Given some of the insanity we've seen out of official North Korean media, a sophisticated satire could easily pass for an official press release. The better the hoax video is crafted, the longer it will take the authorities to figure out that it isn't an official release by some other department in the government and take it down.
I figure, as long as the culture in North Korea seems bent on slow self destruction, we might as well see if we can give it a bit of help. The sooner the North Korean regime collapses, the better it will be for the North and South Korean people.
One question remains though: It's well known that North Korea maintains its own national Intranet and only approved people are allowed to use it. Does anyone know just how well connected that Intranet is to the world at large?
Come to think of it, because of UV considerations, I would assume that any roof top application of photovoltaic panels would use glass instead of some plastic. You have to assume similar life expectancies as with other roofing materials after all (10 yrs min, usually 25 to 50 IIRC) and even UV resistant plastics discolour and even become brittle over those sorts of time frames.
Speaking as a former roofer, my recommendation for most residential applications would be to install this new roofing and place snow guards, artificial dormers or roof crickets over every entrance way. I would go with dormers or crickets over entrances because that would still let the snow shed from the glass surfaces naturally. Thus; you would minimize how often you had to go out and clean the roof. Light dustings or ice could still accumulate, and with that the problem would be cutting down on PV output. My ideal PV roof solution would include embedded wires that heat the surface to just above freezing temps, either automatically, or manually. Anyone who drives in snowy regions knows what a big difference those wires in the back glass of their vehicle make when it comes time to clean the car before heading to work...
Playing Farmville, private messaging, tagging photos, all of that is just bait in the trap, with your personal data being the "fur" Facebook gathers for profit.
I hold the concept of Privacy in high regard. On the other hand, I recognize that any free thing needs to be paid for by somebody That's why, despite the occasional annoyance factor, I avoid using ad-blocking software for most of my browsing. When the marketing efforts get too annoying, I block them as best I can. But when it gets as egregiously, offensively, frightenly bad as Facebook, I drop out altogether and urge everyone I can influence to drop out as well. (one of the reasons I loathe Facebook as I do is because I don't have to have a profile there, I don't have to have accepted the terms of service, for the company to accumulate an awful lot of personal information about me. My less clued-in friends and family will happily, and more or less obliviously, tag me in photos, provide my email address to Facebook partners so they can send invites and so on.
*Enough wide spread adoption that I don't have to coax all my existing contacts to migrate to the new system.
*Also be a multi-protocol application like Pidgin or Trillian. That way I can still keep in touch with those who haven't yet, will not or can not migrate.
One reason I stuck with MSN messenger so long is that I had several friend who had locked down desktops at work and so could only use Windows Messenger that came built into XP. These days I am using Pidgin for the most part. I only use Skype for Linux because the Skype video call function in Pidgin doesn't work very well. The only thing I miss these days using a multi-protocol client instead of the dedicated ones is the ability to easily share files in the chat. But these days, with Dropbox, big email inbox sizes and so on, that just isn't really a big problem.
As you may have guessed by the name, Skype for Linux Alpha is not a fully functioning Skype client as of yet.
Further down, there is a link to a help page with the available features. Looks like everything I use, common things, are taken away in the alpha and only one new thing is being added.... Skype for Linux feature list
In this case; having read the article (I know, I know...) it seems that the car programming is overly optimistic about predicting the behaviour of vehicles overtaking it. It seems possible that the programming includes implicit assumptions of the likely stopping distance and reaction times it should expect from other vehicles as well. In other words; it "thought" it had sufficient space and time to perform the manoeuvre because it "assumed" a bus would behave and react the way a car might.
I have two thoughts, each in defence of one of the vehicles in this collision:
1) Even the safety driver expected the bus to yield and from I can glean from the article, legally the bus should have yielded. So this was a mistake that even the majority of human drivers might have made in the same situation.
2) Others in this thread have posted criticisms of bus drivers in their city or in general. Much of the annoying behaviours they mention though are pretty understandable from the bus drivers POV. You can't just suddenly hit the brakes if a smaller vehicle or pedestrian darts in front of you. Not only do you have a hell of a lot of momentum (highly variable, depending on passenger load) you also have to make as gradual velocity changes as you can. Your passengers aren't buckled up, you might have a fair number of them standing, with any number of knapsacks, briefcases, skateboards etc etc that become flying hazards when you come stop too suddenly. You have to ease to the left a fair bit when making a right turn because you have a much larger turning radius than most other vehicles. You have to drive straddling lines sometimes because if you stayed tight to the right, you are going to crunch someone, hop the curb or both. On the other hand, if you do stick to the left as much as you can, lots of people are going to pull what Torontonians call a "cabby pass" where the cab illegally passes a bus or streetcar on the right so as to get out from behind it. If they don't use their rear end to block the traffic lane, quite often they'll never get back out because no one wants to stop at the buses back corner and let the bus back in. (I have a relative who is a TTC bus driver and he has passed along some training and daily work anecdotes)
No; my issue is that it gives the choice over what temperature in my home is acceptable during hot weather to the utility. If my understanding is correct, the way it is going to work is that, late in the afternoons or during heat waves when the A/C based demand on the grid is highest, the utility will send out shut down/throttle back commands to vast numbers of their customers. I have the following problems with this:
1) Some people need close control of their home temperatures. Every heat wave triggers a number of heat related deaths after all, even with ready (albeit often expensive) access to A/C. Allowing thousands or tens of thousands of homes to rise by ten degrees seems likely to increase that death rate by some amount.
2) People like having control, are long accustomed to having control in their own homes. They can handle a lack of control or handing control over to someone/thing else as long as it is a) Doing close to what they would be doing themselves b) not obtrusive, not rubbed in their face. Having the power company turn off my A/C when things are at their hottest would be intolerable to me, and I imagine many other people. The greater the heat, the more aggressively the power company tries to throttle demand, the more people are going to find ways of bypassing the external control of their A/C units so they can run them as much as they want. When it's hot out, I want to cool my house *now*, not two or three hours from now when rates and demand are lower
3) Doing this properly requires that everybody upgrade their A/C units to ones capable of receiving and responding to the grid commands. I think very few people are going to be willing or able to just replace any or all of the A/C units in their dwelling. I've seen proposals for subsidized A/C swap programs (indeed, my own freezer and one of my window a/c units are new courtesy of my local program) But I notice that, where the swap programs are successful, a majority of the funding for it has come from the government, not the utility company. (which is just a round about way of saying we all paid for some people to get new equipment)
Another example; more closely related to the point expressed in the article is jasmine rice. Like legitimate champagne or shade-grown fair trade coffee, jasmine rice is much sought after in the marketplace. Like champagne, "real" jasmine rice is supposed to be rice of a specific variety, grown in certain regions. There have been efforts to form grower and marketer groups that can create brands, authorize use of group logos and so on. And yet, adulterated or counterfeit jasmine rice is rampant in Asian marketplaces.
The point I'm making here is that, if a given product can demand a premium price compared to alternatives or competitors, disreputable people will find a way to get a taste of that action. Using technology can make the documentation process cheaper to implement and maintain, but ultimately I doubt it can provide as much assurance of product provenance as the public believes. The best that I think could be done would be a collection of RFID tags attached to every product. Each organization, at each stage of the manufacturing process, would add their own RFID tag, encrypted with their own key. A customer who doubted the provenance of the product could, in theory, decrypt the tag using the manufacturers public key and thus be assured the manufacturer is responsible for that tag.
This would be unwieldy as hell, an added expense, and wouldn't work anyway. You still have the problems of a) Is that the product the tag was originally attached to? b) Can we be sure the manufacturers key hasn't been compromised? c) Can we be sure that the manufacturer isn't lying? d) how far back along the chain are any users or value adders expected to go to ensure the nature of the product? e) how can we arrange things so the end user will actually bother to check these things? (and keep checking them every now and again) Some people read the label, but not everyone. And even among those who read the label, how many read that label every time they purchase it? Doing the due diligence is a huge pain in the ass, you're going to see non-compliance all over the place.
Slashdotters will easily recognize that this situation has a lot of resemblance to the problem of internet security. It all boils down to a chain of trust and every link in that chain is a potential flaw to be exploited.
We were told about the CRISPR/CAS9 approach being tested in animals, but as you note, it is even further down the road then anti-sense therapies. Right now we have to hope that our son can get access to the anti-sense therapies in time and that this will buy him the time he needs for the CRISPER/CAS9 approach to get approved.
The part of it that is eating us up every day is that, even our most optimistic guess for when each therapy will become available isn't soon enough for even our most optimistic prognosis for his condition. The most likely outcome is that he will be in the wheelchair full time and require assistance eating before the anti-sense therapy becomes available and that he will be dead just before the CRISPR/CAS9 "cure" gets full approval.
*Many other large corporations and corporate associations have done the same of course. It's just that in the realm of IP, copyrights and piracy do we see the most clear-cut, headline grabbing examples. Examples: The efforts to keep electric cars non-competitive, efforts to continue to subsidize oil and corn-based ethanol fuel stocks, Native land being outright seized by abusing eminent domain and then selling that land to mining and/or oil companies who started the whole process. The well known "chicken tax" originally intended to penalize Euro companies for taxing US chicken imports, but somehow morphing into a tax on Asian light trucks, which "coincidentally" protected the big three US auto makers from competition from smaller, lighter and more efficient vehicles during the height of the 70's fuel crisis. These are just off the top of my head. I'm sure my fellow slashdotters can contribute many more examples....
"It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God but to create him." -Arthur C. Clarke