This is a terrible idea. Someone wearing this will feel that they are owned, that they are property, that they are watched and not trusted. Parents who would use this have a problem, either in that they watch the news too much and believe the world is a very dangerous place, or that they have an adversarial and overly controlling relationship with their kid, at which point you give up all pretense of having a good relationship and enter into a nasty tug-of-war that will last until the kid is 18 and flees the parents forever.

My parents would have used this on me. My mom believed the world was a dangerous place, with evil lurking around every corner. Both my parents had trust issues even though I was an ideal student, never got in trouble, and was always trustworthy and dependable. And if they had shackled me with something like this, my eventual rebellion would have been a thousand times worse.

And you *really* believe that was because of the toolset they chose, as opposed to the scaling architecture and software design? Please.

Once again: the *vast* majority of performance is determined at the architecture- and design-level stages of a project. The right choice of algorithm can result in an order of magnitude difference in performance, while fine tuning a hot spot might give you a small multiple, in the very best of cases.

The real problem is that most people don't know how to design for performance and scaling. But that's an entirely separate problem.

It could be that the USA's cyber-warfare department is doing its best to disrupt Iranian networks. Or it could be that government shills are "reporting" fake news so as to create antagonism towards Iran in order to reduce the number of protests that the USA government would face during its future war against Iran.

There are more interesting applications for such a material than weaponry. Such as engine seals. There is a lot of engine longevity and efficiency to be gained from high strength bellows for expansion chambers. And the problem with Kevlar is that it doesn't take well to high temperatures.

Why do you reject the possibility that he's simply an attention-starved troll?

The Enigma was one of the most advanced pre-modern cryptosystems. But it still treated letters as letters. To get to the next level, the separation of data (letters) from encryption into math operations was needed. This happened in parallel with the development of digital computers. Really, many of those advancements came from cryptanalysis of Enigma itself.

In theory what you say is true. In reality, the landfills are littered with discarded metal PC cases. Just because it CAN be reused, doesn't mean that it is.

well ... even in the hey day of tobacco popularity, scientific evidence against smoking was fairly high and the relationship between smoking and cancer was supported by lots of evidence. The industry money was able to convince individuals otherwise, mostly because nicotine is so addictive that people were willing to accept any evidence to the contrary.

The same may be true for EM radiation. We would expect to see evidence to support the supposition independent of who was troubled by the facts.The lack of any supporting evidence between EM and cancer probably squashing any conspiracy theories.

It's probably a good idea for reasons of liability and quality control, but IMHO it IS admitting the failure of the Wikipedia model. I suspect this is just the beginning of greater editorial control. Eventually, the editorial bottlenecks will slow its progress until is asymptotically approaches the cumbersomeness of Encyclopaedia Britannica.

But it all depends on what you do with it. My guess is that AOL will fall into the same trap as Fox, CNN, and other "news" agencies who focus on easy sensationalist money are the cost of facts and credibility.

I am speculating here, that AOL will go after their niche markets using the same "entertainment" rating system that the others do. Good for the masses, but not for a news junkie like me.

I believe they can succeed. I question whether or not it really matters to the world of news.

whoa whoa there. News is biased and uninformative because news agencies provide what people want to hear independent of the actual fact. Entertainment sells, and those pesky facts just gets in the way.

I understand your point, but you picked a bad example. Domestic workers tend to make more money at low skill jobs. It is difficult to find someone trustworthy who will clean for less than $35 / hour.

A better comparison would be hotel house keeping staff. I suspect there is a large difference between what hotels pay in Europe versus the US.

Not entirely true:

Bicycles may not be ridden on a sidewalk in the Harvard Sq. and Central Sq. business districts, as well as some newly created banned areas:

        * Inman Sq.
        * Huron Village
        * Mass. Ave., from Wendell St. and Shepard St. to Russell St. and Cogswel
        * Somerville Ave (entirely)

Outside of these areas, there isn't a lot of motivation for riding on the sidewalk. The big exception is Memorial Drive where sidewalks are essentially shared bike/pedestrian lanes.

There is a lot of anger and the MPAA and RIAA, and much of it stems from their tactics to protect their dwindling market and the price they charge for the poor quality products they offer (read this as shit).

The industry seems to be driven by bean counters and lawyers instead of artists and creative producers. They lack inspiration in what they produce and the business models they put forth. DRM is an uncreative technical answer to what seems to be a changing market. All aspects of the changing market and the Industry's inability to change with it has been discussed here on these very pages.

The big question on my mind is: is it fair to single out individuals when they are merely representative of a common practice? If one or two individuals break the law, then it is a crime. If everyone breaks the law, then it isn't it a question of public policy? At what point does dissonance stop being an individual crime and start being a revolution? How effective is it to stop a revolution when the majority of people are against you?

Putting that all aside, the current changes in the entertainment industry is not much different to the changes we have been experiencing in the computer, networking, and cell phone industries. It is a real pain in the ass when you can no longer extract 60% to 80% margins on your products. Even Microsoft is feeling this pinch. The way other industries deal with this problem is to find new ways of providing value to their customers. Nokia and Apple are focusing on the services surrounding their phones. Google is making money from advertising, and IBM has changed from a hardware vendor to a services company.

I know it is not completely a fair comparison because of copyright law,, but when your product starts becoming a commodity, how do you respond? If I were running the entertainment industry, I would concentrate on new ways to make money rather than pissing off my remaining customers. It is not surprising to me that the only big change in the music industry came from Steve Jobs with his IPOD and ITunes and not from the lackluster entertainment execs. The big labels and entertainment giants are the same lazy behemoths as was the auto industry.

Here is an interesting thought. Why doesn't someone on Slashdot come up with a creative way for the RIAA or MPAA to make lots of money given the current market trends? We could make it a contest. The winner gets a big cut in the profits. Just remember, if you do come up with a winning idea, I want my finders fee :-)

I'm allergic to stupid and annoying people with silly medical claims, but I'm not moving to an desert Island to avoid them.