Rather than provide fancy new 'heads up' displays for drivers or built-in smart phone driver docking stations for drivers with their 'heads up' their ass, we should be working on roadside electronic surveillance and longer prison sentences for the drivers who kill people while using their smartphone.
While I agree that distraction is an issue, and solutions should be found, and I also agree that this device sounds like more distraction, longer prison terms solve nothing. Incarceration does not stop drug use, threat of life in prison does not deter murderers of bank robbers. No matter the differences in incarceration percentage or average length of incarceration, developed countries crime rates stay relatively stable. The few things being tougher on any crime does do well is break up families, provide jobs to the prison workers, and create a hated underclass that is likely to turn to crime again.
This is not to say that there should be no punishment for crime, but to say the money would likely be much better spent on proper prevention. Not more police, swat toys, and police programs, but things like education, family planning , job training, addiction recovery, even driver training, etc. For the cost of putting 2-3 people in prison for a year, a town could hire a person to do distracted driver training and testing on a closed course. All you need is an empty parking lot and some cones.
With legal (or cracked) access to anyone's email account (sex offender or not) lets see how easy it is to plant evidence.
1. Access account, add a folder or label (preferably hidden buy being buried in default sort order or under another folder).
2. Set filter with obscure rule to automatically route certain emails to said folder.
3. Send "illicit" or "evidentiary" messages that match said filter. These can be sent from self or whatever generated entity seems appropriate.
4. Access account again from various public IP addresses (or from target's own wifi). Read already read email, plus messages in target folder.
5. Remove filter. Have Google 'find' the evidence. Arrest wrongdoer.
This is not that far fetched. The chain of evidence doe not prove that the target is guilty, but can be made to look enough like it to convince a judge or jury. From the vantage of Google or a jury, it looks as though the subject sent or had sent, expected, and read the messages.
Just about anyone here could do this with the creds to an account - which in most situations are not terribly hard to garner.
Before you say you would notice the folder in your account, think of this. I have over 100 folders in my email account, some rarely opened, and never all visible on the screen. I wouldn't have noticed - but I may have enough knowledge to fight - a little anyway. How about a novice, when a folder named 'Archived Messages' appears. Would he/she even think twice?
I did not RTFA, but I know google uses their image search algos for blocking known child porn sites. It is not a hard step to run that against email messages. How about when the NSA/CIA/FBI tells google (via a NSL) scan all messages for x terms. How about when said terms are sent to and from hacked accounts as a matter of course?
It is important to realize that absolutely no communication that is unencrypted is private, but how about whe forged open communications can make you a criminal?
Joshua Wright, an FTC commissioner who dissented in a recent settlement with Apple, says a 15-minute open purchase window produced "obvious and intuitive consumer benefits" and that the FTC "simply substituted its own judgment for a private firm's decision as to how to design a product to satisfy as many shareholdersas possible."
FTFY
You have to keep up!
The word you are looking for is Waldo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
We should always err on the side of least effect on innocent people, preferably no effect.
I would hope this unification means that there will be suffice emulation built into windows that it will pick the kernel/libs/drivers required by the CPU arch, and userland apps can run in emulation (even if slowly) if they are compiled for the wrong proc. This would be a unified windows, that allows x86 and 64 bit apps run on ARM and vice versa (although the other direction is likely not as useful). And have a usable interface. This may actually be a killer OS. It is the next version after a bad one!
At some point the bottle will fail and the soda will erupt.
Can you say on which drop? Can you say how it will fail (split seam, pinhole rupture that expands, cap failure?)
No? But you can say that it likely will if the behavior continues.
Lets take another example, say HDD failure. Any HDD will fail, at some point. Is it head failure? Bearing failure? Temperature damage to the media? You do not know, but you can say it WILL fail.
So, nice troll attempt, but it falls flat.
And it should be the law: If you use the word `paradigm' without knowing what the dictionary says it means, you go to jail. No exceptions. -- David Jones
