Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Governments don't have the right (Score 0) 124

I suppose if one were to ignore 250 years of constitutional law

What "Constitutional Law"? Citation needed. Needed so badly, I'll do it for you:

Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)
Established the “reasonable expectation of privacy” test. The Court held that what a person knowingly exposes to the public is not protected by the Fourth Amendment, laying the foundation for warrantless visual observation of people in public places.
United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983)
Held that police may use a beeper (tracking device) to follow a vehicle on public roads without a warrant. A person traveling on public thoroughfares has no reasonable expectation of privacy in their movements from one place to another; visual surveillance (or technological aids that merely enhance it) is not a Fourth Amendment “search.”
United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012)
While ruling that prolonged GPS tracking of a vehicle constitutes a search requiring a warrant (because of the physical attachment of the device), the Court reaffirmed that short-term visual or technological monitoring of movements on public roads remains permissible without a warrant under the principles of Knotts.

Oh, wait...

Comment Re:Governments don't have the right (Score 0) 124

people shouldn't have a government that follows their every step by using AI and networked devices

Maybe, we should not, but there is not law prohibiting government to do this.

AI may be new, but the problem is not, and courts have repeatedly reaffirmed government's right to surveil us in public without any warrants (list courtesy of Grok). The second item — known as Knotts — is particularly telling...

Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)
Established the “reasonable expectation of privacy” test. The Court held that what a person knowingly exposes to the public is not protected by the Fourth Amendment, laying the foundation for warrantless visual observation of people in public places.
United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983)
Held that police may use a beeper (tracking device) to follow a vehicle on public roads without a warrant. A person traveling on public thoroughfares has no reasonable expectation of privacy in their movements from one place to another; visual surveillance (or technological aids that merely enhance it) is not a Fourth Amendment “search.”
United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012)
While ruling that prolonged GPS tracking of a vehicle constitutes a search requiring a warrant (because of the physical attachment of the device), the Court reaffirmed that short-term visual or technological monitoring of movements on public roads remains permissible without a warrant under the principles of Knotts.

Besides, how can the 4th Amendment include cameras, which didn't exist in the 18th century, if the 2nd doesn't protect "assault rifles"? :-)

Comment Re:Governments don't have the right (Score 1) 124

Usage of Flock cameras is almost certainly a violation of the 4th amendment.

It most definitely is not. The actual text of the Amendment, for your benefit:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.

The camera is not peering into your pockets, or windows. It is only looking at what's publicly visible...

Very simple, obvious, common-sense argument: whatever a human policeman can see and memorize, an electronic device can record too.

Comment Re:Governments don't have the right (Score -1) 124

Governments don't have the right to do mass general surveillance

Huh?! Why not? Let's focus on American (Federal) government in particular — what is prohibiting them from conducting "mass general surveillance"?

Not saying, it is good — or bad — just want you to substantiate your claim, that it is somehow illegal...

Comment Genocide? (Score -1) 182

You name it, our government has done it, including coups, assassinations, coups, genocides, false flags, drug trafficking, human trafficking, willfully selling munitions to international criminals

Genocides — plural — is the worst accusation here, and warrants a follow-up question. What genocides (two or more) has our government committed — within our lifetimes?

Comment Re: âoefail fastâ development (Score 1) 61

"Over time, with process improvements,"

And like that, you've spent all three.

A lot of people don't understand that. take the time to work it out, you lose fast.

If fast isn't most important, you can spend cheap. Then you can get good, maybe.

If good wasn't the goal, well, then you choose the desired, and the rest sorts itself out.

See? The equation is proved by your example.

Comment Re: âoefail fastâ development (Score 4, Insightful) 61

True. Apollo suffered huge costs because of the deadline, forcing development costs more. The NASA equation - good, fast, cheap. Any 2 of the three.

SpaceX is doing very well indeed, and so far as I can tell making no excuses. Don't need to. They are kicking it, and NASA is trying to stay relevant in the launch business.

Comment Re:Go to Mars, Elmo, I dare you (Score 2, Insightful) 61

With a little luck Starlink will satisfy the broadband access mandates the rest of the ISP business has taken money for and not delivered for *decades*.

Of course people hate Elon. He's successful. They don't envy him, they resent his success, while they languish in sub-mediocrity and blame all else for their malaise.

Pus.

Comment Long term consequences? (Score -1) 40

I wonder, what the long term consequences of obtaining — and using — this skill are, if any... Does it make one smarter? Or faster? Does it reduce — or increase — the risk of developing Altzheimer? Does it affect personality in any way?

Also, can the skill be lost — if not regularly used — or is it more like bicycle-riding?

Submission + - Humans Can Learn to Echolocate in Just 10 Weeks, And It Rewires The Brain (sciencealert.com)

alternative_right writes: A study published in PLOS One in 2021 by researchers from Durham University in the UK showed that with 10 weeks of training, both blind and sighted people could learn to echolocate using verbal clicks.

While the technique is already used by a number of people with impaired vision â" sometimes using the taps of a cane instead of clicks made by their mouth â" those findings suggest that many of us can learn the necessary techniques.

Some of the same researchers who made that discovery are part of the team behind a follow-up study published in Cerebral Cortex, looking at how the 10 weeks of training that the 26 participants went through actually changed the physical structure of their brains.

(If this is too nerdly even for Slashdot, I apologize for wasting your time.)

Slashdot Top Deals

You had mail, but the super-user read it, and deleted it!

Working...