Slashdot Mirror

Stop right here. The basic principle of debate is that you debate what the person actually says, not what you invent.

And you don't get to ignore inconvenient facts. It's no strawman to point out that the vast majority of conservatives who prattle on about "limited government" only want to limit the stuff they don't like (social spending), but baby, bring on that pork and military spending, any more than pointing out how full of crap they are on "family values".

If you can't do that, you can take your ass back to a lefty echo chamber like DailyKos where you belong.

Oh, come on, admit that the real reason you don't like DailyKos is because they bring attention to right wing assholes.

Stop right here. The basic principle of debate is that you debate what the person actually says, not what you invent.

And you don't get to ignore inconvenient facts. It's no strawman to point out that the vast majority of conservatives who prattle on about "limited government" only want to limit the stuff they don't like (social spending), but baby, bring on that pork and military spending, any more than pointing out how full of crap they are on "family values".

If you can't do that, you can take your ass back to a lefty echo chamber like DailyKos where you belong.

Oh, come on, admit that the real reason you don't like DailyKos is because they bring attention to right wing assholes.

Why would they bother when the NSA can do it for them?

Guess who has been spying as a subcontractor? Verisign!

Welcome to MITM country.

The CALEA law covers data now, so virtually all of the USA Internet traffic can be effectively bugged, and there are no trustable third parties for SSL links. Where secure encryption is concerned, you are on your own.

Heh. The head of the IETF receives compensation from both Verisign and the NSA.

According to Kos himself:

It's something their former golden girl Cindy Sheehan found out when she was considering running against a Democrat, and was (according to her last Kos post) warned to stop posting on the site if she did.

Ethanol is most criticized, and with due cause. Traditional methods of ethanol production (for instance) deserve criticism. Using only corn kernels is horribly inefficient, particularly when corn is a food source.

But the old ways are changing. The State of Georgia will host the nation's first cellulosic ethanol production facility. Cellulosic ethanol production is more than 15 times more efficient than traditional production methods. Any green biomass can be used: corn kernels, corn stalks, corn roots, switchgrass, cane sugar, tree chips, industrial green waste, and even pig shit. This is the future of biofuels.

Range Fuels is building the new facility in Georgia. They do not use any biomass also used as a food source for humans or animals. The Georgia plant will use industrial tree waste from the many paper mills in the region.

So, what you are saying is that, it is perfectly fine to point a finger at another country's human rights violations (etc.) while one's own country's records are dubious at best?

Oh, and I wanted to address this piece of illogic, sense I'm seeing it crop up from other PRC apologists in different threads. The answer is: Yes, as long as you also point the finger at your own country when it fucks up along the same lines. Which I do. A lot. One of the nice things about living in the U.S. is that we don't imprison dissidents until they explicitly threaten or commit violence, no matter how popular they may or may not be.

You are lost in specifics of legitimate business and have missed evidence of political abuse of process. The ties between corporate and government intelligence allow routine, unreasonable search. Government agents are also being used for political purposes though illegal wiretaping and other programs. You might have noticed the screening portion of Bush "crowd control", where political opposition is excluded from public events. Detailed records are being kept for innocent Americans, and we have dipped so low as to spy on our own churches. These unAmerican practices were expressly outlawed in the wake of Watergate and other scandals. The president who signed those laws, claims they are being broken. This is a waste of your money and it will be used against you in business. Ultimately, this kind of abuse is all about economic advantage.

Every time telcos (and lately cablecos) want more money and less regulation for their Internet cartel, they whine that bandwidth demand will destroy the Internet. Lately they want to doublecharge popular websites (like Google) to carry their traffic, even when they are not the website's actual ISP. They really want to censor political and other comms that could threaten their power or money control, like AT&T just did to Pearl Jam. So they lie about needing to prioritize their favorite packets (therefore deprioritize or drop the packets they dislike). Rather than just adding more bandwidth, which is what we pay for, which would give them more product to sell (if at a lower price per bps), and which would solve all their routing problems better than more computation on switching ever could.

When people started putting 19.2Kbps modems on our POTS lines to the PSTN, telcos like Verizon (then still NYNEX) would try to charge us for "data modems" on special "data lines" with "data connectors" (like V.32 serial cables). Because otherwise they'd have to ensure the Central Office clocks were properly synced as master/slave, as required by law. Enough geeks (like me, in NYC's photo district) fought their BS with engineering truth, and they stopped lying. Until 56.6Kbps modems came around, and they tried it again.

They will always try it, except when (someday, maybe) there's real competition rather than the industrywide collusion. And real geeks will always stop them.

You know, it's just a rumor that he said that. The source of the report, Capitol Hill Blue, has a poor reputation for accuracy:

http://priuschat.com/index.php?showtopic=22180

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/12/9/143434/049

http://www.mccmedia.com/pipermail/brin-l/Week-of-M on-20060109/034824.html

The two main objections I see to fusion right now are 1) too little too late and 2) thermal pollution. Both might be dealt with, the second more easily.

Renewables turn out to be very inexpensive. There is an energy plan going around call Energize America http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/18/62733/6577 that includes a chart that takes selectively from this link: http://www.crest.org/repp_pubs/pdf/subsidies.pdf. So, the big dramatic number which shows up in the chart is that the subsidy for nuclear power in its first 15 years of development was $15/kWh generated, which is comapred to wind at $0.46/kWh generated. There are problems with making such comparisons because some problems are harder than others and take more time to develop. But there is some validity too. From the pdf, the number for solar is about $7/kWh generated. Nuclear power converges towards a subsidy of $0.012/kWh which can't reduce much further owing to the the arrangements on liability and waste that fusion, solar and wind will not face so they can tend to zero. Note that this subsidy makes the actual cost of nuclear power higher than for coal. So, now that wind is cheaper than both coal and nuclear power and solar is headed towards an even lower price, where will fusion fit in? It's first 15 years, subsidy per kWh generated is infinite; again we see the problem of picking a fixed span. But, can it beat solar on price? Most plans have a replacement of the lithium blanket every couple of years so you have to work in a very hot environment and do precision machine work. This kind of effort is going to be similar to refueling in a nuclear plant. I think this alone makes the lowest possible cost for (big) fusion about $0.04/kWh. But it looks good for solar to get to 0.007/kWh. So, even if you have to pay for storage, the base cost of the power generation is going to be hard to beat. Another thing about renewable energy is that once it is in place, there won't be much reason to change. Thus, the market for fusion would only be for new generation. But, new generation may not be much needed when fusion is ready because the world population is projected to stabilize about then so energy markets may not be experiencing much growth.

The problem of thermal pollution is perhaps not so hard. This one is easily handled with dilution. But, you do need a place to dilute and that usually means a river. Just as we have run out of rivers to dam, a large deployment of fusion may run out of rivers to warm. This already happens for nuclear power in Europe in the summer time.

I usually find a way to celebrate when fusion reaches a mile stone. But I think we'll end up using it in niche applications like propulsion and dark outposts, perhaps in the oceans and space. The power-to-weight ratio should make it attractive for the outer solar system for example. The power-to-weight ratio for those lab-grown cells that you dislike is the main reason solar power is chosen for work in the inner solar system. 17% efficient silicon is about 200 times better than coal on the surface of the earth. On orbit the 30% efficeint cells are about 3000 times better than coal given the better sunlight and lack oxygen. Durable 50% efficient cells will be here before fusion I think. The article I cited has commercialization in three years. These are intended for soldiers in the field.

As a former Libertarian (full disclosure: now pretty much a Dem), let me say that Libertarians aren't really against Democrats any more than Republicans.

Libertarians tend to agree with Conservatives on fiscal issues and small government (with exceptions, of course. Libertarians tend to be in favor of little to no national debt, while Republicans generally either don't care or see mounting debt onto the nation as a way to bleed money from government programs like welfare and public education). However, Libertarians tend to side with Democrats on most social issues (they tend to be in favor of keeping the government out of your bedroom and strongly believe in civil liberties, but tend to be against programs that try to "artificially" achieve equality, such as affirmative action).

Traditionally, Libertarians run as Republicans, because Republicans have had better fund raising and a better "brand" in the US. If you agree with both sides equally, why not run as the one that you're more likely to win as? However, with the general democratic trend on the 2006 elections and the rise of democratic fundraising, more and more Libertarians are running as Democrats. In many ways, the Blue Dogs that got elected in 2006 were just that.

Many now are even being more open about it. Bob Lord is raising huge cash right now to make a run in Arizona. Technically running as a Democrat, he's calling himself a Libertarian. It'll be interesting how this turns out.

The "withdraw from the UN, back to a gold standard, life begins at conception" Ron Paul? No thanks.

The biggest problem is, that internet radio stations pay copyright fees to SoundExchange even if the artists have released their stuff under a creative commons licence. Or even if said artist is not associated with SoundExchange or the RIAA.
(Article on the DailyKos on this subject)

Which ever way you look at it, it's a lose-lose situation for internet radio, if the fees will go in effect.

I don't know why senate.gov doesn't have the vote up yet. It should be 00309, but the list ends at 00308. In the meantime, http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/4/04858/2 9657 lists the Senate democrats who voted for the bill. No republicans voted against it.

We must travel in different circles. I don't think I know anyone, rich or poor, who has a $7K plasma TV and a $40K car (which was what you originally said). So I seriously doubt that there are "a lot" of such people, but maybe you have a credible citation (talk radio shows don't count).

Been to a Best Buy lately? Looked at the prices on the real top-end plasmas? Looked at car prices for some of those SUVs and top-end cars? Seen them on the roads?

Your little rant sounds like it came straight off of Kos.

Gee, you make that sound like a bad thing . Sounds like you read http://www.dailykos.com/ more often than I do. If it gives you heartburn, you should stick to Limbaugh.

I peruse Kos occasionally for many reasons. One of which is that I like to see what other people are thinking even if I disagree with it. It's also a good way to keep the mainstream media honest because it makes it abundantly clear that they are just regurgitating blogs these days instead of reporting the news or writing their own opinions. It doesn't give me heart burn at all, but rather allows me to spot people who are enveloped in group think.

As for Limbaugh, I do listen occasionally and agree most of the time. Hannity, listen occasionally, and agree with much less. As for O'Reilly, I prefer his TV program, particularly because he's on the same time as Limbaugh on the radio. Mixed in with a hefty dose of opinion are little facts that appear to be lacking from mainstream sources. Every journalist will of course highlight the facts that prove his point, but what's most disturbing is that the mainstream journalists trying to play themselves off as unbiased reporters are guilty of it just as much, if not more so than the talk radio hosts.

instead of raising taxes maybe they could've avoided spending money on a new stadium among other things.

That's exactly what I was suggesting. But maybe you didn't know that new stadium is funded by raising the local sales tax. Just like raising the gas tax (which is a fixed amount, rather than a percentage, and hasn't been raised since 1988) to pay for highway maintenance. Let people who drive pay for the bridges. If you don't like the idea of a tax, maybe calling it a "user fee" will make you happier.

Well, apparently I made a factual error on where the source of the stadium funding came from. My apologies. The point still stands though that there are several state programs that could have been cut to pay for it. Your idea of raising the gas tax or making it a percentage is a rather interesting one. Making it a percentage of the price of a good with a widely fluctuating commodity price does not dovetail very well with the idea that the gas tax is there to fund highway development. Adjusting the fixed price upwards to account for inflation from 1988 to today would make sense and I would probably support that as a proper way of doing things. However, you also have to realize that even people without a car are highly dependent upon roadways. For instance, most goods are shipped over those highways. An educated guess would be that taking the money out of general funds from income and sales taxes vs. taking it from a special gas tax probably works out about the same for the majority of citizens. Some argument could even be made that a pure gas-tax based system would give an unfair break to those driving very economical cars vs. those driving not very economical cars as the people driving economical cars will travel more roadway (thus contributing to its depreciation) on less gas (thus not paying as much for it).

It is very likely that the most fair system has some component of taxation on fuel (a very rough analog translating to miles of road traveled and thus depreciated) and some component of general taxation. Unless of course we want toll roads everywhere which would be m

here are a lot of people who are doing exactly what I say: sitting on their couch watching their plasma with a > $100/mo cable or satellite bill, driving to work in a gas guzzling SUV, then bitching that they can't afford health care

We must travel in different circles. I don't think I know anyone, rich or poor, who has a $7K plasma TV and a $40K car (which was what you originally said). So I seriously doubt that there are "a lot" of such people, but maybe you have a credible citation (talk radio shows don't count).

Your little rant sounds like it came straight off of Kos.

Gee, you make that sound like a bad thing . Sounds like you read http://www.dailykos.com/ more often than I do. If it gives you heartburn, you should stick to Limbaugh.

instead of raising taxes maybe they could've avoided spending money on a new stadium among other things.

That's exactly what I was suggesting. But maybe you didn't know that new stadium is funded by raising the local sales tax. Just like raising the gas tax (which is a fixed amount, rather than a percentage, and hasn't been raised since 1988) to pay for highway maintenance. Let people who drive pay for the bridges. If you don't like the idea of a tax, maybe calling it a "user fee" will make you happier.

Of course, you're right the money could have been taken from somewhere else in government. The hundreds of billions of dollars being pissed down a rathole in Iraq is the most obvious choice, that would buy a lot of the things we actually need. The US infrastructure has been falling apart for decades. It's not totally a Republican thing, I doubt that it's even a totally American thing. Politicians get elected by promising the sky, superhighways and safety and all manner of good things, but they hate to have to explain to people that they'll have to pay for all those good things.

I never understood the opposition to the V-Chip. Why shouldn't the multimedia client (TV) come with a network screening app? In HW, so it's harder to crack, especially by literal "script kiddies".

The alternative is that the government and providers screen content at the server, without consumer choice.

The only problem is that today's FCC, coming at the tail end of the Republican covert government, will probably install spyware on their "Super" V-Chip. So instead of all your TV signals of all they offer coming down your wire or over the air, for you to privately select from, their "Super" V-Chip will send a log to the NSA. Crossreferenced to all your personal data, including email, phone, surveillance video, and all the electronic/digital transactions that profile your life.

Eventually the NSA will convince us to implant an RFID V-Chip "so we can easily tune our TVs wherever we go".

But if we get a private V-Chip now, before they do it, then we can satisfy the demand for convenience before that convenience is exploited to mask total privacy invasion. If the V-Chip specs and HW/firmware/SW are open, then we can get both safety and convenience. That's known as "freedom": the (traditional) American Way.

Really what the hell has happened to Slashdot over the last few years?

(Now this isn't flamebait, a troll, or off-topic [because the quality of the story is always on-topic]. You may not like what I have to say, but it is heart-felt and contains more truth than you may want to face up to. [Yeah, Truth to Power, that is it.])

Slashdot used to be a good technology related website. "News for Nerds" Now, it is conspiracy theory central.
It is obviously the editors fault. I eagerly await their book review of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion".
If your grip on reality is that tenuous, go over to Kos to find out how Tillman was OBVIOUSLY killed because he was about to meet Noam Chomsky.

I know, I know. Controversy equals pages hits equals advertising dollars. But at some point you get too out there and drive the punters away. Like I am about to. Save the flamebait stories for the Windows/Linux flamewars.

I had to block the Politics stories because that isn't what I want out of the technology site.
I had to block the Science section because it because Creationist Central (meanwhile the San Diego school system is setting up Muslim prayer rooms and gender separation, but that is OK).
And then, Your Rights On-Line is quickly becoming Politics under a different heading. Yeah, until they put the comma in there it really shouldn't be "Your Rights, ... On-Line". This story barely passed the "subject matter" test, but many other stories in this section fail even that test.
Yeah, I have tried to do my bit by meta-modding things as "unfair" as often as possible. But, the flood of immaturity and politically based mods in overwhelming.
I am really running out of sections that are free of the conspiracy theories, GroupHate, and the Daily Hate (really wish the people screaming about 1984 would have read the book). I think we are down to "Games", "Development", and "AskSlashdot". But at least "Games" and "AskSlashdot" have their own issue, which are currently tolerable but threaten to go off the rails.

Even then some bullshit conspiracy theory like this should have been blocked by the editors. Have we totally infantilized the entire world? If you can't separate one brick in a wall of evidence and circumstantial evidence (versus corroborating evidence) from a Vast Right Wing Consipricy, you need to go back to your parents and ask why they didn't teach you to be an adult. When I was a child I got angry because the telephone didn't give me a pre-paid envelope to pay my bill. As an adult I have a better expectation of how the world works and what it does not owe me. No jury will convict on the basis of an encrypted disk alone. When the IRS comes after you for unpaid taxes, you don't have to tell them where all your records are, but if you don't they have the right to come up with a guess and submit that guess to the jury. Same thing here. The prosecution gets to make a guess as to the contents of the encrypted disk. The jury may or may not buy their guess.
Plus the story itself is long on rant and short on any type of facts. That is OK in a post, but I expect better from the editors. The whole story is a troll.

I guess I'll end this with a question, what sites are out there that are what Slashdot used to be (circa 1998-ish)?

"Ask a Ninja" about "Network Neutrality" and learn about Robin Williams
and hotdog on a stick girl, too. The video is fun, and educational, and brought to you by your friendly neighborhood, endangered, Neutral Network.

There are lots of normal people with good reason to be freaked out by this.

Here's a reasonable discussion of this unreasonable Executive Order that has actual Constitutional scholars commenting, not just a bunch of anonymous Slashdotters with more time at a keyboard than any credible sense.

A $45 six pack of Coke?

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/11/4/18128/ 5469

And oh, yes. If you don't believe lawyers and HR departments do not cook up this sort of trumped up reason to hire or fire employees, or avoid obeying the law, take a good look at the video on how not to hire an American at http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/6/18/22435/ 0365.

How to ease out an unwanted employee is basic training for HR people, and how to protect the company from legal issues of it is basic training for any corporate attorney. It's often for good reason, but it certainly need not be.

Shouldn't an artist be able to give away his own music if he wants to without fear of industry retaliation?

If you're asking this question, then you don't understand who you are really dealing with.

The music industry thinks they own ALL music. Not just the RIAA affiliated bands - all music, EVERYWHERE. My proof? SoundExchange. They are demanding royalty fees for all music streamed over the net from net radio - and get this - from EVERYONE. Doesn't matter if you're a member or not, they will collect on your behalf in preparation for the glorious day you elect to join the Borg. Until then they're happy to bill people for all music, everywhere.

The music industry thinks it owns all music. Everywhere. If there was a way to drill a tap into your head and bill you every time you think of a song, they'd do it.

So yeah, Prince, having the audacity to make a song and give it away clearly goes against everything these morons believe. I wouldn't be surprised to see them ban him completely.

In response - we, the public - should buy every single thing Prince makes. After he releases it over the net independently. Money straight to the artist with no insane middlemen. This could be where it starts.

You can still see the tribute video here. It has all of the good parts anyway. The press release is also preserved elsewhere.

However the cost per listener for terrestrial radio is far lower.
Running a net station means reaching fewer people and paying more per listener.
Having more net stations helps ensure a roughly equivalent user base to terrestrial.
I like the "hard to apply payola" theory.

They probably just want less choices on the internet.
I'm sure getting royalties that they don't deserve:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/24/141326/870
doesn't hurt either.

Tim Griffin, Michael Elston, Paul McNulty, Monica Goodling
Sara Taylor, Bradley Schlozman, Steve Biskupic, Alberto Gonzalez, David Safavian, Lurita Doan, Ken Tomlinson
Tom Delay, Bob Ney, Conrad Burns, Ted Stevens, Kyle Foggo, Duke Cunningham, Brent Wilkes, Mitchell Wade, Curt Weldon, Donald Rumsfeld, Jim Tobin
Scooter Libby, Manuel Miranda, Darleen Dryun, Thomas Scully, Chuck Mcgee, Pete Domenici
Porter Goss, Brant Bassett, Virgil Goode, Katherine Harris, Jerry Lewis, Ed Buckham, Steven Griles, Mark Foley, Paul Wolfowitz, Ken Lay, Conrad Black, Douglas Feith, Richard Perle, Roger Stilwell, Tony Rudy, Jack Abramoff, Michael Scanlon, William Heaton, Adam Kidan, Neil Volz,

Just because you're clinically depressed doesn't mean the world isn't depressing :). But it's always been that way, and Americans with some self awareness have so many sources of joy and hope, when we can appreciate them.

What gets me through is other people who've caught on to the big picture scam, talking with them, learning from them, teaching them, laughing with them, and, when sometimes gaping in horror at the latest outrage, at least gaping in good company. I like the Daily Kos. When I want to wallow in bad news, I enjoy BuzzFlash. And when I want to run with a crowd of ignorant, but often smart nerds who sometimes teach me something, sometimes learn something, and sometimes just serve as a worthy target for venting some rage, I like Slashdot. Too much, probably. It's better to talk with a live human outside somewhere. Reminds you how complex reality is, and how fit we are to live in it.

Check out http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/5/16/115444 /263
This is the testimony of James Comey, who was the acting AG while John Ashcroft was in the ICU after surgury. Al Gonzoles and Andrew Card sought to push a sick, bed ridden old man to agree to their illegal program (according to the AG, they guy who's job it was to determine that). It took the FBI (guys with guns) to ensure that the acting AG would NOT get pushed out of the way. Essentially, FBI direct Meuller ordered his men to protect the AG from the White House's representitives.

This is sh!t that's supposed to happen only in 3rd world dictatorships, not the US of A!

The White House went ahead with the illegal program anyway. And yes, according to the TOP guy hired to enforce the LAW of the USA, it was illegal!

Moderation +3
    60% Insightful
    20% Troll
    10% Flamebait

Hey, TrollMods, your boy Ted Stevens is headed for the Cunningham Suite in the slammer. And your new star, Fred "Frogman" Thompson, has his own "strong convictions". McCain himself was kneedeep in the same S&L swindles - how long before your boy finishes his long career in public service making license plates, finally a productive Republican?

So my subject is a homige to recent efforts by fans of Jericho to get the show back on the air... but I think it's a fitting title since about half of this top 25 list is rabid liberal conspiracy theory... Why is it when an extreme liberal view isn't widely covered in the media it's called censorship, but if a conservative view get a moments air time it's lambased as propaganda?

For example the proponents of the Fairness Doctrine are making serious strides in making it into law, but that story didn't make the cut. The Fairness Doctrine in a nutshell is carefully designed to squash the views on talk radio, because it is one of the only places conservative views far outweight those of liberals.

I am so tempted to break down the 25 points to show their liberal bias. Like how Cheney sold all his Halliburton stock before the first election to avoid any conflict of interst concerns... but taking the time and effort to break down every argument in their 25 points... would likely make my head explode. I simply don't have enough duct tape to wrap around my head to take on such an endeavor.

While I love Slashdot and the tech news I find there, sometimes the liberal bias of what stories get published on the home page makes me sick. When was the last time you saw a list of 25 or so far right views not getting enough much media attention on the Slashdot home page? Trust me they are out there. You can't remember it can you, becasue they don't post it... but that's not censorship, it's refusing to promote propaganda from their jaded point of view... but all those Daily Kos articles, well they are news that needs to be heard!

Honestly, I'd rather not see highly bias views from either the right or left on Slashdot... just give us the tech news... if I want liberal news I'll go to Daily Kos and if I want conservative news I'll go to Rush Limbaugh... just give me tech news Slashdot and leave out the liberal BS... pretty please.

I would think that using "The Guardian" to disprove "The Daily Mail" is a bit like using "Little Green Footballs" to disprove/discredit "Daily Kos".

Say something indiscreet in public? Mysteriously you'd lose your job and no matter how hard you tried you just couldn't get past an interview for even the most unskilled job.

That's already happening with the no-fly list. A Princeton professor who gave a televised speech criticizing Bush's constitutional overreach found himself on the no-fly list afterwards. A guy who wrote a book called "Bush's Brain" about Karl Rove found himself on the no-fly list afterwards. 20 Wisconsin peace activists suddenly found themselves on the no-fly list .

The no-fly list is even being used to harass opposition political party members. Senator Ted Kennedy suddenly found himself on the no-fly list and had a lot of trouble getting himself off the list. The head of the TSA had to call him personally and promise to take him off the list before his troubles ended. In the same article, it talks about employees of the ACLU also ending up on the list.

Giving the government more secret and anonymous "lists" to deny people rights is not an invitation to abuse, it's a guarantee of it. The fact that systems like this from previous fascist governments are being implemented in modern-day America is one reason that people are arguing that America is on a well-planned transition to fascism.

If it can make a buck by dissing the right, it will do so

Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. The media is so terrified of being hit with the "biased liberal media" tag that they consistently throw softballs to Republicans while playing hardball with Democrats. For a recent example, check out the comparison between the first questions asked at the Democratic debate and the first questions at the Republican debate.

As some here know and as my moniker indeed suggests, I -- a sober, middle-aged lawyer, family guy, and native New Yorker -- am one of those troubling persons who feels convinced that the Official Story of the 9-11 attacks is a huge lie; that the attacks were permitted to happen by BushCo or, even more likely, actively sponsored, planned and abetted by them, and that, accordingly, we are in much deeper doo-doo than we had imagined.

It includes a cute poll. I voted "The Gay Agenda People" because there was plenty of fire in WTC and according to the razor, that means flamers were present.

Yes they both think the jews did WTC. It's the only possible explanation for sites which interview and promote loose change and other such garbage. It's so bad Jews are leaving the sites for greener, errr, less antisemitic pastures.

Can't Internet radio stations just simply refuse to play RIAA music then?

Through SoundExchange, they'll still collect from the Internet radio stations anyway.

What's this article doing on Slashdot?

If I wanted to read meaningless political discussions, I'd go read KOS.

Consider John Edwards's bit about eliminating poverty. Of course, Socialist Worker doesn't like him, but they wouldn't, now would they.

I think Boing Boing needs to get a lawyer and get to suing.

If they're going to sue, they need to start with those jokers at Smartfilter.

They use it at my workplace, and it blocks things completely at random. BoingBoing posted some critical articals on Smartfilter and instantly got on their shit list -- Boing Boing is now permanently blocked as "nudity", a blatantly false category designed to get people in trouble for even trying to view it.

If you report the inaccuracy, they claim to fix it, only to ignore it and keep them blocked.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Boston was just using Smartfilter and this is just a symptom of a much larger problem. Smartfilter is, IIRC, the official filter of choice for the US and Iranian governments for blocking naughty content from their masses -- ever since the Republicans managed to con their way into forcing all library machines into being filtered ("Think of the Children" covering the fact that Libraries are poor people's only way to get on the net) Smartfilter has been a bit of a fun toy to play with.

In the middle of the 2006 elections, for example, out of the blue Liberal blogs and Political Canidate websites in Swing States suddenly found themselves blocked as being "curse words" or "mature" or "forums" or other similarly flimsy excuses. Pretty sneaky -- get a censorship filter installed where poor people (who typically vote Democratic) are going to be forced to go through it, then just start randomly blocking political "dissidents" that you don't like. And since Smartfilter has a very, very strict policy (now, anyway) about not REMOVING, only RECATEGORIZING websites... well, yeah.

Wow, Flamebait. Not used to that one.

I strayed from the Sacred Libertarian Viewpoint and got modded into oblivion there, and for saying something that quite frankly makes a lot of sense. I just think somebody needs to counter the idea that just because the Dems are also in bed with the RIAA means that they're just as bad as the republicans, and that democrats let our party get away with this kind of bullshit. We don't.

Laugh all you want at the term 'blogosphere', but it's where the grassroots action is at in the Democratic party at the moment. If enough bloggers complain about it, people will notice. Note that this has been on Daily Kos since long before Slashdot picked it up. The story is negative and the comments are negative. Take a look:

DNC hires RIAA shill

If you complain that the Dems did something shitty by hiring this jackwad, you'd be correct. But if you sit there and claim that the grassroots aren't pissed off about it, you're dead wrong.

Whether they're really gone *permanently* is another story, and already being discussed elsewhere. I think the bigger story, and I was Googling like crazy but can't find the link now, is that it turns out these Republican-controlled email addresses were on some of the *same servers through which electronic voting results were being processed.* I thought I read this on DailyKos but maybe I'm wrong. If anyone has a link to more info. on this, please post. Thanks.

With the latest news of RNC hosted email archives being "mishandled" by the White House, I decided to take a trip around the cyberblock to see what's new.

To my surprise, I wasn't able to ping gwb43.com

Of course, some scholars http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/3/20/215835 /227 don't believe executive privilege should even be an issue here.

And the really fun part is watching the White House Press Secretary, Tony Snow, trying to explain http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_displa y.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003560724 why this was bad for the Clinton Administration, but OK for the Bush Regime.

You obviously think everyone is an idiot.

Some people don't have time to read 8 hours of fucking news every day to meet your standards.

One should take in all sources of news and make up their own minds.

Look a bit down on this page:www.dailykos.com Where strangely somebody has done the criminal act of putting the two curves on top of each other. Makes your argument evaporate like a 21 century glacier.

Those spooks don't even know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites.

They're not fighting the Terror War (on terrorists, anyway). They're spying on Americans for political and financial control. Fascists. Meanwhile, there is real terrorism and other threats to security that these fools are neither competent or interested in handling.

The military and secretive NSA operations do not care about you or your open source proxy software. Stop trying to make yourself feel special by writing convoluted conspiracy theories.

According to the powerful chairman of the Texas House Appropriations Committee, Warren Chisum:

The non-moving Earth & anti-evolution web page of The Fair Education Foundation, Inc.

Exposing the False Science Idol of Evolutionism, and Proving the Truthfulness of the Bible from Creation to Heaven...

Levitating Globe

"An electromagnet and computerized sensor hidden in its display stand cause the Earth to levitate motionlessly in the air."

Could God have engineered something like that for the real Earth?

The Bible and all real evidence confirms that this is precisely what He did, and indeed:

The Earth is not rotating...nor is it going around the sun.

The universe is not one ten trillionth the size we are told.

Today's cosmology fulfills an anti-Bible religious plan disguised as "science".

The whole scheme from Copernicanism to Big Bangism is a factless lie.

Those lies have planted the Truth-killing virus of evolutionism in every aspect of man's "knowledge" about the Universe, the

Earth, and Himself.

Take your time.

Check it all out.

Decide for yourself.

The Non-Moving Earth & Anti-Evolution Web Page

2006

All of the evidence that is required to expose and destroy the counterfeit Copernican Model of a rotating and orbiting Earth--and the entire evolutionary paradigm resting upon that counterfeit--is set out in this book (HERE) & in scores of links on this web page.

Those who read some or all of these links will quickly realize that this is no idle claim. Rather--as will become evident with each subject listed--there is abundant hard proof that both the Copernican Counterfeit and the Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm that is built upon it are factless frauds from start to finish.

Indeed, the diligent reader will be astonished at the level of demonstrable hi-tech fraud, baseless assumptions, occult mathematics, etc.,--all part of a religious conspiracy!--that has been at work over many centuries implanting the incredible evolution myth about the origin of the Universe, the Earth, and Mankind.

On this web page the Bible is not used to prove anything scientific. Instead, the scientific facts--along with historical and religious facts-- prove the Bible to be precisely what it claims to be, namely, the infallible Word of God.

Those who like what they read here--and are eager for more evidence in book form--will want to go HERE & HERE, and then: HERE, & HERE, and also: HERE to order The Earth Is Not Moving, The Truth About Evolution, and any of a dozen other book-length studies on Bible Doctrines.

***N E W! PayPal, MC/Visa now available on order links above....***

So, welcome! Think of this as a "crash course" for people everywhere of all ages who are ready to learn how evolutionary mythology has deceived the world...and what it will mean to every living person when that deception is exposed.

Sincerely,

(Marshall Hall, BS. MA + 2 years:...Advanced International Studies Ph.D. Program)

...Warren Chisum, chair of the Texas House Appropriations Committee, doesn't believe the Earth orbits the sun!.