Slashdot Mirror

That's not really all that scary, mykos. After the US Supreme court Decision that gives corporations the right to spend any amount of money to influence elections in the US, the corporations are now able to be the government that regulates the corporations that tell us what is OK for us to communicate and do.

It's not just Bing that lit the fire under Google that helped make this happen, Facebook is actually their most potent threat - wrote about it here. They're challenging Google for ad revenue, for search, for email, the list goes on. I saw some pretty compelling discussion on Twitter speculating about how long till Facebook comes out with their own browser.

So the question I have is, will we see a Facebook superbowl ad next year?

I no longer see pot being legal "any day now".

Months ago, President Obama announced a policy revision not to interfere with states that legalize medical cannabis. One might compare this to the 21st Amendment, which devolved the power to ban alcohol from the federal government to the states. I wait to see how this will apply if California voters put pot over the counter this November.

He pulled in front of them: story.

No, check here: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-toyota-recall2-2010feb02,0,1031407.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+latimes/mostviewed+(L.A.+Times+-+Most+Viewed+Stories)

The Japanese automaker said that it had isolated the problem to a "friction device" within the pedals in the more than 4 million vehicles it has recalled worldwide and -- in the U.S. -- temporarily stopped selling and producing altogether.

The fix, which Toyota characterized as "both effective and simple," involves installing a steel reinforcement bar into the pedal assembly in order to reduce friction.

While that fix will be conducted on consumers' vehicles, newly produced cars and trucks subject to the action will receive entirely new pedal assemblies, Toyota said. Production of those vehicles, on six assembly lines in the U.S. and Canada, ceased Monday, but will begin again Feb. 8, the automaker said.

The recall repair is entirely mechanical. The electronics issues is a red herring be sensationalist media, trying to create a problem where none exists.

It is a bit hard to search for since the Google results for any logical set of search terms are packed with people advising drivers to shift into neutral, but I found one here.

As for the "sticking" problem, two reports near the end of this article. Both are cases where a sticking pedal wouldn't explain the situation.

I have seen nothing in any of the reports that talked about any computer system malfunction. All reports of malfunctions were mechanical: mats and stuck pedals.

You haven't been looking, then:

• Data point to Toyota's throttles, not floor mats, From November 2009.
• Specifically, NHTSA is investigating the electronic throttle control system...

Is there evidence of a problem?

As a consumer, if there was no regulation, then I would want to be able to know what testing was done on the software of a safety critical component. They tell me all about the impact resistance of the frame and do all sorts of crash tests of the car and make that public; why not the software/firmware/hardware?

I used to own a 2005 Matrix! I noticed this problem, but just like everyone else, I thought it was a sticking mat. But then I realized that the mat was not in the car!!! So I thought it must have been a sticky pedal.

--jeffk++

By all accounts I can find, the issue with the Toyota's sticky gas pedal is a MECHANICAL one - not some electrical bug.

This article in the LA Times says a lot of knowledgeable people don't believe that. E.g., "A wide group of national automotive experts say there is strong evidence that a hidden electronic problem must account for at least some, if not most, of the Toyota sudden-acceleration events."

We have a Prius, and the electronic stuff does not inspire my confidence. It's a really crappy, poorly designed UI. My wife, my sister, and I have all drained the 12-volt battery at various times. We think it's because we didn't do the shutdown procedure in the right order, but we're not sure. There have been times when the car was non-operational, and we couldn't get it to release the key, so we had to leave the key in the ignition while the car was parked. (And there's another thing that is not a design issue, but -- the used car dealer revealed to us after we signed the contract that they only had one key to give us. A second key costs $500. If you lose your only key, it's $1000 to replace it.)

I like the car in general, but god, I wish it had an ordinary old-fasioned non-electronic key and ignition system. I'd have a lot more confidence in it.

The Los Angeles Times has taken the lead on breaking this story. They published another article yesterday: Doubt cast on Toyota's decision to blame sudden acceleration on gas pedal defect

Here's a quote: "The way the sudden-acceleration problems are occurring in reported incidents doesn't comport with how this sticky pedal is described," said Sean Kane, president of Safety Research & Strategies, a Rehoboth, Mass., auto safety consulting firm. "We know this recall is a red herring."

The number of reports of unintended acceleration increased by as much as a factor of 5 for some models after Toyota introduced electronic throttle control systems. While floor mats and defective accelerator pedals may have caused some of the problems, they don't explain many of the reported cases of uncommanded acceleration.

And were derided as birthers for wanting to make sure he was in compliance with the Constitution.

Irrelevant. You made a claim which essentially said his personal life was ignored. That is false.

Nobody complained about GWB's dad before election or during his time in office?

Again, irrelevant. We are talking about Obama, not Bush.

Someone chooses to associate with someone for 20 years, someone they call their spiritual adviser, and now that person is off limits too?

I never said they were off limits. I said people were examining (extensively) who his pastor was. A pastor, being a spiritual adviser, is a very personal relationship. You made a claim which essentially said Obama's personal life was ignored. That is false.

Fox News did some digging on him, they are the lone "they" from the media as far as your statements above go. Where were the other media outlets? Virtually all of them gave him a pass as far as investigating just who he was. Why else would Tom Brokaw feel the need to say that we don't really know who Obama is AFTER he was elected if he was fully vetted beforehand?

Again, bullshit.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/DemocraticDebate/story?id=4443788&page=1
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/wright-dominated-news-coverage/
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8630.html
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rich-noyes/2008/09/23/barack-obama-bill-ayers-stanley-kurtz-makes-connection
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/02/obama-birth-cer.html
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_birth_certificate/2009/07/22/238969.html

Even fucking Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/21/obamas-church-pushes-cont_n_92802.html

Anyone that did attempt to dig through his history was excoriated for it. Look at what people did to Joe the Plumber just for asking him a question that exposed more of Obama's real views than the Obama campaign really wanted the public to know. The media ran cover for him, even going so far as to completely make up stories that would make him more sympathetic (like the one about someone publicly threatening to harm/kill Obama at a McCain rally. The Secret Service investigated and found no such threat).

Again, irrelevant. You made a claim which essentially said Obama's personal life was ignored. That is false.

Regardless of the reaction or fallout from looking into his personal life, to try and say it wasn't widely scrutinized is an outright lie.

I second inviolet's post.

My wife and I homeschool precisely because we were disgusted with both the quality and the direction of the public school in our district. Before making that decision we attended school board meetings, met with our children's teachers, and had private meetings with both the past and present superintendent. While not too surprised what we found was indifference at just about all levels. Both my wife and I are college grads - I majored in the humanities and my wife in the sciences - and neither of us are religious.

Evolution was too controversial, but letting a community church onto school grounds so they could proselytize and pass out bibles to our kids as they got off the bus and walked into the school building was no big deal. Our children were at the top of their classes, but gifted programming was eschewed for individualized learning plans -- a nice idea except all it meant to the teacher was letting our kids finish their work then tutor the other kids. Classrooms of 25 - 30+ kids in 1st grade were not an issue to be concerned about.

What really surprised us were the supportive phone calls we got from teachers after we pulled our kids out. Teachers know things aren't right, but when their job depends upon keeping their mouth shut during these tough times what's a teacher to do?

Now in our second year of homeschooling things are going great. Science and math are an integral part of our homeschooling, our kids have been exploring another language thanks to some decent support materials on DVD and the web, history is as accurate as we can make it, and we don't have to worry about some other parent complaining that the dictionaries in the library define oral sex. As for extra curricular activities our kids are involved in at least one sport every season through the YMCA and YWCA (in our area they're merged). They have friends who they occasionally spend the night with and vice versa. Their bright, inquisitive, social and aren't afraid of science and math (ok - I'm a proud parent too ;-).

http://www.google.com/search?q=haiti+9%2F11+hurricane+katrina

http://www.google.com/search?&q=haiti+9%2F11+hurricane+katrina+rush+limbaugh

http://www.google.com/search?q=haiti+9%2F11+hurricane+katrina+fox+news

http://www.google.com/search?q=haiti+9%2F11+hurricane+katrina+sarah+palin

http://www.google.com/search?q=haiti+9%2F11+hurricane+katrina+msnbc

http://www.google.com/search?q=haiti+9%2F11+hurricane+katrina+pat+robertson

http://www.google.com/search?&q=haiti+9/11+hurricane+katrina+pat+buchanan

Best match for the source is....

Rush Limbaugh
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/comments_blog/2010/01/rush-limbaugh-haiti-earthquake-relief-donations-obama-red-cross-links.html?cid=6a00d8341c630a53ef012876e720dc970c

Looks like a good portion of the republican party are using this to distance themselves from the great propagandist.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. It might be a policy at your company, but a look at California's Web sites shows there's still a clear overtime exemption for "employees in the computer software field." Governor Schwarzenegger clarified the law in 2008, by specifying that any software developer who is paid a minimum of $75,000 is exempt. So maybe they just changed the salary range at your company, and rather than divide developers into exempt and non-exempt ones, they decided to treat them all as non-exempt.

I found this article about EA from 2004. It seems like the very same thing.

I don't know Abu, it seems fake.

I hate reading about studies only in mass media outlets because of the lack of critical evaluation. Unfortunately the real study isn't showing up in the Circulation journal's past three issues and they never did give the complete title.

However, even the LA Times article states "researchers found a statistical relationship between long hours of TV viewing and a shortened life span, but the study did not go so far as to find a direct cause".

This means the results are interesting and the subject should be further evaluated in a controlled study, but are useless for practical purposes. We don't know if it was the sedentary behavior or something else, like the potato chips and soda that often go with watching TV. It may be that their conclusion is correct, but it's impossible to know from this type of study.

Now with bleeding edge hyperlink technology!

(Let's try that again with the correct link.) http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-cyber-czar23-2009dec23,0,6636463.story

Has the current Cybersecurity Czar even made a statement about the recent hacking invasion from the Chinese government?

Hell no. A former C-level executive at Microsoft is not going to touch that, it's an international incident that he helped cause. Look instead for smoke and noise about some other happy horseshit. It's bizarre how he could squeak past the employment interviews. Any background check should have turned up his employment at Microsoft, so either none was done or there is some serious corruption and a serious breach:

(Let's try that again with the correct link.) http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-cyber-czar23-2009dec23,0,6636463.story

Has the current Cybersecurity Czar even made a statement about the recent hacking invasion from the Chinese government?

Hell no. A former C-level executive at Microsoft is not going to touch that, it's an international incident that he helped cause. Look instead for smoke and noise about some other happy horseshit. It's bizarre how he could squeak past the employment interviews. Any background check should have turned up his employment at Microsoft, so either none was done or there is some serious corruption and a serious breach:

Is there a reason you use the (Republican Party created) term "Democrat party", just out of curiosity?

Yes, because they're anything BUT democratic. Just look up voter fraud and intimidation. Here's a video recording of the later in 2008 election cycle. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU

The other day I listened to this man opine about how it would be irresponsible to expect taxpayers to pay for a lifesaving operation if you could not afford it yourself. Just die if you can't pay was the message.

Healthcare debate is a huge one. But in short, his view is that -we- as individuals should be paying into the systems and making individual choices when financially able to do so. However, he's against letting the Federal Government be the sole arbiter of support between you and your doctor. I agree with him as many others do. I'm sorry you have a problem with that.

but I do think that programs like his need to be VERY clearly advertised as entertainment and nothing more.

Well actually, he's both entertaining AND informative. His ratings speak for themselves.

...and really, a Dittohead? Barack the Magic Negro and all that? I find that very sad.

Actually, the term "Magic Negro" was coined in an article written by the LA Times. In fact, you can read that very article at this link.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19,0,3391015.story

Rush Limbaugh thought it was entertaining to have a parody song created to mock the issue. Below is the link to it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZyPaivOARM

Ruch Limbaugh also defended himself regarding the "Magic Negro" bit. Blow is the link to it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbBgRiHYrs0&feature=related

What did China do when they found all the bugs the US government put in the plane we sold them?

Nothing.
http://articles.latimes.com/2002/jan/20/news/mn-23796

Half of why movies are so expensive is actors and scriptwriters unions and the hollywood monopoly

Feh. Seriously? Was that necessary to bring in to this conversation? You REALLY think unions are the reason why actors get paid so much?

By the way, there are a TON of movies made on a shoestring budget that rival anything out of Hollywood. I Like Killing Flies is a move that is a perfect example of that. Directed, Produced, Edited, AND Filmed all by one guy.

District 9 is another great example, although on a much larger scale. Do you know how much District 9's budget was? Go ahead, take a guess. $30 Million. Compare the visuals to that of any big-budget CGI laden film.

'm old enough to rembember when one teenager could write a game on his home computer with a budget of zero

Check out Kongregate, Newgrounds, etc. There are also a TON of games on XBLA/PSN, as well as very popular games made by folks using the XNA (I Made a Game with Zombies in it) and pretty much no cash.

Google seems to be taking a "we'll do what we want and carriers can't stop us" attitude. Good luck with that.

That's what fascinates me about the Droid. Google has gotten Verizon to let the cork off that genie:

Verizon spokesman Ken Muche said the company has no plans to make its own app store for Android -- another platform that already has one, called Market. Good idea.

The Droid's App Store does have a Verizon tab, which contains a Visual Voicemail app.

But all of those little Verizon injections added up to potential revenue in the past.

A lack of Bluetooth transfers on some phones meant you might have to pay a fee to move contacts between devices. Controlling apps meant Verizon could potentially profit from selling software as an intermediary. Keeping GPS software off phones meant a monthly fee could be charged for navigation service.

So much for that.

"If you want total customization, you can go this route," Muche said. Of course, if you'd rather have big red buttons, there's a phone for that.

Granted, Verizon had been loosening up recently with its lineup of dull (but no red menus) smart phones. With this phone, Verizon seems to be sincerely facing facts and stepping back from the software game. And there's another Verizon Droid phone on the way? Has Verizon been taken over by robots?

Wait a minute. Is Google taking over the world?

Muche and Nicholson laughed uncomfortably at the question. After a brief awkward silence, Nicholson chimed in, "You either join or you don't."

If only that were the case. For example, from page 2 of http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jul/20/local/me-dna20:

In a typical criminal case, investigators look for matches to a specific profile. But the Arizona search looked for any matches among all the thousands of profiles in the database, greatly increasing the odds of finding them.

[emphasis added] What you say is how it usually works, and how it stands any chance of being statistically valid. In some cases I've read about (not sure if it's in the story I linked to or not), the raw "1 in 100 billion" type odds were presented, which is plainly and patently false when used in this manner, and I believe the defense was not allowed to correct this. Some states do not allow this sort of search, per the article, but some do.

However, this is not relevant to independent checking of statistics. I'm sure the FBI has done at least some good faith testing of their methods, but they are also far too interested in the outcomes of those tests to be trusted with that without some verification.

I'm sorry you do not feel I am worthy of being better informed. All of my research without your assistance seems to come up with information basically contradicting your statements. I guess the "socialists" have managed to hide the truth from my eyes?

Tax rates by country seem to put the US on the lower side of things for personal tax rates, but still comperable to Canada, and higher than Iceland, Ireland, and Australia, and the highest of the graphed countries for corporate tax rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_around_the_world

As for "by what measure is the US at the top of the health care heap"? Well we have the shortest times for getting treatment, we have the highest number of hi-tech medical equipment per capita, we have the highest survival rate of premature births, the highest survival rate for cancer patients, we have access to the most advanced medicines and treatments, we have the highest number of doctors per capita - do you want me to continue?

Humm, LA seems to have 12+ hour wait times in the emergency room, which doesn't sound great:

http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-er-wait-times-socal21-2009dec21,0,2238664.story

I can't think of how to search for "hi-tech medical equipment per capita", so could you let me know where to find that?

Premature birth survival rates are also hard to find for me at least, and as you noted, the birth survival stats are a bit hard to compare across countries and regions due to different reporting methods - if you had some references I would be interested if it wasn't too much trouble.

The US cancer survival rate seems among the highest, but clearly not THE highest, particularly if you are not white it would seem:
http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20080716/cancer-survival-rates-vary-by-country

The US is way down the list on doctors-per-capita, ranking 52nd on the list by nationmaster, and also mentioned in this piece on Forbes. Oh the Forbs article mentions "the amount of highly expensive medical equipment per capita" as being highest in the USA, but that the lead is shrinking.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_phy_per_1000_peo-physicians-per-1-000-people
http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/02/health-care-costs-opinions-columnists-reform.html

Heck, that Forbes article (are they a socialist rag? I thought they were sort of right-leaning?) seems to indicate they at least do not think "it [the US medical system]'s a hell of a lot better than what the rest of the world has."

The overall point seems to be that American citizens, as a whole, do NOT "have access to the most advanced medicines and treatments", in that a significant fraction of them have little to no access to primary health care that they can afford.

In my opinion, much of your opposition to various levels of socialism is well founded. There are downsides and disincentives inherent in any system trying to promote the collective good, however I think you are being willfully ignorant to think that the current situation in the USA is somehow vastly superior to situations in other places where different decisions have been made. One of the biggest problems in policy formation in the US is the instinctive fear or socialism and big government so what seems to happen is that we end up with the worst of both worlds - governmental programs that artificially alter the market, but do not actually benefit anyone but a few special interests. In the US we already have a whole lot of socialism, it is just half-assed and poorly implemented.

No development of any kind, anywhere, under any circumstances, ever.

and provided this link to an article that says:

The Sierra Club wants regulators to move the site closer to Interstate 15, the busy freeway connecting Los Angeles and Las Vegas, to avoid what it says will be a virtual death sentence for the tortoises. Estimates of the population have varied, but government scientists say at least 25 would need to be captured and moved.

I realize I'm not supposed to follow the links but ISTM the article directly contradicts TopSpin's claim. Moving the solar farm closer to Interstate 15 sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Elsewhere in the article it was claimed that the solar plant would generate billions of dollars and the cost of moving the tortoises could be $25 million. I'll tell you what: I'll move those 25 tortoises for half price -- a mere $500k per tortoise.

But seriously, suggesting an alternate location to put the plant is nothing like "No development of any kind, anywhere, under any circumstances, ever." What's wrong with placing the solar farm where they will do the least amount of environmental harm? Are you worried that placing it near route 15 is going to break up the monotony of the drive?

I call bullshit. If environmental activists...

There isn't any "if" involved here. Feinstein is sprinkling "national monuments" all over the Mojave to prevent solar projects.

link
link

No development of any kind, anywhere, under any circumstances, ever.

EnviroMission has been failing in Australia for at least half a decade. They aren't going to get anywhere in the US.

Citations? Let's see them.

http://articles.latimes.com/2004/feb/06/world/fg-tenet6

Google around some if you like. Tenet specifically said multiple times that Iraq was NOT an "imminent threat" to the US. Tenet's CIA stated multiple times that Iraq was NOT a threat, imminent or otherwise. The CIA never supplied intel that Iraq was producing WMD - in fact, in the article I linked to, he is basically apologizing for allowing Iraqi defectors taint CIA testimony.

The only people who believed Iraq had WMD were the gullible, and the fearful - often the same thing.

The British and the United States administrations were cooking all that "intel" in a damned bar, or at cookouts. Even after the war started, the CIA supplied little to no "intel" about the crap going on in Iraq, they didn't advocate those "extreme interrogation" methods, and the administration had little use for the CIA.

In short - the CIA and most of the rest of the United States intelligence community acted professionally, while the administration cooked the books, and instilled fear in the population.

I'll be happy to look at any citations you may have, in which genuine intelligence agencies painted the bleak picture which George and his administration painted, and which the American media happily blared over the airwaves. Remember, now, I want INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY people - professionals from the CIA, NSA, or some other alphabet soup group. Not a political appointee, and almost anyone at the Pentagon is out. The Pentagon was basically subverted by the administration, for it's own purposes.

http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=19565

It is 160 characters because of one guy and his typewriter in 1985.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/05/invented-text-messaging.html

"Alone in a room in his home in Bonn, Germany, Friedhelm Hillebrand sat at his typewriter, tapping out random sentences and questions on a sheet of paper.

As he went along, Hillebrand counted the number of letters, numbers, punctuation marks and spaces on the page. Each blurb ran on for a line or two and nearly always clocked in under 160 characters."

There's an article up at the LA Times about Peter Drucker. If you don't know, Druker was an economist who said things like:

The enterprise exists on sufferance and exists only as long as the society and the economy believe that it does a necessary, useful, and productive job.

As pointed out above by noidentity and others, people who have risen in the economic hierarchy thanks to institutions built by the people for the people owe their success to society's edifices as much as themselves. Sure someone may be a talented corporate cost-cutter with the nickname "Chainsaw" or a writer nobody has ever heard of, but they would be flipping burgers if it wasn't for the artificial man-made constructs of incorporation and copyright.

There's an implicit Ann Rand-ian quality to Alexie's thinking: progress for all depends on the special qualities of a few geniuses who naturally deserve the good life. Putting aside the fact that most admirers of Rand ignore that her elite characters all had a social conscience and gave back, few people who claim to be rainmakers stop to consider where they got the water that makes the rain.

But that's all background really, the issue that Alexie is talking about is the economic value of what he does. That value is assigned by society and I think it's fair to say that the generation growing up doesn't see as much value in it as he does. And they may have a point. Upsetting as it may be to artists, would the world fall apart if it was even harder to make a living doing what they do? Did Avatar give us free electricity? Feed Africa?

The artistic community might also want to ask itself if copyright had not been extended to ridiculous lengths and more books that people actually want to read were in the public domain, would that have prevented a lot of piracy? Experience has shown that where legal alternatives exist for people to get what they want they will chose those alternatives. I don't think too many people explicitly know how many works they have been denied by copyright reform but I think they can sense it.

The conflict we have now exists because this generation's instincts clash with the status quo. It remains to be seen whether or not the interests represented by Rupert Murdoch`s media machine can keep the lid on things.

As an American living in China, it pains me to see this sort of hysterical nonsense on Slashdot all the time. China is the new Evil Empire, apparently. Scream "fascist" all you want, but you and most other westerners do not understand Chinese civilization or the role that government has traditionally played in it. Then again, maybe the U.S. should "pre-empt" their errors, and save China from the Chinese. :-P

The basic reason that the Chinese do not allow porn is that they believe that it demeans women. This goes back to the revolution, in which women were eager to participate to get some basic equality with men. You can argue that women have a choice, but in poor provinces, you can bet that it would be akin to prostitution, where young women are basically forced into the lifestyle because they have no other options.

Chinese society is quite conservative about sex, or at least it has that appearance. For example, it isn't unheard of to hear of a foreigner beaten into a coma for deflowering local girls. In a country where virginity is prized and sex can almost be like a contract for marriage, that sort of thing isn't taken lightly. In the same way, if Chinese people think their women are being debased (as in porn), they tend to get very angry.

I am not going to try to explain 5000 years of Chinese civilization to you, or explain every way that it is different from the West, but I would encourage Slashdotters to read this article from the LA Times. It explains quite a bit about the role of government in China and how the West has gotten it wrong with predicting that China would become more like them (developing a rights tradition, embracing democracy, etc.).

Article: Understanding China

That guy needs a lawyer. But looking at the authorities referenced in the "subpoena", there are some real questions. It's an "administrative subpoena", not one issued by a court. Some agencies can do that. (The FBI has been refused that authority by Congress). The Department of Transportation has subpoena authority for its hearings and investigations, and Homeland Security inheirited that authority when TSA was transferred from DOT to DHS. For all administrative subpoenas, the party served can file a motion to quash the subpoena with a District Court, and the court has to rule before anything happens.

But that section (49 USC 46104) refers to a "hearing or investigation", a formal proceeding presided over by a hearing officer. This is just some "special agent", and the subpoena is signed by someone with the title "Senior Counsel - Civil Enforcement". There's a list of people who can sign these things at 49 CFR 1503.303, and a "Senior Counsel" isn't high enough up the food chain to sign off. A Deputy Chief Counsel or the Chief Counsel is supposed to sign. This probably reflects who the TSA had in the office on December 26. A more senior official probably would have considered the political implications of doing something this embarrassing.

This is a touchy area, related to the "National Security Letter" debacle. See this Congressional Research Service analysis. The FBI got in trouble for issuing demands for documents without statutory authority.

The Associated Press reports that the blogger is going to challenge the subpoena in court.

Besides, if the ginkgo industry's scared it won't be seen as a feel-good product, they can just say it lowers cholesterol or something.

Anytime I feel bad about the current state of affairs here in America a story shows up with EU, UK, Australia, or Canada doing something that would be worse.

Dont' let that lull you into a false sense of security - The US is the main actor behind most of these laws being passed so you will probably find that it is just the boiling frog method of shafting these laws in. Know your enemy. "THEY" are the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), and they have the full political clout of the US government behind them - working to subvert democratic process in just about every country in the world via stealth taxes/three strikes/no presumption of innocence for the sheeple. Countries sign on to this in exchange for "Free Trade" deals. Examples:

New Zealand Reintroduces 3 Strikes:
"IIPA testifies in support of the initiation of negotiations for a Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement (TPP FTA) with Singapore, Chile, New Zealand, Brunei Darussalam, Australia, Peru and Vietnam."... "Specific problems in some of the TPP countries are outlined in the Special 301 reports from 2009 for Chile, Peru, Brunei, and Vietnam".
Where "specific problems" mean: No three strikes laws, no trade deal.

Spain's Proposed Internet Law Sparks Protest:
IIPA report card on Spain. resulting US political clout result: local laws and taxes supporting mafiaa industry.

The sad part is that even though countries that want to be in on these trade "deals" are required to implement draconian anti-internet laws and filters, obliged to extradite civil cases to the US for trial (software piracy in this case), the resulting "Free Trade" agreement rewards generaly do not benefit the countries involved! Which begs the question, who does benefit... perhaps just the politicians who signed off on the deal?

The only way I can see to fight this kind of slide is to create a black list of any group/industry that lobbies any government in support these kinds of anti-democratic process trade deals. If any group supports trade deals that required destroying the internet, then the internet could become one humongous nightmare of bad press blog artices against your industry group. Seems only fair - shouldn't be able to have their cake and eat it too.

However, you are missing the fact that the new bikes are much cleaner than the old ones. The old ones put a LOT of pollution into the air, where as the newer ones put up less pollution (cleaner burn), but with more CO2 due to the higher power.

And yet, the average motorbike is about 10 times more polluting per mile than a passenger car, light truck or SUV. That's right, I'm polluting less in my 3/4 ton diesel pickup than one of these new Triumphs, or even a CBR or what have you.

Emissions controls for motorcycles now. Especially since the way they're actually driven, the average sportbike is not hitting even 40 mpg, especially not 2-up. I can haul four people and thousands of pounds of cargo (in addition to the thousands of pounds of truck) for around 15-18 mpg. And trust me, I make an effort not to drive. Who wants to go out and navigate through the masses of asses?

How many people have Christians persecuted since, say, 1800?

Where to begin?

Dark skinned people can be used as work animals because they're "Hammites" - cursed by God for the sins of Ham after the flood.
Plenty of US states' constitutions barred non-believers from public office.
Some people are still trying to enforce them.
Catholics and Protestants in Ireland.
Some states won't allow single people to adopt kids - solely because that's the only legal way to bar gays from adopting.
Then there's the whole gay marriage thing...
And that's what I can come up with in two minutes while sleep deprived.

But I'm sure it makes you feel better that atheists did it because they didn't want to "spread their religion".

Killing people to spread Communism isn't the same thing as killing to spread atheism, atheism alone doesn't tell you to kill anyone (nor does it endorse any other moral stance). Christianity is based on a book that bluntly says to stone certain people to death, that repeatedly discusses the proper way to practice slavery, that says God approves of some kids of genocide (yes, in order to spread His religion) - you have to add something else (like a specific interpretation) to avoid endorsing the bad stuff.

As a Bay Area resident who's seen Newsom's "management" of San Francisco, I don't know that I'd be so quick to follow Newsom's lead. Not to mention that he has a history of making big annoucements... and failing to follow through.

This isn't even a policy agenda that can be argued from a moral or social perspective -- it's based on erroneous beliefs with no scientific backing whatsoever. Not to mention that there are already agencies who test every damn cell phone when it comes out. Sounds to me like there's already legislation (albeit at the federal level) to handle this should cell phones prove to be brain cookers.

One other related item in the news today, but not on Vitamin D:
    http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-celiac21-2009dec21,0,5395819.story
"""
Researchers at the Brisbane Princess Alexandra Hospital in Queensland, Australia, tested the effects of hookworm inoculation on 20 patients with celiac disease to see if it would blunt the immune response to gluten. In addition to hoping to provide relief for celiac patients, the researchers want to learn if this could be an effective therapy for inflammatory bowel disease and Crohn's disease.
    The results have not been published, but when the Phase II trial was over and the patients were offered a medication that would kill the parasites, they all opted to keep their hookworms.
"""

Paramount recently announced they were starting a unit to produce films exclusively at the $100,000, because they see dollar signs when a film like Paranormal Activity make tens of millions of dollars.

Several friends of mine are writer-directors and independent producers, and when they were making the rounds at AFM this year, and when they take meetings now, executives tell them in no uncertain terms that "YouTube has lowered the standards of what we have to make," so now where their pitch might have been for a $7-$10 million film that might make $20-$30M all in, the backers are constantly asking if it can be done like "Paranormal Activity" or some comedy series they saw on funnyordie. What they don't seem to realize is that films at this level are labors of love, and that if the people who made these things were actually making them commercially, they wouldn't be able to obtain the millions of dollars in favors they get from everyone involved.

On the other end, a studio exec once told a partner at my company that they were "only making 'hits' from now on," with no trace of irony. By this they mean they're only going to produce HUGE $100M+ features, and they will no longer be making the programmer/$10-$50M films. These films aren't bad, a lot of them do very well and at this level they have to have good stories, but because the upside is limited, and even terrible $200M films tend to make a profit (viz, Transformers), they will pursue this direction.

Because of my work I've seen a lot of features, shorts and series in the sub $300k range, and more than a few web series in the sub $50k range, and they can be some of the punkest films you've ever seen -- people don't want to watch them, the only reason films like this succeed is explicitly because a studio isn't involved, and only the barest few make their money back. The only reason a film like "Paranormal Activity" makes $50 million is because (1) the studio had nothing to do with the making, and (2) the studio spends $20 million marketing it, and (3) five "Paranormal Activity" films haven't already come out this year (the novelty is still there). The studio comes out all the better, because they paid nothing for the original film, and the people who made it are nobodies who won't get a good deal off this film and will probably never be heard from again.

If you've ever seen The Player, at one point Peter Gallagher's character goes into a board meeting and declares that the studio no longer needs to hire directors or writers, and will simply cast mega-stars into adaptations of newspaper articles. This latest development of cinema-by-youtube is just another variation on this theme, except in this case they don't even need to hire actors! The studios are just trying to create a situation where they make all the upside and inflict a rent on the people who want to have their films seen, instead of those people partaking in the spoils as well as the studio.

Oh don't worry. THEY will lobby/bribe 3 strikes laws into existence pretty much everywhere.

Know your enemy. "THEY" are the International Intelectual Property Alliance (IIPA), and they have the full political clout of the US government behind them - working to subvert democratic process in just about every country in the world via three strikes/no presumption of innocence for the sheeple. As one small example of many, check out their recent "report" on Spain. Witness the resulting political clout and of course, the result they were after with local laws against P2P. Spain is the 8th largest economy in the world - not so easy to boss around if unwilling to cooperate. UK, France appear to be more than happy to bend over for IIPA without any fight - at least Spain managed to keep judicial process in the loop, for now at least.
All of it does not bode well for tiny countries like NZ that do not stand much chance against combined international coercion from the "IIPA Club".

"And the government provided version is expensive"

Compared to what.

"All studies have shown that average cost per pupil for public schools is twice that of private schools." [further links to study]

Also, the ability to fire someone in theory is not the same as in practice. How much documentation is required to prove someone is a poor or less effective teacher? Is that due cause? It is not as if the teacher tried to kill somebody. By far, you are the dumbest poster I have encountered today..

Here you go. No doubt a native speaker could improve it, and maybe someone with a bit of time can find Spanish versions of the links I haven't replaced.

España ha vuelto a mostrarse mucho más sabia que Francia o el Reino Unido en cuanto a rendirse ante las presiones de los lobbys internacionales. Me explico: el gobierno español, como cualquier gobierno, ha sido sujeto a presiones políticas intensas. No hay premios para adivinar quién ha hecho el mayor esfuerzo para cambiar el sistema democrático aquí en España y por todo el mundo: sí, como siempre, EEUU. La demostración: aquí está el informe 301 anual del IIP de EEUU, que menciona España con China, Rusia, y varios otros países como los peores infractores por no ceder a las exigencias de propiedad intelectual de los "autores" estadounidenses. El resumen del informe 301: Metas de EEUU aquí y en otras partes del mundo:

Las prioridades principales de la Administración este año siguen ser tratar debilidades en protección de y de hacer respetar los derechos de propiedad intelectual [DPI]... Aunque el Informe Especial 301 de este año muestra progreso positivo en muchos países, problemas endémicos de falsificación y piratería han continuado... lo que indica la necesidad de regímenes más fuertes de [protegir] y hacer repetar los DPI en esos países.

Cómo crees que "ayudan" a países como España a implementar regímenes más fuertes de DPI? Por el proceso democrático y escuchar la voluntad de la gente? (Chantaje, extorsiones y corrupción son palabras más adecuadas). Ay, pero se me olvidé, aquí en EEUU llamamos al proceso "difundir la democracia", qué tonto soy.

Lo que tenemos es un país extremadamente poderoso que corre por este pequeño planeta con un palo político excepcionalmente grande, pegando hasta que se someta cualquier país que se atreva a escuchar la voluntad de su gente con respeto a su idea de lo que es hacer respetar la propiedad intelectual (o cualquier otra idea). No me creas así de fácil: intenta leer el "Informe Especial 2009 de la Alianza Internacional de Propiedad Intelectual (IIPA)" [inglés] sobre España. El resumen ejecutivo para los perezosos [o los que no leen el inglés]:

La piratería por Internet en España sigue empeorando, tanto que muchas de las industrias de copyright creen que España tiene el peor problema de piratería por Internet per capita en Europa y una de las tasas de conjunto de piratería por Internet en el mundo. Los altos niveles de piratería se agravan por las políticas del gobierno español de: (1) "despenalizar" la distribución P2P de archivos (reflejado en la Circular de 2006 de la Fiscalía General) y (2) fallar en establecer los requisitos mínimos a nivel de la UE en cuanto a las responsabilidades de los proveedores de servicios de Internet según el Directivo de E-Commercio para que los dueños de derechos tengan las herramientas necesarias para hacer respetar sus derechos en Internet. Por resultado, la policía ha dejado de tomar acciones en Internet por las incertezas legales, y la Fiscalía ha pedido que sobresean casos criminales actuales contra webs ilegales de portales y vínculos. Es i

They still are, generally (Rounding three years in Madrid quite soon) - Lately a judge decided that P2P sites are okay for private sharing. However, the government tries to slip in above kind of Internet law ruling for quite some time now, it is not the first time and sure it will be not the last time.

I agree, the Spanish and its current government are really good when it comes to the internet (Also living in Madrid 7 years or so). Spain has once again demonstrated itself far more wise than France, UK when it comes to bowing to international lobbying pressure. Let me explain: The Spanish government, like all the worlds governments, has been under intense lobbying pressure ("presiones políticas"). You get no points for guessing who has been working the hardest to change the democratic system here in Spain and around the world: Yes that's right, good old US of A. Proof: Here is last years US annual IIP 301 report lumping Spain along side China, Rusia, and many others as the worst offenders for not bowing to intellectual property demands of the United States "authors". Summary of 301 report: Aims of the US here and elsewhere in the world:

The Administration's top priorities this year continue to be addressing weak IPR protection and enforcement... Although this year's Special 301 Report shows positive progress in many countries, rampant counterfeiting and piracy problems have continued... indicating a need for stronger IPR regimes and enforcement in those countries.

How do you think they are "helping" countries like Spain implement stronger IPR regimes? Through democratic process and listening to the will of the people? (blackmailing, extorting and corrupting are more applicable words). Oh I forgot, here in the US we call the process "spreading democracy", silly me.

What we have got is a extremely powerful country running around this little planet with an exceptionally big political stick, beating any country into submission that dares listen to the will of its people over their idea of Intellectual property enforcement (and anything else). Don't believe me: try reading the "INTERNATIONAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ALLIANCE (IIPA) 2009 SPECIAL REPORT" on Spain. (their title, not mine sorry - I guess they want to shout the message). First line summary for the lazy:

Executive Summary: Internet piracy in Spain continues to worsen, such that many of the copyright industries believe that Spain has the worst per capita Internet piracy problem in Europe and one of the worst overall Internet piracy rates in the world. Exacerbating the high piracy levels are the Spanish government’s policies of: (1) “decriminalizing” P2P file-sharing (as reflected in the 2006 Circular issued by the Attorney General) and (2) failing to establish the minimum EU-level requirements regarding liability for Internet service providers under the E-Commerce Directive so that rights holders have the necessary tools to enforce their rights on the Internet. As a result, the police have ceased taking Internet enforcement actions given the legal uncertainties, and the Attorney General has requested dismissal of current criminal cases against illegal portal and link sites. Importantly, negotiations between rights holders and the Internet service provider (ISP) community to find ways to prevent infringing content from being distributed over the ISPs’ services and/or networks finally

You seem to be conveniently forgetting the actions of the Chamber of Commerce earlier this year.

One example for your personal edification: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/aug/25/nation/na-climate-trial25

There are more examples of businesses doing similar things - they know that with any (and I do mean *ANY*) theory in science, if you don't need to present an alternative, you can always find holes in the theory and ram those holes through to be the only thing anyone talks about.

A non-climate related example would be people saying we haven't witnessed macroevolution in a lab, so how can we be sure that it exists? Of course, anyone versed in the field will say, "Well, we have witnessed macroevolution among single-celled organisms, and it's unreasonable to expect us to have lab evidence of a process that takes hundreds of generations for multi-celled creatures, where hundreds of generations could take decades."

Of course, to evolution skeptics (or those paid to oppose evolution), this is not nearly good enough. Nothing says a priori that macroevolution on a unicellular scale extends to multicellular organisms, much like nothing says a priori that microevolution on a multicellular scale extends to macroevolution. Scientifically, of course, we are united on macroevolution occurring, and have moved onto discussing its mechanisms, history, etc.

I guess what I'm saying is, if we can't get people to agree that macroevolution exists despite the overwhelming, irrefutable evidence that it does, how can we get people to agree on something with even greater societal impact based on (by necessity) much less data?

What would happen if you were standing in front of the beam? You would die. It would be a pretty spectacular death, and you wouldn't know a lot about it. ... It would be the equivalent of having 87kg of TNT dumped into your body.

So you're saying it'd be pretty painless? You could revolutionize flawed processes we have in the United States by providing an alternative that may have a more expensive start up cost but would solve budget problems by providing needed services for both our prison system and science research at the same time. I mean if we ignore the ethical problems with televised executions, the costs of an LHC could be mitigated by commercial segments ...

One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game, during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.

Source

Letterman later claimed he was referring to Bristol, the slut who got knocked up by her boyfriend who she plans to marry. Like OMG, that doesn’t ever happen. What a slut.

Bristol wasn’t at the baseball game, by the way. 14-year-old Willow Palin was.

Letterman still has his job, if I’m not mistaken.

I suppose a clarification is in order, then.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/06/sarah-palin-david-letterman-cbs-rape.html

Letterman made for him a lengthy explanation or clarification, though no apology. He said that his "joke" Monday about Palin's (unnamed) daughter getting "knocked up" by a professional baseball player was aimed at Palin's daughter, Bristol, who is 18, not Willow, who is 14 and attended the baseball game. "I would never, never make jokes about raping or having sex with a 14-year-old girl...Am I guilty of poor taste? Yes."

Long story short, he fucked up big time, and should have got his story straight before he said that. Bristol Palin was not at the ball game with her mother; Willow was. Whoops. The quote in question:

One awkward moment for Sarah Palin at the Yankee game, during the seventh inning, her daughter was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.

The law enforcement agencies are also liable. It just takes more to go after them. Unfortunately they only seem to be held accountable after a long history of gross misconduct and after trampling on civil liberties for an extended period of time.

An example from Los Angeles is what happened in MacAurther park. Despite obvious use of force problems on part of the LAPD, none of the officers involved were charged.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-melee31-2009oct31,0,5092137.story

I'm of the opinion that more often than not, the police rely too much on violence and coercion to do their jobs. Most often they seem to use excess force to disperse crowds and large gatherings. Given what I've seen and experienced with law enforcement, I just make it a point of avoiding them.

You must not be keeping up on the news.

Also, though some in porn dispute it, herpes is part-and-parcel of working in porn -- condoms aren't effective in preventing the spread of herpes, and herpes can make you more susceptible to other diseases.

It strikes me that a lot of good is being done by this body. Plus there's more to come. So it strikes me that Bill might be in line first, or maybe a shared one with Bill, Linus and Tim Berners-Lee or something.

There is good being done. There is also a lot of damage being done by misguided cultural meddling.*
I don't doubt that B & M Gates have good intentions with their charity, but it gets handled like you would expect from any Corporate PR campaign, looking to make news rather than make a change.

(* the link provided by an AC below is a good start http://www.latimes.com/business/la-na-gatesx7jan07-sg,0,2046572.storygallery )

Oh yee of much (intentional?) ignorance...(or perhaps an MS troll...)

Start reading here:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-na-gatesx7jan07-sg,0,2046572.storygallery

(Or just type latimes.com/gates into a browser)

And continue researching on the internet to find other evil(s) done by B. Gates and MS, etc.
He's probably done more HARM to getting computers and, dare I say, non-working, non-functional, BSOD computers into the public eye than anyone else.
Why are so many computer-illiterate? Thank B.Gates and MS for scaring people off computers due to their junk systems...
Microsoft Windows...the MacDonalds of the computer world...definitely NOT Nobel material.