18.4 C
Monday, August 21, 2017
Home Tags Walmart

Tag: Walmart

Nintendo promises "significant amount" of consoles through end of the year.
Lawsuit: Walmart let teen steal weapons, pass security before killing driver.
You say Dad already has a $50 smartphone-controlled drone? No problem: Here are 11 more tech toys you won't find at your local Walmart.
Fines equal around 8 hours of profit, that'll teach them Target, the shopping behemoth for people who are too classy to go to Walmart, has today reached a settlement with 47 states and the District of Columbia over the 2013 hacking incident that saw 70 million customers lose their personal information.…
Pressure for a huge acquisition—think Netflix or Tesla—may grow.
NES Classic is no more, but luckily cheap hobbyist boards are great for little projects.
After scandals and lawsuits, hobbling company is said to have $150 million left.
The service is based on the Linux Foundation’s Hyperledger Fabric.
AMD's Radeon memory business has slowed down, with fewer products available in the U.S. and no new product releases since the introduction of the Polaris GPUs last year.Products are not being sold by key partners like Newegg, Best Buy, or TigerDirec...
Now that Trump has taken office and is adorning his cabinet with fellow millionaires and billionaires, net neutrality is on the chopping block.

The principle that all internet traffic should be treated equally is all but dead. With net neutrality, Amazon, for example, can’t cut a deal with Time Warner to make its website come up faster than Walmart’s.

For all the talk of being for the common man, this administration won’t stand in the way of big businesses making deals. The internet was built on the very idea of net neutrality.
It has a history going back more than a century in “common carrier” laws, when Standard Oil was fined for creating a deal with a railroad (also a common carrier) in which it got a “rebate” whenever a competitor shipped oil on the line.

These kinds of deals create vertical monopolies to the disadvantage of consumers, escalating prices.

They also stifle innovation as they price access to the market out of the reach of startups and inventors.To read this article in full or to leave a comment, please click here
Enlarge / Nearly two-decade-old photos of a suspected child molester matched a 2007 passport photo via a biometrics analysis by the FBI, leading to Charles Hollin's arrest in Oregon.FBI / Aurich Lawson reader comments 50 Share this story A fugitive suspected of molesting a 10-year-old Indiana girl 17 years ago has been arrested after the Federal Bureau of Investigation employed facial recognition technology, according to court documents.

The bureau said the suspect's US passport photo in December was run though a Facial Analysis, Comparison, and Evaluation (FACE) test, and it matched photos taken before he disappeared nearly two decades ago. Charles Hollin, 61, was arrested in Salem, Oregon last week at a Walmart where he works. He had both Minnesota and Oregon driver's licenses with his picture on them.

The agency said it did not perform a biometrics analysis with those databases because they have not opened up their DMV roles for the bureau to search.

The bureau noted in a court filing that the government maintains "top secret" databases containing biometric profiles. "The Department of Motor Vehicles for Minnesota and Oregon were not searched due to the fact that it was prohibited by law.

Additional searches were conducted in various federal secret and top secret databases.

All of these searches were negative," Todd Prewitt, an FBI agent, wrote in court documents (PDF). Hollin had vanished when Indiana authorities went to arrest him in February, 2000.

The authorities suspect Hollin abducted a 10-year-old girl, put a stocking mask over her head, drove to a secluded area, and then molested her.

They suspect he abandoned the girl naked on an isolated road, where she was found by a passerby. He went by the identity of Andrew David Hall, who was an 8-year-old boy killed in a 1975 Kentucky auto crash, the authorities said. The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) says the bureau has access to roughly 412 million images as part of its face-recognition database.

The bulk of those images are photographs of people who have committed no crime, according to the recent GAO report. The report says the bureau's FACE unit contains 30 million mug shots, has access to driver license photos from 16 states, the State Department's visa and passport database, and the biometric database maintained by the Defense Department.

The report did not mention any top secret database.

But it did fault the FBI for being lax about privacy and the accuracy of the photos in its database. The bureau has used facial recognition to capture other long-vanished suspects.

A US fugitive on the lam for 14 years in connection with child sex abuse and kidnapping charges was apprehended in Nepal in 2014 after authorities scanned his "wanted" poster with facial recognition tech.
Lawrence Berkeley Labreader comments 20 Share this story In Science’s Policy Forum column, President Barack Obama has penned an article arguing that the world is quickly replacing fossil fuel-based energy with clean energy.

That momentum, he asserts, will not be stopped by “near-term” policy changes from Donald Trump’s incoming administration. The current president writes that, although climate change is undeniable, the incoming administration might do nothing about it.

That would be a political mistake, but it might not effect on the economics of clean energy, Obama argues. “Mounting economic and scientific evidence leave me confident that trends toward a clean-energy economy that have emerged during my presidency will continue,” he wrote, adding that “the trend toward clean energy is irreversible.” The president cites recent studies from national and international agencies showing that energy emissions are decoupling from economic growth, a trend that “should put to rest the argument that combatting climate change requires accepting lower growth or a lower standard of living.” And the potential damage to the economy is vast: a 4°C increase in global temperature could “lead to lost US federal revenue of roughly $340 billion to $690 billion annually.” Despite Trump’s baseless denial of climate science, local governments and businesses will be the ones dealing with climate change in the coming years. Obama predicts that these organizations will continue making the investments necessary to protect people and investments from the effects of climate change. He cites Google, Walmart, and GM as companies that have promised to move large portions, or all, of their energy consumption to renewable power. The president notes that momentum is also found on the labor side of the energy equation.

Approximately “2.2 million Americans are currently employed in the design, installation, and manufacture of energy-efficiency products and services,” he writes, as opposed to “roughly 1.1 million Americans who are employed in the production of fossil fuels and their use for electric power generation.” The president adds that fossil fuel industries receive nearly $5 billion in federal subsidies a year, “a market distortion that should be corrected on its own or in the context of corporate tax reform.” Obama then turns to the Paris Agreement—a global agreement to reduce emissions such that the globe stops short of a 2°C increase in global temperature.

Donald Trump has promised to back out of the Paris Agreement, but Obama argues that such a folly would only harm the US rather than help it: Were the United States to step away from Paris, it would lose its seat at the table to hold other countries to their commitments, demand transparency, and encourage ambition.

This does not mean the next Administration needs to follow identical domestic policies to my Administration’s.

There are multiple paths and mechanisms by which this country can achieve—efficiently and economically—the targets we embraced in the Paris Agreement.

The Paris Agreement itself is based on a nationally determined structure whereby each country sets and updates its own commitments. Regardless of U.S. domestic policies, it would undermine our economic interests to walk away from the opportunity to hold countries representing two-thirds of global emissions—including China, India, Mexico, European Union members, and others—accountable. This should not be a partisan issue.
It is good business and good economics to lead a technological revolution and define market trends.

And it is smart planning to set long-term emission-reduction targets and give American companies, entrepreneurs, and investors certainty so they can invest and manufacture the emission-reducing technologies that we can use domestically and export to the rest of the world. Ultimately the message is: deny climate science if you want, but regions, states, and businesses will still be moving to eliminate greenhouse gases to protect their own futures.