Forgot your password?

+ - 32 Cities Want to Challenge Big Telecom, Build Their Own Gigabit Networks

Submitted by Jason Koebler
Jason Koebler (3528235) writes "More than two dozen cities in 19 states announced today that they're sick of big telecom skipping them over for internet infrastructure upgrades and would like to build gigabit fiber networks themselves and help other cities follow their lead.
The Next Centuries Cities coalition, which includes a couple cities that already have gigabit fiber internet for their residents, was devised to help communities who want to build their own broadband networks navigate logistical and legal challenges to doing so."

+ - Federal monies to influence State elections?->

Submitted by bkcallahan
bkcallahan (2515468) writes "Seems a taxpayer-subsidized tour is coming through Oregon — one of the states voting on legalizing marijuana this year — and it seems they're trying to influence a ballot Measure — #91. Regardless of which side you are on with respect to the Measure, shouldn't there be more outrage at this? Why isn't this on the news. Kevin Sabet has been caught on a local forum with an unequivocal message: Vote No On measure 91"
Link to Original Source

+ - TorFi, an alternative to Anonabox, already up at Kickstarter->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "Riding on the coattails of the desire for anonymity on the Internet displayed by Anonabox, new Kickstarter project TorFi "aims to satisfy the demand demonstrated for a simple, plug-and-play, secure access point to the Internet. With no more technical knowledge than what it takes to plug into a home ISP connection..." It appears to use OpenWRT and pre-existing hardware to accomplish this and claims it will only cost $30."
Link to Original Source

Comment: The transcript doesn’t show a lot of push-ba (Score 2) 56

IMHO, These are far too rational for Mr Moore to get past cabinet, as they might be seen as desirable regulation. The politics of the day is to avoid regulating (ie, policing) industry.

They're directly applicable to copyright trolling, by the way, and quite a good idea. I'll suggest that.


Comment: Re:Enforce (Score 2) 122

by davecb (#48074795) Attached to: Dubai Police To Use Google Glass For Facial Recognition

They're not supposed to learn things like that, it will affect their close rates

My local Chief of Police has fought for years to get his people to "keep the peace" instead of "show high case-closed numbers". He's started to succeed, and the crime rates are going down, but he's been rewarded by budget cuts and being phased out for being too expansive... Bummer!

Comment: Re:Enforce (Score 1) 122

by davecb (#48073879) Attached to: Dubai Police To Use Google Glass For Facial Recognition

You need as many 9's after the decimal point as you have digits in (N * N-1). As N is unbounded and accuracy is bounded, you get screwed. It's fine for a 10-person company (90 comparisons, negligable false positives) It's out of the question for airports (10,000 * 9,999 comparisons)

As the ARPAnauts would say "it doesn't scale"

Comment: Re:Enforce (Score 5, Interesting) 122

by davecb (#48072905) Attached to: Dubai Police To Use Google Glass For Facial Recognition

better technology doesn't help enough!

To oversimplify, if you have 1 error in a thousand, and you have 10,000 (crooks + innocent people), you do (10,000 * 9,999) comparisons and get 99,990,000 / 1,000 = 9,990 errors. In stats, it's a selection of every two persons out of 10,000.

It's really something like (select one of 100 crooks from 10,000 innocents), but it's still an insanely huge number of comparisons. Hoeever good your technology, adding more people will give you (N * N-1) more chances of getting an error.

Facial recognition vendors are very careful to NOT report their error rates in ways that expose this problem: it's the "elephant in the room" for that industry. And that includes Siemens, my former employer.

There are running jobs. Why don't you go chase them?