Slashdot Mirror

No, you weren't supposed to actually use those DTDs - they should have came with the app. It's just got a URL to be a unique string, and actually exists as a service so you know where to copy the file from, not to be downloaded every time your app runs.

A better analogy is.. AOL and dojo.

Geolibertarianism is just despotism (i.e. what we have now) on a global scale. Who will collect the taxes? From what warrant does the right to collect taxes (i.e. engage in the violent robbery of others) issue? It cannot be justified using the rules of logic or justice. What you call Geolibertarianism is just a euphemism for a global communist state. Why tax only land and not other forms of property such as oxygen, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, water, timber, beef, etc?

I have seen people misunderstand geolibertarianism before, but generally not on such a scale. Quoth Wikipedia, "Communism is a socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of a classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production." Geolibertarianism explicitly states that of the three classical factors of production (land, labor, and capital), labor and capital should remain untaxed.

And you are incorrect on your latter point -- to a Georgist, "land" includes that part of the natural universe which is not created by mankind and which is (typically) inelastically supplied. Taxes on air pollution would be considered Georgist, since the atmosphere was not created by mankind and is inelastically supplied.

Libertarianism (as defined by For A New Liberty) is an absolute belief in the rights of the individual. You cannot be a libertarian and be for the existence of government or taxes. They are mutually exclusive concepts.

That is the definition of anarchism.

The refutations of geolibertarianism by real libertarians (as opposed to National Socialists masquerading as "libertarians") are legion and I am not going to type them all here.

I suggest you start here: http://mises.org./

The refutations of Murray Rothbard's critique are legion as well, and I recommend this as a starting point: http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/tma68/geo-faq.htm

(As much as I generally dislike links to AOL, the FAQ is well done, and there are links to other sites as well.)

Google is somewhat a special case. Larry and Sergey have a controlling voting interest and thus have broad leeway to interpret what is in shareholder's interests:

http://finance.aol.com/company/google-inc/goog/nas

Yeah, somebody already came up with a modest proposal

Gone are the days when world looked at USA as a saviour
(WW2).

Since then, USA Empire has intervened in more than FIFTY
countries around the world - to support it's own perceived interests.

http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm

They supported fascist Spain, Portugal ... - when it suited them.
They brought down democratic governments in Latin America - when it suited them.
They supported religious zealots - like in Saudi Arabia ... - when it suited them.
They supported dismembering of states - like in the Balkans - when it suited them.
They supported changing of borders - like in the Middle East - when it suited them.
They ...

Current USA reminds me a lot of Roman Empire.
Parallels are striking.

It's ultimate doom is also, assured.

The questions remain what will be the cause and when it will happen?

Market crash like in 1929?
Immigration and population boom that will replace Anglo-Saxons?
Climate change?
Nuclear war?
Else?

The only problem is, rest of the world will not be able to laugh.
We are so dependent on USA economically, that the entire world will
be plunged into a dark age.

Few monkeys in a wrong spot can do a lot of damage.

I'm a bit down on Postini lately. A few months ago, they started marking my personal e-mails to Postini customers as spam. Which is kinda ironic. And pretty damned annoying, since my lawyer, my broker, my apartment manager and my chiropractor are all on Postini servers. But hey, that happens. I went over my server with a fine-tooth comb, I set up SPF, DomainKey, DKIM, no luck. I even switched servers. No matter. My e-mail, now digitally signed in triplicate, was still being scored as 90% probable spam.

So I tried to get in touch with their postmaster group. Only they don't have one. And I tried to check their feedback loop. Only they don't have one. As a shareholder, I even wrote to Investor Relations. No response. In the process, I found out that they have a universally awful reputation among the mail delivery community.

In the end, all they could tell me was that their system decided my mail was spam because - I kid you not - their system had, previously, decided my mail was spam. Which, of course, increases my spamminess score. And so on, and so on, until we're all using the same shampoo.

So, to recap: The guy in charge of keeping Google secure, Scott Petry, is the guy who invented a system that bit-buckets your e-mail, with absolutely no accountability, no sanity checks, no industry best practices... because of guilt by association WITH YOURSELF.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

I'm a bit down on Postini lately. A few months ago, they started marking my personal e-mails to Postini customers as spam. Which is kinda ironic. And pretty damned annoying, since my lawyer, my broker, my apartment manager and my chiropractor are all on Postini servers. But hey, that happens. I went over my server with a fine-tooth comb, I set up SPF, DomainKey, DKIM, no luck. I even switched servers. No matter. My e-mail, now digitally signed in triplicate, was still being scored as 90% probable spam.

So I tried to get in touch with their postmaster group. Only they don't have one. And I tried to check their feedback loop. Only they don't have one. As a shareholder, I even wrote to Investor Relations. No response. In the process, I found out that they have a universally awful reputation among the mail delivery community.

In the end, all they could tell me was that their system decided my mail was spam because - I kid you not - their system had, previously, decided my mail was spam. Which, of course, increases my spamminess score. And so on, and so on, until we're all using the same shampoo.

So, to recap: The guy in charge of keeping Google secure, Scott Petry, is the guy who invented a system that bit-buckets your e-mail, with absolutely no accountability, no sanity checks, no industry best practices... because of guilt by association WITH YOURSELF.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

• Up will follow WALL-E for Pixar, featuring the voices of Ed Asner, Christopher Plummer, John Ratzenberger and Jordan Nagai.
  
• Tinkerbell will go direct-to-DVD, followed by three sequels. So four Tinkerbell films all together.
  
• Rapunzel is back! Not only that, but the classic story will be done in full CGI.
• King of the Elves is another film coming from Disney animation in 2012, and it's based on a Phillip K. Dick story.
  
• Toy Story and Toy Story 2 to be released in 3-D in 2009 and 2010.
• Toy Story 3 hits theaters on June 18, 2010
• Newt will be Pixar's film in 2011, and it comes with this description: "What happens when the last remaining male and female blue-footed newts on the planet are forced together by science to save the species, and they can't stand each other?
• Cars 2 coming in 2012!

Pennsylvania state law will not consider entering and turning around in a driveway trespassing unless the driveway is marked as private or is gated or otherwise enclosed in a manner that is designed to secure it from intruders. See http://members.aol.com/StatutesPA/18.Cp.35.html. So there was no criminal or civil offense committed.

That is a criminal law statute. It has nothing whatsoever to do with civil trespass, and you are unlikely to find a convenient statutory description of the rules of civil trespass since they are derived from statements made by courts - that is, they are case law, and the rules are too complex for a convenient 5 line description.

DCMA Section 202, Sub-Section 512, Paragraph (a) provides for common carrier status in all but name.

Gawking in my window from the public street is legal. Gawking in my window from my driveway/lawn/whatever is not. The difference? I own my driveway. The problem here is that Google employed an idiot driver who blindly followed the GPS, which apparently indicated that the street terminated around the garage. They *should have* recognized a clear property line at the concrete drive.

While it's true that you can control whether people can take photographs while on your property, or enter your property for any reason, unless the property is clearly posted "NO TRESPASSING," someone on a readily accessible part of the property isn't considered to be trespassing. Exactly how this works varies depending upon state law. Pennsylvania state law will not consider entering and turning around in a driveway trespassing unless the driveway is marked as private or is gated or otherwise enclosed in a manner that is designed to secure it from intruders. See http://members.aol.com/StatutesPA/18.Cp.35.html. So there was no criminal or civil offense committed.

As to the status of the photographs, they clearly do not violate the privacy of the homeowners, because the area photographed was publicly visible anyway. It would be difficult to imagine a situation in which a court would provide any remedy other than ordering that the photographs be taken down.

Just to make this clear - the fact that photographs are taken on private property does not in any way automatically constitute a violation of privacy or automatically assign ownership of the photos to anyone other than the photographer. You can take photographs of whatever you want from private property as long as you are not instructed not to do so. The issue is what happens afterward - what use do you make of them. Invasion of privacy, copyrighted works visible in photographs, espionage, commercial exploitation, trespass, and so on, are separate issues.

1: it is assumed that a driveway can be reasonably used at will to turn a vehicle around.

Please, cite PA state law which provides for this.

2: tresspassing is not automatic. In most states even when properly posted, you can still go onto private land and go up to the front door. Even salesman can ring bells at homes posted no soliciting in SC. The onyl poewr you have is to ask them to leave. It only becomes tresspassing if they refuse to or if they return later. Neither of these conditions happened.

http://members.aol.com/StatutesPA/18.Cp.35.html

In PA, posting IS legally binding. If it's maked as no trepsasing, you CANNOT enter the property without permission.

3: the proerty itself was not marked, posted, fenced with a gate, not in any other way abvious that is was private. I can't see in any of the pictures the van took where their so called private road sign exists, let alone complies with their state's laws concerning use of proper singage (including regionally accepted or universal images to assist those who can't read).

Not in any of the pictures which we've seen. Unless you've actually been on that road, I would drop this argument.

4: all they had to do was ask for the images to be removed.

Google may not have had a right to be on the property; that has nothing to do with pictures being taken. Also, I prefer people get my permission to photograph me or my property in advance if they are going to use it in a commerical application.

5: the engineer in the vehicle has no control over the images being taken, not can he catalog or document them. This is ON PURPOSE to prevent tampering with the image feeds, and to keep the image recorder in sync with GPS information.

That's not an excuse to trepass or take pictures on private property without permission.

As an aside, I prefer trespass not even require posting; unless you KNOW you have permission to be on a piece of property, you shouldn't be on it. You shouldn't be able to root around my car anymore than you should be able to root around on my property.

Nope. Not in PA. Here, I looked it up for ya. 3503 (b) ii. Defiant Trespass.

http://members.aol.com/StatutesPA/18.Cp.35.html

"posting in a manner prescribed by law or reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders;"

Also, you can't be charged if:

"the actor reasonably believed that the owner of the premises, or other person empowered to license access thereto, would have licensed him to enter or remain."

Which is why delivery vans, fire fighters, etc. can't be charged with trespass, even when it is posted. Also, no PA court would consider chasing a wounded deer across your property trespassing. You have to post "No hunting" as well.

I've worked for a karaoke bar called the 7 Bamboo since 2001. Here's some video clips of the mayhem.

http://uncutvideo.aol.com/users/sevenbamboovideo

Here's a statement from a guy that deals with both sexes at the core of thier honest drunkness when it comes to getting what they want. In this case, it mostly happens when our playlist is so full we cannot take anymore requests.

Guys will typically flash cash, or they'll do a intimidation display (beating thier chest) to get what they want. Girls on the other hand will flirt, pout, or use some other form of sexual display.

So when a slobbering drunk girl is pouting at me, bent over the booth, cleavage showing, saying "PLEASE MR KARAOKE MAN! LET ME HAVE ONE MORE SONG!" You mean to tell me as a male i'm misreading what she's trying to communicate?

She's trying to tell me "I'll fuck your brains out of this world if you let me sing." 99% of the women will pretend this is thier offer, but never deliver. (Yes, there's a small maybe even less than 1% that would deliver. (Cue up the "TOQER PLZ INTRO ME jokes now)

Just because a woman has no intent on fullfilling the message she's projecting, it doesn't diminish the fact that she *IS* trying to get that message across. It could be cleavage, it could me smiling and acting all cute, it could be putting thier arm around you, women have a lot of body language things they can do to convey it.

Not all men can tell the difference either. In fact, I'd say the majority can't. It's not fair to lump all us men together as one chauvenist mass though because women are trying to decieve us. Who's worse? The dumb man that can't tell the difference, or the salacious seductructress using her false (read lying) sexual messages?

And maybe I just don't know WTF i'm talking about because I have a skewed view of the world based on where I work, but I did work in desktop support in corporate enviroments for many years prior (think netware, early .com, NT3.51 days) I used to see women use the very same techniques at work to size new hires up, or get guys to help them on projects, or whatever. I think this is pre-programmed into us from our primate ancestors (ever see female chimps in heat with the swollen red asses? How about the bonobo chimps trading sex for food, etc.)

My wife is a very paranoid lady when it comes to other women. I think deep down inside all women know that all other women use sexual body cues in the same way. I used to think my wife was nuts when she would be all jealous of other girls standing around me, but after 14 years of her giving me cues I can sort of spot what's going on now too.

I believe a lot of this behavior is going to end at my generation. We didn't have this tharn intarnet in the 70's when I was born. I believe that the net, womens sufferage, and globalization has lead to a balancing out of the genders (at least here in the US) We are really on the verge of having a woman president, and that says a lot for how much gender roles have changed in this country. A lot of men (like me) had to take what jobs they could in 2001 between the layoffs and 9/11. I'm not the breadwinner in my household anymore, and i'm OK with that.

I look forward to it. It's got to be better than the message tradition beliefs and pop culture has tried to teach us. Western Christianity has typically conveyed that the man is in a dominant role, and the woman is a sexual toy/servant/baby launcher. I think the best balance is a true partnership, but so many women, men are running around ignorantly trying to assert thier gender role that they don't learn that till many years down the road.

There's also another side to this and that's the pop culture aspect. How many of you have watch Margeret Cho and Andrew Dice Clay?

I've known girls that follow Cho like she's Jesus, and guys follow ADC like he's uhh I dunno, Jesus? I'm sure other folks have seen the same. People a

In 1863, nearly 15 years before Thomas Alva Edison created the first phonograph, an inventor named Leon Scott is said to have visited the White House. If historical anecdotes are accurate, he made a tracing of President Lincoln's voice with his newly invented "phonautograph," a machine that scratched sound vibrations onto a soot-blackened sheet of paper wrapped around a drum.

The cylinder on which a paper record of Lincoln's voice was apparently made has never been found.

This sounds all too familiar, mostly because I grew up in Mendocino county (To give you an idea of how hippie friendly Mendo is, take this fact: "the marijuana industry is responsible for roughly 40% of all Mendocino County economic activity" -http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle-old/413/mendocino.shtml ) . It wasn't all to long ago when my mom and one of her close friends spearheaded a movement against the installation of a cell tower. Funnily enough, they both owned cell phones. It wasn't long until she moved on to blaming my computer for all of my problems, under the basis of EMFs (ElectroMagnetic Fields http://www.mercola.com/article/emf/emf_dangers.htm . These people in Sebastopol (Oh god, I only live a few miles away from this town at the moment: I live in Santa Rosa)are more than likely caught up in the EMF craze. ( To see how EMFs are being applied to wifi , just check out this http://members.aol.com/gotemf/emf/wifi.htm ) Personally, I think people like this should adopt a more well balanced perspective, instead of just feeding into modern societies fear tactics.

Their company may turn around like HP did(please see the 10-year chart for the whole picture) after they boot the incompetent upper management like HP booted Carly Fiorina(note: she ran HP from 1999-2005 and oversaw the HP/Compaq merger, among "other things").

On the other hand, it may be interesting to see what would happen if Motorola split "for real" just as Agilent split from HP.

Old school advice...

First of all, school up to the PhD is a pyramid scheme (currently failing):
"The Big Crunch" by David Goodstein (Vice Provost CalTech)
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~dg/crunch_art.html
The end result is "disciplined minds" who will not step out of line politically:
http://disciplined-minds.com/
Or journalistically:
http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20051207.htm
"By the time you've gone through, you know, Oxford and Cambridge and here you could say Harvard and Princeton and so on, and even less fancy places, you have instilled into you the understanding that there are certain things that just wouldn't do to say, and that's what a good deal of education is. So the people who come out of it - and there are many filters, if people go off and try to be too critical there are many ways of discouraging them or eliminating them one way or the other. Some get through, it's not a uniform story. ... The more educated you are the more indoctrinated you are. And you believe you are being free and objective, whereas in fact you're just repeating state propaganda."

The reason schooling exists in its current form is to teach these seven lessons:
"The Seven-Lesson Schoolteacher" by John Taylor Gatto - 1991 New York State Teacher of the Year
http://hometown.aol.com/tma68/7lesson.htm
in order to prepare most people for a life of servitude to the military or factories (and to not be very thoughtful about consumption or politics either).
"The Prussian Connection" -- Gatto
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/7a.htm
And from:
"A conversation with historian and author James Loewen. Sort of."
http://www.stayfreemagazine.org/archives/18/loewen.html
"We like to believe schooling is a good thing. But when it comes to understanding any problem with historical roots, we might expect that the more traditional schooling in history that Americans have, the less they will understand it. Students who have taken math courses are better at math. The same is true for English, foreign languages, and almost every other subject. But in history, stupidity is the result of more, not less, schooling."

Still, studies have shown that the only people who really get economic value out of an Ivy League degree or equivalent are those from lower middle class backgrounds. All other things being equal, for most other people it's not worth the money as an investment. See the book "Class" for some other details:
http://www.amazon.com/Class-Through-American-Status-System/dp/0671792253
Otherwise, consider:
"College is a Waste of Time and Money" (1975)
http://www.grossmont.edu/bertdill/docs/CollegeWaste.pdf
"College, then, may be a good place for those few young people who are really drawn to academic work, who would rather read than eat, but it has become too expensive, in money, time, and intellectual effort to serve as a holding pen for large numbers of our young. We ought to make it possible for those reluctant, unhappy students to find alternative ways of growing up, and more realistic preparation for the years ahead."

And consider those years ahead following Moore's Law will include computers 10000X faster than what we have now for the same price in 20 or so years.
http://www.transhumanis

I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Sam

(5:45) And We prescribed for them therein: The life for the life, and the eye for the eye, and the nose for the nose, and the ear for the ear, and the tooth for the tooth, and for wounds of retaliation. But whoso forgoeth it (in the way of charity) it shall be expiation (atonement for past sins) for him. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed; such are wrong-doers.

(5:3) [...]whoso is forced by hunger, not by will, to sin: (for him) lo! Allah is forgiving, Merciful.

"The vast majority of Palestinian voters did not and have never voted for any HAMAS-affiliated MP."

Hamas won 76 out of 132 seats the Jan 2006 elections. Whether the US or Fatah liked it, Hamas won.

Abbas (who belongs to Fatah) was voted in the year before - Hamas boycotted that election.

Fatah has been accused of collaborating with the CIA, and I won't be surprised if that is true. History has shown that the US has a habit of just paying lip service to democracy. Go look at the history of Chile, Guatemala, Iran, Ecuador, Syria etc. The US has been "better" at overthrowing democracies than dictatorships.

The only "legitimate government" is a US Gov approved one. If they could diebold all elections they would (but not all voters will tolerate such crap).

See: http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html

For the others the following are good _starting_ points:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_intervention_in_the_Middle_East
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_U.S._regime_change_actions
http://members.aol.com/bblum6/American_holocaust.htm

It's a strange game the US is playing- they give Israel money and weapons, and they give Fatah money and weapons, who then both fight each other and also fight Hamas (whose backers include the Saudis - who are propped up by the USA).

For instance, Lobachevsky, at least according to Tom Lehrer. (For those of you sound-deprived, enjoy the lyrics).

We tried to make the Open AIM Program as restriction-free and flexible as possible. But in order to help protect our network and users, certain rules apply.

• We ask that you incorporate two value-added features of the AIM service into your application. The full list that you can pick from is listed in our Additional Feature Requirements webpage.
• Although we have removed many restrictions on usage and development, we still do not permit developers to build Open AIM applications that are interoperable with other IM networks. (Multi-headed applications are now allowed). Please refer to the Developers License Agreement for additional details.

Yes. You act as if you're not causing harm. If your house is broken into, the only reasonable thing to do is assume your life is in danger. What legitimate reason does someone have to break into your house? You act in a threatening way you should expect harm to come to you.

What do you think should happen? Ask them politely to leave? Do you think they break in to throw you a suprise birthday party?

Please, wake up. You're only as safe as YOU make yourself.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2007/12/02/2007-12-02_grandma_killed_and_grandson_stabbed_in_l.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2007/12/02/2007-12-02_grandma_killed_and_grandson_stabbed_in_l.html
http://www.nypost.com/seven/02042007/news/regionalnews/l_i__home_invasion_slaying_regionalnews_frank_ryan______and_c_j__sullivan.htm
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/cops-arrest-suspect-in-attempted-home-invasion/3555644578

You're barking up the wrong tree. The US doesn't use its military to apply imperialistic pressure. The military is used sparingly (Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Kuwait, Somalia, Iraq - hardly an empire).

Oh really?

Libertarianism. ---- Heard of it? 22%.

OpenID promises single signon, but can't deliver it because everyone wants their own walled garden - Yahoo and AOL don't want to share users.

According to the AOL developers' blog, they are actively working on making their products accept OpenID, and even if they weren't, just because AOL wants a walled garden, it doesn't mean nobody else can become a relying party. There's plenty of utility in OpenID even if all the big players are only providers.

Are you sure you don't have an OpenID? If you have a LiveJournal, you have an OpenID. If you have a Yahoo! account, you have an OpenID. If you have an AOL account, you have an OpenID.

You are full of shit. Period.

Nothing in his congressional record, personal life, nor his medical practice leads one iota of credence to the newsletters. In fact, it's just the opposite.

Would the president of the NAACP back someone like you just described? Of course not.

Would someone that you just described deliver babies for free to African American and Hispanic families that were too poor to afford it? No.

He was running a full time medical practice and left the newsletters in care of people he thought he could trust. That was a mistake, as there were those who had a different agenda. At least he admitted he had been careless, unlike MOST of our elected officials (Iraq War).

His actions speak a lot louder than the words written by some assholes who had a vendetta. Here's a challenge for you. I want you to find one, just one instance where an action in his personal, medical, or political life shows paranoid racism. You won't find one.

But I'll bite. Ron Paul has extensive ties to the League of the South, a neo-Confederate group that advocates secession, a "return" to Christian law and racial violence.

Or his association with the John Birch Society, a far right wing society with both racist and conspiracy theory views.

He's not a libertarian. He's a constitutionalist. There is a difference.

I get "We're sorry, the clip you are trying to play is not currently available in your area.". Seems even adverts are DRM'd nowadays.

Amazing. Found a video about her ignorance.

More amazing ignorance: The Gift That Keeps On Giving: Dana Perino Reveals The Awesome Benefits Of Global Warming.

Was hiring her a decision Cheney allowed George W. Bush to make?

Is this now a yearly tradition for churches to whine about their Superbowl parties...

Here is last years article same story, different church:

http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/category/miami-football/2007/02/01/nfl-orders-church-to-cancel-super-bowl-party/

That was a great site you mentioned with all sorts of fun activities:
http://www.poissonrouge.com/
If a younger kid is going to play video games, those are probably the best sorts of them. So too with the other one you mentioned (though it is more about reading):
http://www.starfall.com/

And certainly YouTube offers access to lots of interesting stuff for young kids (buildings being demolished, tornadoes, firetrucks, bagger 288, visualization of new ideas, etc.). Example:
"Take a seat concept: a library seat that follows you"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Dgaz6NIUFk
And for slightly older kids there is lots of educational video online like from the Annenberg CPB project like "The World of Chemistry"
http://www.learner.org/resources/series61.html
or for younger kids stuff on energy:
http://www.learner.org/resources/series160.html

The late Fred Rogers' "Family Communications" non-profit has lots of good resources too both for kids and parents (CDs, DVDs, web pages, and books):
http://www.fci.org/parenting.asp

Kids can also learn a lot from Rokenbok and other RC toys (even at age four or so).
http://www.rokenbok.com/
The benefits of RC over video games is that the physical RC vehicles can also be pushed around by hand or used with other toys. And a child's eye site continues to develop normally instead of being used at a common fixed distance to the screen.

But there remains a lot to be said for learning from the real world. See:
"Gever Tulley: 5 dangerous things you should let your kids do"
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/202
"Nature deficit disorder"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_deficit_disorder

The Greeks suggests a good life involves "moderation in all things, including moderation". Or in other words, balance. Might kids grow healthiest at a certain pace? Perhaps too much of one thing (video games, broadcast tv) can mean too little of something else (health, creativity)? See:
http://www.openwaldorf.com/media.html
It's certainly a complex topic, but again, if kids are going to use video games, then the links you pointed to are fantastic ones, and much more likely to promote creativity than staring at less engaging and less interactive fare than advertisement and fear/sarcasm driven broadcast TV.

Also, now that you've gone and helped your kid get smarter than average, :-) why dump him into the day-prison euphemistically called "school"? :-) "Schooling" has only a tangential relationship to "Educating" in practice.

See John Taylor Gatto:
"The Underground History of American Education":
http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/prologue.htm
"The Seven-Lesson Schoolteacher"
http://hometown.aol.com/tma68/7lesson.htm

John Holt:
"Teach your own"
http://www.holtgws.com/

Unschooling:
http://www.unschooling.info/articles.htm

_Disciplined Minds: A Critical Look at Salaried Professionals and the Soul-Batteri

The "condemnations" of homosexuality on the one hand and shrimp on the other are not the same, using entirely different words. (Just because the 400 year-old language in the KJV uses the word "abomination" in both passages, doesn't mean the Hebrew is the same.)

(the following was shamelessly taken from godhatesshrimp.com)

But, some of you say, in the original Hebrew, there are two words that were both translated as "abomination": to'eivah , for homosexuality, and sheketz , for non-kosher food.

Our answer to that is:

1. Sure, that's the letter of the law, but pretty mealy-mouthed, in our opinion - you take the "strict constructionist" viewpoint in this situation to justify your prejudice while still being able to eat what you want, while glossing over or ignoring other translation problems in other parts of the bible. (More about biblical mistranslations in Romans and Corinthians: What the New Testament Says About Homosexuality)
2. You claim that some parts of the bible are open to interpretation, that there are translation errors, that some parts only apply to Jews, etc., and then simultaneously claim that the bible is inerrant and without flaw... a positively Orwellian bit of doublethink there. Either follow all the rules, or admit that they're all outdated.

But, still others say, what about 1 Corinthians? Paul says... Well, the easy answer is, this site was never meant to be a comprehensive rebuttal to following outdated religious rules. The less easy answer is that, in his letter to the church in Corinth, Paul referred to restrictions listed in Mosaic law in the Torah, a.k.a. the Old Testament, so basing your argument on Paul's reference to a source that was declared invalid by Jesus (see above) is a shaky bit of reasoning. Or to explain it more clearly, we'll quote a friend who is studying to be a minister:

1) Paul is not God.

2) When Paul is citing this list of sins he is doing it to make the point that the Church in Corinth is free of these sins, which were listed in the Torah, because of their faith in Jesus. Paul's letter to the Romans spells out in excruciating detail how the law no longer applies to Christians because they have died to sin and been risen in Jesus. In other words, these categories were good enough for our Hebrew forebears as they went, but as Jesus says to the tricky scribes, Moses gave those laws (specifically speaking of divorce) because the people's hearts were hard. Jesus clearly demands a higher mode of ethical conduct; in repeated instruction and parables he contrasts what people were taught with what he says. Therefore, Paul's personal feelings about what kind of people will inherit the kingdom of God, taken as a blanket condemnation of certain behaviors, is not only contrary to Paul's own teachings on the matter of justification, but deeply opposed to the spirit and teaching of Christ.

3) What Paul is giving a list of, in both verses that you cite, are examples of depraved conduct, as he sees it. His point is that when people turn their backs on God, they are prone to act in all kinds of sick ways; his point is not to list things that Christians should mark in their notebooks as being the "newly revised Levitical code". Paul is saying, "You guys used to do all kinds of crazy shit, but now that you have Jesus, you've got your act together." I would say that there is a big difference between lustful, furtive couplings and a committed, healthy relationship. The notion of a committed, healthy homosexual relationship was utterly foreign to early Jews and Christians, as was the notion of abolition, racial intermarriage, antiseptics, and all sorts of other things that we take for granted today.

4) Jesus never mentions homosexuality in the Gospels, not once. If it was so important that we had to clamp down on it anywhere and eve

Does anybody find it odd that the FCC website recomends Netscape as their browser of choice and then sends you to a link which forwards to http://netscape.aol.com/ that has no means of downloading Netscape? Then when you dig further you find this article recomending migrating to Mozilla Firefox.

Really can we trust the FCC to get anything right? Also am I the only one who was confused by that page that is supposed to describe how to comment?

Obviously you've never watched Bugs Bunny cartoons. When you run out of gas you either come to a complete stop, or you simply use the air brakes.

Dan East

That's true, and even then it can be abused. I guess anything can be abused. There was the guy named Mike Rowe who registered MikeRoweSoft.com and if memory serves correctly (and probably doesn't) he got in a bit of a tussle with Microsoft and IIRC wound up working for them.

And there was the US Army Staff Sergent, whose name I can't remember, who registered his name. There was a famous guy with the same name who sued, I also don't remember the outcome of that one but IIRC money talked and sgt. whatsisname walked.

I tried to register SteveMcGrew.com years ago but the other Steve McGrew (or rather, one of the other Stve McGrews, the semifamous one) already had it. I tried to register mcgrew.com but some spamming asshat squatter company had it and wanted to sell the email address (yourfirst name)@(your last name).com

Anything can be abused. In fact I'm going to need rehab for kitten huffing.

-mcgrew

You know, you're starting sound worryingly familiar. You're not a Harvard postgraduate, by any chance?

Even worse, who are these sick bastards poisoning squirrels?

Lets go through some terms, shall we?

Demos: Greek for "common people" or "lower class"

Kratia: Greek for the word "rule".

Thus the word demos-krates; democracy.

Polity: Aristotle considered it to be the perfect form of government because it was neither Democracy (self-serving by the poor) or Oligarchy (self-serving rule by the wealthy) - but rather a form of government where things are ruled by everyone in the interest of the whole community.

Democracy used to be the corrupt equivalent of "polity" in the day of Athens, according to Aristotle's typology of governments. Back in the day during the time when the founding fathers framed the constitution, the word "democracy" used to have the negative connotation of "tyranny of the majority" (still exists to this day). As demonstrated by their influence to call one of the parliamentary chambers "the Senate", they opted to use another word inspired by the Romans:

Res publica: The word "republic" in latin, which means thing business / thing of the people.

Madison and Jefferson DID in turn change the definition of "Republic" to mean scheme of representation. It is different from the term Res Publica which just implies people's business. Since then the definitions and usage of both the words have changed, as hundreds of years have passed. "Democracy" changed in the sense that it now includes a representative structure ("liberal democracy" is what we all mean) and "Republic" today commonly refers to a country whose head of state is not a monarch (China is a republic, but they for sure aint democratic). In essence, the founding fathers used the word "Republic" exactly in the way we use the word "Democracy" today. I.e. Representative Democracy.
 
So when people claim that the United States is a Republic and not a Democracy, they're using age old definitions. If they claim the today's linguistical definition of Republic is wrong, then they ought to go back to the true Roman definition! So when someone tells you that the United States isn't democracy - do the right thing and tell them they're wrong!

Real Estate - you can buy it, improve it, sell it on to someone who is unable to improve it themselves

Or, you can hold on to it, prevent it from being used by anyone else in the hopes that its value will appreciate or that you will gain some indirect benefits.

Stocks - you buy it and a company gets an investment to spend and improve their business

A publicly-owned corporation does not benefit directly from the machinations of the stock market. When you buy a stock (except in the case of an IPO or reissue), you do not enrich the company.

Gold - meh, we don't need it, everything is based on 1s and 0s. No-one misses it if you 'buy' some and it remains sitting in some bank vault somewhere

You don't need it, maybe. But millions are made on precious metal speculation, so someone is benefiting..

Coins/stamps - Millions of almost identical ones. To most people they don't have much value or use.

Just as a personal domain name doesn't have much use for most people (other than perhaps the domain owner)?

Art - it was designed to be collected and displayed

Really? Care to provide a resource for this?

Domains - squatters (which is what they are) don't improve it after they buy it. In real estate terms they leave it to rot with minimal attention and invest nothing in it

It doesn't appear your arguments support your conclusion. Please try again, and this time let's not engage in slashthink.

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/will-ferrell-snl-harry-carry/1926075673

Seriously. I mean, I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Comcast fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to download a 17 Meg file from one website on the internet to another internet. 20 minutes. At home, on my verizon wireless, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this comcast, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

In addition, during this file transfer, Youtube will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Slashdot is straining to keep up as I type this.

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered with various comcast accounts, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a comcast site that has loads faster than its verizon counterpart, despite comcasts' faster tube infrastructure. My cable modem with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this WIFI modem at times. From a web 2.0 standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the comcast is a superior service.

Comcast addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use comcast over other faster, cheaper, more stable service providers.

Ahem. It's called "Research".

/begin oblig Tom Lehrer lyric/
Plagiarize,
Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes,
So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize...
Only be sure always to call it please, "research".