Slashdot Mirror

You stopped just short of mentioning the solution to the problem of employers having all the control - UNIONS.

Demonized the United States, unions brought about such reforms as:

-The 40 hour work week
-Higher wages
-(Limited) Wage equality for all genders and races.
-Sick days
-Lunch breaks
-Improved workplace safety
-Maternity leave
-Collective bargaining
-Retirement benefits
-Healthcare benefits
-Paid vacations
-Due process
-Representation through lobbying

Without a union, you are an at-will employee and a U.S. employer can fire you for the color of your shirt.

"We must hang together or assuredly we shall hang separately"-Often Attributed to Ben Franklin

Something like this eh?
http://carloz.newsvine.com/_news/2013/09/17/20545876-man-killed-by-half-ton-of-marijuana

For some reason I got an uneasy feeling watching the image of SS2 running on its rubber rocket engine.

Now I know what it reminded me of. That image comes with an interesting back story, it seems the Concorde did not only go down in flames because of debris on the runway.

There's no evidence they asked her to lie. She was deciding on her own what was fact and what wasn't. The story is a fabrication. The court found there was no distortion of Fox's part. Are you beginning to get some idea of the gross bias now? You're guilty of confirmation bias - you haven't looked into the facts at all and are just agreeing with the original article which was fabricated or at least, heavily distorted. This is the entire point I was making - that both sides of the debate are equally as biased as the other. Fox only stands out because it goes in the opposite direction to the mainstream. If 10 mainstream sources say "Fox won the right to lie in court" and one says "No we didn't", the natural inclination is to believe the 10, even if that's not the facts, especially if you're personally opposed to Fox. http://boothby.newsvine.com/_news/2010/09/17/5125831-so-apparently-the-claims-that-fox-won-the-right-to-lie-in-court-arent-truthful

I only googled for a quick reference to this story. I didn't pick this particular web site for any reason other than it came up as one of the first results.

However, you are correct. This story doesn't concern "Fox News" the network in general at all. In the end, though, this is still disturbing:

Because the FCC’s news distortion policy is not a “law, rule, or regulation” under section 448.102, Akre has failed to state a claim under the whistle-blower's statute. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment in her favor and remand for entry of a judgment in favor of WTVT.

It still remains a fact that WTVT bowed to pressure from Monsanto's lawyers, and that itself is a corruption of the news if you ask me. I agree with Akre's stance, and I support her right to take that stance.

And although linking to that article hurt my credibility, I still believe that Fox News distorts stories in its broadcasts as would any reasonable-thinking person. Maybe not intentionally, of course, but they have to be pretty well brainwashed to not realize that they're doing it.

I'm not sure what you where you got your info from but Europe actually DOES pay for it's own defence. NATO is a defence ALLIANCE

Yes, it is an alliance, and Europe isn't living up to its commitment.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/10/gates-blasts-nato-questions-future-alliance/

http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2011/06/10/6830603-gates-nato-alliance-future-could-be-dim-dismal

the only thing it's european members has gotten out of it so far is having to help fight some US war in Afghanistan

Well, geez, who created the mess in Afghanistan in the first place? Oh, right, European colonial powers. Same in Libya, the Middle East, South East Asia, and Africa.

You really do not know much about what's going on outside the US, do you?

You really are the typical European: ignorant of your own history and anything outside your home village.

The ISS is expensive to keep in operation with a crew, so there has been discussion of taking it out of service in a few years, and de-orbiting it. My suggestion is to salvage it using robotic technology, and use the material to build new satellites in space.

The original space program had enormous technological benefits for society that would have been valuable even if we had failed to land on the moon. I believe a program to develop robots to disassemble the ISS and build satellites would also pay dividends in terms of advancing robotic technology for manufacturing and recycling, whether the goal is achieved or not.

I RTFA, the average Tea Party Mind will hear "Stem Cells", and make a life decision there; regardless of fact. If Parry should debate the President, Obama's accusation of Parry not spending funds set aside to help the poor just so Parry could bank roll personal projects in a failing Texas sized state economy will be stinging. Like wise, people want to go to work, and will vote for the candidate that get them work.

I am reminded of an old joke, "Most Tea Party Types will not change their mind on Thursday given new information discovered on Wednesday for a personal judgement made on Tuesday."

I think you have wrong three letter agency.

    Google for some of the following, and you'll find the answers.

    Cocaine One

    Cocaine flight crashes in Yucatan (2007)

    Cocaine flight (1990)

    Herion, Opium, etc (1960's on)

    And more (1950's on)

    If you're going to run black ops mission with operations off the books, that budget has to come from somewhere. It's not to say that it's all bad, they get lots of things done, that wouldn't generally be approved of by the public, but are necessary evils.

The usual technique for discouraging whistle blowing has not been abandoned. Some FOIA requests are being blocked and we just rarely hear about it. http://js10131979.new.newsvine.com/_news/2011/03/17/6288196-top-lawmaker-takes-issue-with-dhs-whistle-blower-demotion

Rupert Murdoch owned News Corp. is a fascist, totalitarian gangster group. Flock them all and their mentally retarded agenda. http://carloz.newsvine.com/_news/2010/10/01/5213354-news-corp-parent-company-of-fox-and-wall-st-journal-makes-second-1-million-donation-to-pro-gop-group?pc=25&sp=25

We've discovered new bacteria that operate at those colder depths that seem to be metaolizing the oil at the rapid rate, and being atomized likely makes it easier for them.

Sure, and those bacteria create a hypoxic zone that kills the foodweb in that zone. Coupled with the very slow rate of mixing at that depth in the gulf, and you've got a dead zone that may persist for decades.

Actually the "dead zone" idea may be somewhat in doubt. I believe this story is referring to the bacteria mentioned.

From the above story:

"... the microbe works without significantly depleting oxygen in the water, researchers led by Terry Hazen at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory reported Tuesday in the online journal Science Express."

"Scientists also had been concerned that oil-eating activity by microbes would consume large amounts of oxygen in the water, creating a "dead zone" dangerous to other life. But the new study found that oxygen saturation outside the oil plume was 67 percent, while within the plume it was 59 percent."

Sounds to me like the oxygen deletion as a result of the oil being metabolized or biodegraded, however you wish to style it, is less extreme than the severe oxygen deletion that occurs during the annual dead zone in the Gulf (not to mention other locations) due to nitrogen rich agricultural run-off and sewage.

FYI - Dan Maes followed these comments by winning the Republican primary. He defeated Scott McInnis, who just paid $300,000 to settle a plagiarism suit. Now all Maes has to worry about (other than John Hickenlooper, the Democratic candidate) is Tom Tancredo, who is also known for making some outlandish comments:

http://rdonaldsnyder.newsvine.com/_news/2010/07/09/4647834-poll-is-tom-tancredo-bat-guano-crazy

Not exactly a bumper crop of top-quality Republicans this year in the state of Colorado.

and a failed drug test could be said "I have a prescription" and keep their job.

that no longer works.

You can't just create words out of the blue. People will never be able to grok your meaning if you do. You know I'm right, so don't be all fugnutish about it.

Don't be such an asshat.

It's a reference to a stunt that Stephen Colbert encouraged.

No kidding.

The problem is the incestuous "culture" - or more to the point, the haves-and-have-nots attitude of the majority of their administrators and so-called "respected users" - that works on the basis of gaming the system.

Words by a former wikipedia administrator that showed me how their system really works. And then of course there's scandal after scandal after scandal after scandal (the last one is incredible fun, too... if you think that's the only secret organizing list for abusive wikipedians, admin or no, you're delusional).

Wikipedia doesn't work. It hasn't worked for a long time and I don't think it ever really did. It has horrible bias against anyone who is a verifiable expert in their field. It has MASSIVE problems with cliques going around pushing their agendas and claiming that anyone new coming to an article or set of articles on their favorite topic (global warming, middle eastern conflict/culture, scientology, etc). If you show up with well-researched refutals to the crap that is 99% of wikipedia, you are labeled a "troll", or abused, or targeted by one of their throwaway accounts so that a friendly behind-the-scenes admin can slap an indefinite ban on you. This is deliberate: 20 newcomers to an article might be able to outweigh the morons pushing bad information, but as long as they can pick them off one at a time, they "win" in the wikipedian system.

A few wikipedians have been there "Forever." They'll never go away. More have been there "A very long time" and have developed incestuous, corrupt relationships with each other and with the "forever" types. Meanwhile, anyone new coming in is instantly accused of being a "sockpuppet", "meatpuppet", or whatever other epithet can be thrown at them.

It's no coincidence that the "Checkuser" tool, which was originally ripped out of David Gerard's corrupt grasp after a series of false-attack incidents (privately hushed up, naturally) has on en.wp been removed from the ability to "prove innocence." The accusation of "sockpuppetry" is an abuser's tool of force, pure and simple. In the Wikipedia "judge, jury, and executioner" administrator zone, any tool that could prove someone is innocent is to be neutered as soon as possible.

The statistics on blockings/bannings and responses to them are likewise hidden. Why? Because analysis of these shows what really goes on. Most administrators don't bother to communicate with users when placing a block. They drop indefinites immediately with no remorse, using wikispeak code rather than plain language. The "appeal" process is a laughable joke as well, with maybe 5-8 active "reviewers" who basically use it as a stress-relief tool, beating up on people who are helpless (because they don't have the admin bit) to begin with.

Face it. Wikipedia is worthless with the current "leadership." All the good editors and conscientious administrators were driven away long ago.

if food, medicine, and shelter were not taxed then the poor would not be paying as much in tax

That is true. However, it seems that the FairTax does not have such exemptions.

I thought I heard of one fair tax proposal that did have exemptions for food, medicine, and shelter. While looking I didn;t find it but I did find this: Why not just exempt food and medicine from the tax? Wouldn't that be fair and simple?"

"Exempting items by category is neither fair nor simple. Respected economists have shown that the wealthy spend much more on unprepared food, clothing, housing, and medical care than do the poor. Exempting these goods, as many state sales taxes do, actually gives the wealthy a disproportionate benefit. Also, today these purchases are not exempted from federal taxation. The purchase of food, clothing, and medical services is made from after-income-tax and after-payroll-tax dollars, while their purchase price hides the cost of corporate taxes and private sector compliance costs."

"Finally, exempting one product or service, but not another, opens the door to the army of lobbyists and special interest groups that plague and distort our taxation system today. Those who have the money will send lobbyists to Washington to obtain special tax breaks in their own self-interest. This process causes unfair and inefficient distortions in our economy and must be stopped."

However, at some point in the wealthier brackets, it would still become regressive as investment takes over the outflow of capital from wealthy individuals' coffers.

As more money is invested though more jobs will be created which will drive up wages. So the poor will benefit. Only those who don't work may not, but with higher wages more people will be donate so even they may be helped.

Oh, and regarding donating I heard on CNN that the poor actually donate more than the wealthy. While I didn't find it on the CNN website I found another website that has it: "America's poor are its most generous givers".

You could still make an argument that this is a good way to incentivize investment, but I still think it would cause the rich-poor gap to widen.

I don't think that would happen the way I would do it. To save tyme I didn't include everything in my previous post on a fair tax. While I would get rid of personal income taxes I would not get rid of income tax on corporations. Now this is where I disagree with other Libertarians, some would eliminate income tax for corporations but not me. This is because corporations enjoy limited liability and I feel such a business has to pay for that. And an income tax is a good way to do it.

Falcon

Large Hadron Collider: Understanding The Dangers (Part 3) The end note there: This "safety review" is a political PR document, not real science. http://deepthought.newsvine.com/_news/2008/09/05/1831610-large-hadron-collider-understanding-the-dangers-part-3

Large Hadron Collider: Understanding The Dangers (Part 3) The end note there: This "safety review" is a political PR document, not real science. http://deepthought.newsvine.com/_news/2008/09/05/1831610-large-hadron-collider-understanding-the-dangers-part-3

Feel free to vote to ban this user:
http://opengov.ideascale.com/akira/dtd/5326-4049
Also, feel free to tell him to stop.
His email address is davecreacrea@gmail.com
(see http://davecreacrea.newsvine.com/ and
http://mwcnews.net/content/view/28707/ )

Deeply religious people are very happy. They're also batshit insane. Drunks are happy until the next morning as well but I'd rather be a miserable man than a happy pig.

It isn't, it's an affront to safety.

No more so than say, mayors goofing around with assault rifles. http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2008/02/restoring-right-to-resist.html

In fact, I would guess that there are many fewer fatalities due to accidents with guns than with cars. So why not take away everyone's car? Both guns and cars provide utility. For brevity, I will cut short the reductio ad absurdam.

In any case, your desire to prevent me or anyone else from having a gun infringes on the freedoms of others predicated on a perceived risk, not on a committed crime, and thus you prejudge people before they have in fact comitted a crime which is generally a no-no.

And besides which, your safety concerns (if they were genuinely only safety concerns) would easily be remedied by civilian firearms training programs. These are required by several states, especially for concealed carry permits. If you would still see this as a safety issue even with adequate training (whatever that may be), why don't you feel the same about government employees having those weapons? I grew up in DC and I feel a vague sense of unease when an armed government employee is in close proximity. Perhaps this is because I've been around much more police violence than you have. But surely you remember Rodney King.

Secondly you make an assumption that if everyone were armed then those who would seek to do harm would be interested in the continuance of thier lives. This is also a falsehood in todays current climate. Those who would seek to do harm in the situation you're likely describing care nothing more than completing a 'mission' with no regards to their own lives.

Here you misread my argument. The vast majority of crime is still robbery/rape/etc. and is motivated by self-interested greed/power hunger. These are people to whom death may not scare to the same extent it scares most people in our society, but these are not suicidal people in general. My argument in its main is directed at what a traveler would do to protect him/herself in their destination after the flight (though yes, armed people will also protect their lives against those unconcerned with the loss of their own). It is sad that people believe that they are safer when frequently apathetic "public servants" and criminals have weapons. This next link is only a sample of what is beginning to happen as we entrust more of our safety to people in government. http://www.newsvine.com/_question/2009/04/08/2656511-did-transit-workers-do-enough-in-subway-rape-case

And that's when the police themselves aren't the criminals: http://www.lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w84.html
Or inciting/perpetrating violence at demonstrations and trying to cover it up. http://digg.com/world_news/British_police_kill_passer_by_at_London_G20_protests_Video

The answer is that we must each take responsibility for our own safety to a large extent.

As far as "opposite ends of the political spectrum" goes, you may be right, but only if you're of the socialist-fascism bent rather than the socialist bent. I'm (as you should be able to tell from my posting history) also very much against the majority of the acts of the Republicans in the last decade. I am a civil libertarian on all fronts.

In '95 Biden introduced a "Counterterrorism Bill" in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing that was essentially the same thing as the Patriot Act. He even said, when the DOJ introduced the Patriot Act, "I drafted a terrorism bill after the Oklahoma City bombing. And the bill John Ashcroft sent up was my bill".

The National Forensic Association is an intercollegiate debating organization. I doubt they have anything particularly important to say about the JFK assassination. There was a report by the National Academy of Sciences based on acoustical analysis of crime scene recordings, but it concluded that the multiple-shooter theory was not supported by the available acoustic evidence.

Perhaps you are thinking of a report by a Texas A&M professor of statistics and a retired FBI forensic scientist from 2007 who "conducted a chemical and forensic analysis of bullets reportedly derived from the same batch as those used by suspected assassin Lee Harvey Oswald." Their conclusion was that the bullet fragments aren't particularly rare and that the matching fragments could have come from three or more separate bullets, and that previous analysis based on bullet fragments "used to rule out a second assassin is fundamentally flawed."

The important thing to note here, conspiracy buffs, is that those two reports don't contradict one another. There could be a second shooter that wasn't captured by the acoustic evidence -- but likewise, matching fragments could have come from three or more separate bullets is not an equivalent statement to "matching fragments did come from three or more separate bullets."

It's also worth noting that, in fact, the report was not done by a "national association," it never made the sweeping claim that "the official story was impossible," and the report has been criticized for naive use of statistics and generally poor writing. According to critic John Fiorentino, the paper as finally presented in 2008 was revised to address his rebuttal linked above, and "by making the revisions, the authors have effectively negated their findings just as stated in [Fiorentino's] rebuttal."

There are many criticisms to be made of the Warren Commission's handling of the investigation, and I suspect that because of that there will be people arguing about this two hundred years from now. The problem is the same here as with nearly all Grand Government Conspiracy Stories, though: even if the official story (about whatever event we're talking about) is incomplete and imperfect, that doesn't ipso facto make the official story wrong in either overall scope or final conclusion. It's worthy to question authority and to be skeptical of any official story--but there is a point where skepticism becomes gullibility: someone who automatically dismisses anything The Government says is thinking no more critically than someone who automatically accepts anything The Government says, and is ultimately just as easy to manipulate.

I believe when you are born in calif, dna samples are taken (you probably can't even opt-out?) when you are born. ...or slightly afterwards ;)

also see:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E00E4D71231F93BA35751C1A9629C8B63
  (National Briefing | West: California: Challenge To DNA Collection Law)

and:

http://japark.newsvine.com/_news/2008/06/29/1623247-may-2-2008-bush-signs-bill-to-take-all-newborns-dna-
  (May 2, 2008: Bush Signs Bill To Take All Newborns' DNA)

Coincidentally, you could say the exact same thing about the Bible. Of course, many people seem to think the Bible is also a governing document of this nation, so I suppose it's fitting that they would treat the two the same way.

Quite true - anyone that doubts that this is explicitly true should read the comments posted at a discussion over the "In God We Trust" removal attempt. Probably a good 70% of the anti-removal comments are of the form "Fuck liberal hippies, this is a Christian country and the government should not take away our right to have Christianity in the government, if you don't like it MOVE TO CHINA." Er...well, kind of like that, except with more spelling errors.

I particularly like the implication that it's only the liberals that want the government to remain as secular as possible; apparently the so-called "conservatives" making these arguments have forgotten what the tradition really stands for...

The longest word you can type with only the left-hand letters on a keyboard is "devertebrated".

A much better answer isn't, so don't bother clicking it...

Are we talking about the same picture?

Are we looking at the same picture?

What a completely shill review by the way.

http://discuss.newsvine.com/_news/2008/09/08/1841134-spore-is-a-game-for-all-gamers?threadId=352205&cmt=2818650#c2818650

"Current phone authentication techniques lack security, as they are typically conducted semi-manually, and are susceptible to social engineering attacks, RSA said. Crooks are learning to take advantage of that, it added.". http://hodgie.newsvine.com/_news/2006/10/24/413813-telephone-banking-system-recognizes-your-voice-

I do hope they don't send this data around on CD's or sell the PC's.

I remember having to create an account with Kodak to get the latest sofware and tried several usernames. "Unhappy Customer" was taken and so was "Angry Customer" so I guess that says it all.

But anyone who showed that it could be done would be arrested and spend serious jail time.

Not anyone. The GAO already did this.

Results were as expected: the TSA operates a security theater.

Anyway, while us über-rational Slashdotters disdain security theater because we only care about real security, Bruce Schneier, who coined the term "security theater," points out that security theater can help bring inaccurate perceptions of security closer inline with reality. It's not an entirely worthless effort, if it helps misinformed people make more efficient tradeoffs by bringing their mistaken perceptions closer inline with reality. Even if we could force everyone to study statistics and learn the real dangers in their lives so that they could act in better accordance with reality, it's not clear that's necessarily a good thing. There are significant costs involved with education and information that would have to be weighed against the benefits of modifying people's behavior to act more rationally when considering danger.

I didn't mean it that way,and am truly sorry if I did offend. But seeing as how the ultra right wing has now said contraceptives are abortion that you can see why I worded it the way that I did. And even though I am an atheistic agnostic I have no problem with folks beliefs(my oldest is so Catholic it hurts. he even has a Gothic Cross for a Desktop.He just loves the ritual of it.) it just hurts that folks seem to forget that before Roe V Wade we still had abortions. They were called using a coat hanger and my mom who was a nurse lost quite a few of them. Of course the rich just got on a plane and went to a country with legal abortions,so in reality it only applied to the poor.

If you really wanted to get rid of abortions,then push your church leaders to support birth control. Contraceptives should be just as easy to get as a Coke. I know that when I started having sex at 15 I would have died of embarrassment if I would have had to go to a doctor or a school official for them. Again i was lucky that my mom was a nurse and set me down at 14 and handed me a box of rubbers and said "I don't care what the news says. There is no way a disease like GRID can know whether someone is gay or not. So when you find that lucky girl who steals your heart I want you to be safe,because my kids aren't getting sick or dying for lack of a condom."

If we made it a lot easier for kids to be protected we would not only cut down on STD and abortions and unwanted children, but there is no telling how many diseases later in life will spring up from exposure to an STD. I know my former best friend has been exposed to HPV enough times that he will in all likelihood die from cancer. We need to make it easy for our kids to not only protect themselves,but learn about other safe sex methods like mutual masturbation. But to do so the only way it will happen is all the good christian folk out there push their pastors to get past the BS of "OMG,if they know how a penis works they'll use it!" and push for acceptance that birth control,especially condoms and femidoms,are they way to keep ALL our kids safe and healthy. And as always this is my 02c,YMMV

It is not as if people are not already insulating themselves. Even when their opinions are refuted by the facts, they continue to push their bullshit onto news forums. They apparently don't even see what is right in front of their eyes, so I don't see how this trend will change much for them.

People with any intelligence seek to fully understand ideas and events and will continue to do so. So this trend is unlikely to change anything for these folks, either.

With luck, we might see trolls tending to flock to certain sites and thoughtful folks tending towards other sites, but with what becomes of sites like Newsvine, I'm not going to hold my breath.

moogyboog, I just wanted to tell you how insightful I found your comment to be (since I have no mod points at this moment). You articulate many things I feel but, for which, I have not yet found words. I quoted the first bit of your comment to this parallel discussion on Newsvine. http://onlynow99.newsvine.com/_news/2008/02/25/1324796-scientology-based-organization-campaigns-against-psychiatry#c1523809 Cheers!! Keep on thinking freely!

This sounds fairly similar to Newsvine, a site that was launched a few years ago for the purpose of community-driven reporting. Since then, it has been acquired by MSNBC, and several of the more prominent submitters there have either been interviewed or actually done some reporting on MSNBC. Killfile, one of the members there was in or near Blacksburg, VA when the school shootings happened last year. Thanks to his contacts at the school, he was able to post up-to-the-minute reports of exactly what was going on, while the other news outlets were busy trying to get people down there (which takes several hours since it's an out-of-the-way hamlet). His professionalism in that and other instances have made him one of the biggest assets there. Oh yeah, and Newsvine also shares the ad revenue with its submitters, too. It's a great community.

The executive can set law enforcement priorities. It can also pardon or commute the sentences of convicts. Ron Paul can tell the nation: "stop paying your income tax and I will pardon you."

Ron Paul has already said he'd pardon all drug offenders.

Uh yeah.... they just closed it. Guess what? They didn't tell us :-) http://onlineapps.newsvine.com/_news/2007/12/12/1158826-breaking-microsoft-removes-free-vista-offer-but-forgets-to-put-it-on-their-site

nah... we can simply burn coal and use that new filter (can't find the link right now) to ciphen off the CO2 and Methane... burn teh methane for extra power and filter the CO2 from that as well, then send it over to this process to perminantly bind it and then cart it away.

Or, if you dislike ACLU/IJ/etc for whatever reasons, you can strike on 9/11/07, as part of a grassroots movement which has been endorsed by several organizations but is controlled by none of them... and which could mean the start of something big.

Here's a perk of living in (even rural) Canada: I go down to the garage/general/liquor store, and there on the shelf is Havana Club, "Ron puro Cubano," mmm, great is right. And cuban coffee in the cupboard, it's only pretty good but it's organic.

There may be long-term competitive benefits accruing to Cuba out of the blockade and its hardships.

The whole island has pretty much gone organic, as part of the austerity produced by the embargo, and they're trying to turn that constraint into a strength. When the embargo finally drops in the US, watch for cuban specialty products showing up in the organic food stores.

They need an internationally credible domestic certification system to really flourish, however the embargo has forced them to look hard at their local food security, so they'd be okay if international trade was interrupted. They have international trade in things like organic fruits and coffee, and they've made interesting innovations with domestic distribution in mind, like the Organopónicos.

The embargo has created constraints that make it an interesting testbed for development without the overwhelming influence of large transnationals. It's a race between the international organic sector to help establish Cuba as an entrenched organic ag system and the influx of Life Sciences transnationals that might happen if there's regime change.

Cuba's ripe turf for donated linux-ready systems, so support that goal in some way. There's enough real zeal for independence and common interests to make it a interesting test bed for a society running on open-source software.

That's beautiful! Do you mind if I post a link to Newsvine?

The page was in competent hands, and the campaign could still manipulate people using the page (they had full access). The status-quo was not broken. Obama's campaign just want COMPLETE control over everything dealing with their candidate, which I find more frightening than the MySpace ordeal itself.

Perhaps he was mindful of John McCain's experience with other people having control over content shown on his myspace page.

LINK and LINK2 and LINK3 .

I personally kinda liked the guy at first...but, with these and some other issues I've started hearing, I think he merits closer investigation to see what this guy is all about.

Has anyone else heard about this speach in particular and how he supposedly really blew it due to dates of when what happened?

Link to the original image:

http://www.mikeindustries.com/scratch/myspace/cont acttable_myspace.gif

and the screen grab: http://mike.newsvine.com/_news/2007/03/26/633799-h acking-john-mccain

I think people are going to keep calling it iPhone anyway, though.