It's not the carrier's job to ensure the police are following the law. That's the police's job. And, when they don't do so, it's the court's job to stop it.

[citation needed]

I haven't seen any evidence for it. Maybe I'm just hanging out on the wrong sites.

Let's see this alleged "research." I call bullshit.

Fact: some students learn best by doing. I'm one of them.

Corollary: not all students learn best by doing. My wife is in this category.

Would it be nice to have various styles of teaching so that various styles of students get the most out of it? Sure. But one size fits all solutions are still bullshit. They may fit many, or even most, but never all. Is this method better than what we have today? Maybe for many. But never for all. So stop with the hyperbole. Whereas I might have been interested in your product if you had stuck with objective facts, once you start down the road of hyperbolic bullshit, I'm no longer interested except to bitch about it.

When it *is* running, it could apply the firmware to the BIOS/UEFI system. This may require a reboot somewhere in the middle, but so be it. And then the system would be safe.

Of course, that greatly simplifies the concept since every motherboard has its own variation on BIOS/UEFI. As long as we're dreaming of ponies and rainbows, yeah, this would be nice. But I can see it being a huge headache for MS or Linux distros to manage.

And just think about the poor saps running Hackintosh systems... no way Apple is going to ship firmware for non-Apple-branded systems! :)

Really? I see a lot of complaining about white guys getting jobs, whether they're competent at it or not, just because they're white. Funny how that works.

I'm almost with you. I wish we could leave the market to sort this out. I really do. Because that would create the best possible alternative.

Unfortunately, partially due to physical realities and partially due to lobbying, we aren't in such a situation.

As as mentioned earlier, back in the day we had dozens of dial-up ISPs to choose from. Don't like one? Pick another. Don't like any? It actually was reasonably possible to start a new one. But that's because the physical costs, that of building the communication channels to each user's house, the telephone lines!, were put there by a neutral third party who had no care about which ISP competitor was using the line.

Nowadays, the distribution, especially that last mile, is handled by the same people who provide the service. They have no desire nor reason to share that line with anyone else, which means if you want to start a new provider, you have to build out all that expensive infrastructure again.

This creates a barrier to entry that is so large that it's insurmountable by all but the deepest pockets. And not even always then.

In Alberta, for gas and electricity, which suffers essentially the same physical barrier, our government wanted to increase competition and basically forced a split between distributor and provider. The distributor companies put in all the physical channels (pipes, wires) and manage repairs. In turn, they charge a fixed rate to all customers, and are highly regulated as the monopolies they are. The providers, who sell the gas and electricity, negotiate prices with their suppliers and sell to consumers. We now have choices - not always a lot of choices, but a lot more than we used to have. This split, although it includes regulation of a monopoly, at least allows some market forces to prevail.

If we did the same thing for internet, splitting distribution from providing, the distributor would need to be highly regulated, and completely neutral on the packets it delivers. But the providers would not need to be neutral at all, and be able to negotiate with others based on what they think will provide them with the best total income - pleasing to all their customers, including the residential consumer. Don't like the price/priorities of one provider, switch to another, no big deal.

That may not be perfect, but it would be a hell of a lot better than what we have. Until we get there, though, a certain level of net neutrality seems to be required. In my opinion.

I was going to mod this troll, but then I started to think about it. When my head started to spin, about 5 seconds later, I figured you must be right.

Is there a way to send private messages on slashdot? Where did you find this other gig? I'm in the same boat, work-from-home for 15 years, need to find something before IBM lets out. :(

One thing these customers want .. is to gain all the auditability of a blockchain (the chain itself is impervious to manipulation) without their competitors seeing what they do. If user "A" has a transaction pending with user "B", "A" does not want competitor "C" to know about it and try to swoop in somehow. They want their purchase to provide real market advantage with a level of surprise, instead of having all their competitors roll out the same functionality two months later. And thus, limit their transaction chains to approved people only (e.g., "A", "B", and the bank(s) or escrow managers).

Now I'm sad. I was expecting something more like this. ;)

Doesn't mean those are the guys commenting... :)

From a debugging perspective, it's probably much easier to unit test and fine-tune the algorithms based on the raw speech as then at least the human developer can listen to the audio and compare it to the produced output.

And, of course, in my experience, once such debug capabilities are turned on, there's no impetus later in the cycle to turn them off. I'm just as guilty in that regard as anyone else I know, sometimes probably worse as I end up turning on even more debug information later in the cycle than we had at the beginning.

Remind me again why I want to solve this problem. Yes, I know I could find my password. I don't care. But since that's on my home PC, and I'm standing in front of a TSA agent, at that point, it's too late.

Really? 5-digit UID and you don't get simple spatial awareness?