I was in Taipei a few weeks ago an saw that most taxi's had dash cams - very small, very common. It makes sense to me for have these for a multitude of reasons as stated above. I don't see these being sold in the US - yet another case being behind the rest of the world - but of course we will never admit that...

I'd argue it's the opposite: It is because the relevant parts of American culture is/was ahead of many nations such that our police force and citizens are/were, on average, more honest than those in places where dash cams are more common and necessary.

You could try to counter this by saying that there's been a regression in society these days but that would only deflect the argument to a completely separate but debatable subject of its own.

The other replies ahead of mine have also already pointed out that dashcams are (and have been) available for sale in the US for quite some time. They just aren't very commonly used by the general public. Many law enforcement agencies already have them installed as standard equipment on their cruisers.

They may not be the first in the world to do this but any new competition should be welcome as being another team and another chance at finding techniques to improve cost effectiveness.

My first thought after seeing the headline and thinking "That's cool!" was whether or not they could stay in business and what kind of future this setup could have elsewhere. It's probably a concept very much like fuel prices: When prices rise high enough to support more expensive production methods, these fancier methods will have a better chance of gaining traction and staying in business.

The Singapore government should consider what value they put on food security for their population. If they value it highly enough, then perhaps a subsidy for the company to help them expand would be justifiable.

Building on this perspective, perhaps these newspapers have already benefited from the traffic brought by Google News' indexing and now they want fuller control over this traffic.

That's on top of the lost refining capacity from northern California (Richmond, CA) due to the refinery explosion back in August.

Also, due to California's geography (mountains separating the state from elsewhere), they can't import gasoline from the rest of the continent very easily anyway even if other refineries on the continent produced similar blends of gasoline.

I'm not at all against IPv6. My perspective is just one of speculative curiosity: If IPv4 addresses were used at 100% efficiency (with inefficiency being defined as malware/botnets/spammers) how much longer would they have?

A little extra time to shake out the bugs from any infrastructure upgrade seems couldn't hurt, too.

About seizing IP ranges, I meant looking for entire chunks of IPs that may have been bought by a "business" or "ISP" and then converted wholly into a spam farm. From my point of view, sometimes it feels like there are armies being deliberately built out there. I agree about compromised individuals and don't think it would be practical to go about finding each and every one them, much less enforce any kind of ban.

Somebody managed to pop a goodie hut in 2012? If we keep finding hidden ruins, we might finally unlock the secrets of nuclear fusion.

If they could audit their ISPs, I wonder what fraction of their IP addresses would be found as being used by spammers and their bot nets. It'd be great if they could seize abused IP ranges back and turn them over to folks with more legitimate uses.

I thought AT&T was complaining about saturated wireless phone bandwidth, to the point where purchasing T-Mobile was a supposed business neccessity. What would happen if tens of thousands of these "BioHarness" systems were connected through the network currently used by phones?

A bunch of the stories in that link say they're from 1969. Is there a bug in Slashdot's database?

According to a couple of headlines that I threw into Google, the stories from "December 31st, 1969" are probably from between 2005 and 2008.

He may have also meant the F-117 Nighthawk, the original diamond-shaped stealth fighter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-117_Nighthawk

AMD Fusions will be hitting the market soon. We'll see whether they are better or worse vs the Atom, but either way the added competition should help keep prices under control. One initial report that I came across suggests that the overall performance will be better, but at the cost of increased power draw.

What about saving toward retirement? Emergency funds if you become injured or sick? I imagine it would be difficult to build usable financial cushions on $35k/yr. True, with good fiscal management over enough time it would be possible to accumulate something, but accidents or lawsuits probably won't wait until you're ready before making an unannounced (and unwelcome) visit.

Just imagine if your salary doubles to $70k. Keeping your current lifestyle, your savings would accumulate at far greater than double the rate it is now since every untaxed cent you receive above $35k is gravy and can go straight to your savings, thus preparing you for either the unforseen or the long future (starting a family, caring for relatives, or retirement) that much faster.

It might be possible to deliberately not worry about the future but that would mean simply turning a blind eye on unpleasant realities for the sake of feeling good.