveyors use and subscribe to. DGPS uses multiple GPS satellites to get a better fix on where you are. Less chance of losing signal.
My recent experience with phone GPS on a trip from Iowa to Boston showed me that phone GPS is unreliable, not there when you need it, takes you over routes that just don't make sense, and makes some incredible jumps in reality once in a while (You think I'm WHERE??!?). On many occasions, I couldn't get a fix on a GPS satellite on top of a mountain under clear skies for a half hour. On city streets, I could rarely get a fix because of buildings and trees.
I looked into GPS long ago for use on my farm, but found that it didn't work especially well under any sort of cover. I have 50 acres of timber, and many wooded ravines. The solution came up a bit short. City streets have their own form of cover.
On the post: Boston Shuts Down Uber Because Massachusetts Doesn't Approve Of The GPS
Re: Re: Re: Hold on a sec, this is IRrational
Get your mind out of the theory and into the practicality. Then you too can be a successful swindler.
On the post: Humans: Still The Weakest Link In The Security Chain
Good security starts at the bottom
The simple things are always, well ... simpler for the bad guys to exploit, yet they are extraordinarily unsatisfying to fix.
The best book I have ever read on computer security is by McAfee (back when he knew what he was doing) and is called "Computer viruses, worms, data diddlers, killer programs, and other threats to your system: What they are, how they work, and how to defend your PC, Mac, or mainframe". Don't be put off by McAfee Corporation's current reputation. This book came out in 1989, and covers the ENTIRE security spectrum. It is of the quality that you would expect from Schneier today.
The bottom line: if someone wants to hack you, they will. Don't be a target. Strategies to reduce your profile work. And this was back before the Internet, when Bulletin Boards and floppies were the main vectors for infection. The principles remain the same, though. Take care of the basics.
On the post: Is Facebook's Facial Recognition That Scary?
Re: Re: Because other people put my picture on sites where I am not a member
If you have confidence in it, go for it. I have no problem with that. But I choose not to.
The sad fact of the matter is that a distributed network with nobody in charge, where people were able to share their information without losing control of it - has morphed into a huge body of people who are convinced that they are incapable of managing their own data. Corporations are doing it for them, and making vast amounts of money off of them.
Just think - what does Facebook own that is worth the billions of dollars that investors sunk into them since the IPO? It is your data. ISPs have helped foster this by writing contracts with you that don't match the intent and the technology capability of the Internet. They WANT you to be a passive consumer.
If you are interested in controlling your own part of the Internet, take a look at the Freedom Box [ http://freedomboxfoundation.org/ ]. If you have put a cost on your freedom, then it will look insufficient. But if your freedom is absolutely necessary, then it is priceless, and you will start trying to learn what you need in order to be free.
What we really need, of course, is privacy legislation in the US that isn't bought and paid for by the corporations.
On the post: Is Facebook's Facial Recognition That Scary?
Because other people put my picture on sites where I am not a member
My picture is on Facebook. Family members have put it there. I would rather not have it there. But the network effect of data analysis on the Internet, and the ability to put together widely separated bits of information to reveal something that was never intended to be revealed -- now that is creepy!
Recently, I went through my links to support privacy in an organization that I belong to. I fished some out for you. I note that some of them are from Techdirt. So here they are:
1. A good article on why we should be protecting anonymous speech that looks at some of the things that
make it hard to speak anonymously. This lady has a reason to be anonymous. Her life and her family
was threatened when she published material that challenged false statements:
In Defense of Anonymous Speech ~pj
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120212133227775
1. People who care about privacy and anonymity:
New York Greater Metropolitan Area chapter of the Internet Society
ISOC-NY Event: Eben Moglen "Freedom in the Cloud" - 2/5/2010
http://isoc-ny.org/?p=1338
Everyone wants a piece of you these days: Google, Facebook, Flickr, Apple, AT&T, Bing. They'll give
you free e-mail, free photo storage, free web hosting, even a free date. They just want to listen in. And
you can't wait to let them. They'll store your stuff, they'll organize your photos, they'll keep track of
your appointments, as long as they can watch. It all goes into the "Cloud".
3. A 'Trustworthy' Social Network For The Occupy Movement: Even If They Build It, Can They
Ever Trust It?
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120106/09421517302/trustworthy-social-network-occupy-
movem ent-even-if-they-build-it-can-they-ever-trust-it.shtml
4. What's In A Name: The Importance Of Pseudonymity & The Dangers Of Requiring 'Real
Names'
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110805/14103715409/whats-name-importance-pseudonym ity-
dangers-requiring-real-names.shtml
On the post: Legit Ebook Lending Site Taken Down By An Angry Twitmob Of Writers [UPDATED]
Re: Re:
I was just late posting my response. Sorry about that!
On the post: Can The President Use An Executive Order To Push Through Cybersecurity Rules?
Too little, too late
I can't load a page with 2k of text that I want to read because the graphical ad servers are running slow? The Internet has already been taken over!
Ban Windows or require a competency test. Then you'll have better security on the Internet.
Next >>