Comment Re:Slashdot got a sensational story wrong? (Score 1) 122
CNN would have run the same story as a shaky amateur video with two advertisements bracketing it and no audio.
CNN would have run the same story as a shaky amateur video with two advertisements bracketing it and no audio.
Or a technology story that didn't pander to their No Nukes anti-vax GMO-free science illiterate readership.
But you could have had you backed up your iOS device to the cloud like everybody else.
Such a camera would not be added surveillance, but a log of existing surveillance.
When most users measure traffic locally, it's with a router function. But as I said in Parent, a user's router measurement is not going to be trusted by the ISP. There is a need for a single-purpose device that objectively measures traffic independent from router and modem functionality, in the same way that an odometer or electric meter does.
I did omit another item such a device would have to log continuously: the current IP. Matching this with the ISP's records would reveal any attempt to place the odometer 'downstream' of the edge signal. Just detecting internal IPs is not enough, because some ISPs issue these to users as the IPv4 space runs out of addresses.
I don't construct paranoid futures. I describe what is happening *now*.
I suspect that SuddenLink is fudging its usage numbers, but my router doesn't do usage accounting. Even if it did, I'm sure the reaction from the ISP would be "We don't trust a user device to check our figures." What we need an an Internet odometer, a single-purpose traffic counter that plugs into the Ethernet between modem and router, and is sealed so the user can't tamper with it, and which would track the total time it was in-circuit so a user couldn't evade the count by just temporarily disconnecting it while downloading every Simpsons episode.
Does such a device exist, and do any ISPs trust its use as a check on their own accounting?
An example of a phallacy is: "You can tell by looking at his shoe size."
Neutrino detectors have been around for some time, including a large one at the South Pole. Others are located at Tsukuba, Japan and Lead, SD. What has prevented those detectors from finding solar neutrinos?
Two years ago, my street was torn up between the main highway into town and the CenturyLink switch, so that large-diameter orange cable could be extended to it. Yes, fiber! Fiber that could solve our area's ISP duopoly problem, where our choice is between CenturyLink's poky 10M service and that nice fast SuddenLink 50M service that is near-useless because of a low usage cap.
I checked, and CenturyLink has no intention of using that fiber to offer faster service anytime this century.
Forget the happy horseshit about super-safe robot cars. We don't have those, and they won't work when we do. This is about the ability to track all the vehicles in the world, either by private entities who will backdoor the info to government and political groups, or straight-up security force tracking. Not just here, but all over the world. We are building turnkey police state infrastructure. If you can't grasp this, you might want to contemplate how privileged you are not to ever feel endangered by cops or polical opponents like Scientology or the Moonies. Do not give the monkeys the key to the banana plantation. Once you are in a worldwide prison, there is no escape.
"Trains". Those are called trains.
You can't turn it off even now. The GPS tracking is built into the circuitry and there is no way to diable it. And no, tapping the "please don't track me" option won't work. Its lying.
The criterion should be: if your geoengineering process can't run away, no problem. A legal procedure would be adding nutrient to areas of the ocean to produce carbon-eating algal blooms; the process runs only until the nutrient is consumed. An illegal procedure might be engineering a plankton organism that eats carbon, feeding on existing oceanic nutrients; such an organism could run away and consume all atmospheric carbon, freezing the world and killing most land plants.
Germany wishes it could start reducing the number of coal plants. To do that, it would have had to keep its nuclear plants open, and eventually build more of them. But in getting "environmentalists" to defend strip mining, and for the dirtiest mineral ever dug up, and in the green hills of a crowded continent that values its open space, and directly in the face of their own fears about carbon-induced warming, I'm not just after neener cred. I'm pointing to a real and emerging problem of energy sprawl.
A high-density energy plant might be controversial to install, but low-density energy occupies a large amount of ground. Replacing a nuclear reactor with windmills means having hundreds of them twirling away across the landscape. Lignite has not much more unit energy than wind, but in the absence of nuclear would be Germany's only 24/7 power source. Photovoltaic can be installed on existing rooftops, but what does a cloudy country without deserts do when that diffuse energy source needs large arrays of ground-mounted panels?
Furthermore, sprawling renewable sources require a whole new generation of transmission lines, routed in different ways than the traditional grid. The transmission lines for Engergiewende are already eliciting protests:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02...
Something tells me that the closure of the rest of the nuclear plants will never take place. The high cost of small-source energy can't be concealed in subsidies forever. At some point the ratepayers and the taxpayers are going to revolt.
"Gotcha, you snot-necked weenies!" -- Post Bros. Comics