Slashdot Mirror

Well at least they spun it for good reasons...the other guy was spinning meatspin style

Well I personally welcome our new "not using Photoshop, using a special technique we wont release" German interpol overlords. They'll do a better job than our old robot overlords...er actually maybe not interpol has politicians in it http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/i/interpol/index.html?query=POLITICS%20AND%20GOVERNMENT&field=des&match=exact /cry, DON'T LEAVE US ROBOTS WE 3 YOU

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9407E7D91230F936A35756C0A961958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print

''We really have to watch out for that,'' Mr. Campbell said. ''Last year he came back and whupped us.''

So, it actually turns out to be a direct quote: at which point, that's perfectly legit for the New York Times to report it.

Whether the IBM researcher should have used the word when talking to the press is another matter.

It was a local affair, *and* it sparked the Revolution. There are several analogous local affairs in the matter at hand, namely the suits filed against those accused of file sharing.

The Boston tea merchants were affected by a combination of at least two of the British Crown's foolish acts, namely the outrageously high tariff on tea imported from India by the colonists, and the subsequent allowing of the East India Tea Company to circumvent this tariff. The latter's goods were roughly half the price, and were driving the colonial merchants out of business.

The Crown had bankrupted itself fighting the French and Indian War. Like most present-day governments, it had issued Bonds which were presumed to be very safe investments based on the presumption that they were backed by the power of taxation. It was the excessive taxation enacted upon the booming colonial economy which resulted in Samuel Adams' (and others') rallying against taxation without representation.

The analogy is very, very apt: Both the RIAA and the MPAA are taxpayer-funded entities, but they are not accountable to taxpayers. Further, the RIAA collects (and sues for the collection of) royalties for artists who are giving their music away.

That is, they are making uninformed decisions on how to spend taxpayer monies. OTOH, they are not interfering with anyone's livelihoods--that would foment revolution. The response thus far seems to be increased violation of ridiculous and largely unenforceable law, with a modicum of derision and righteous indignation over the manipulation of tort law to reap unreasonable damages from individual citizens with very little proof.

At a very high level, the analogy is sound: Both cases involve wealthy and powerful entities acting in desperation because each wants to remain rigid in the midst of changing times. Further, both the British Crown and the American Recording Industry caused the change: The British colonized North America, and the Recording Industry introduced digital media. The common belief is one of entitlement based on investment.

Funny how that doesn't work for individuals. When things change, you and I must adapt or fail. Some of us have certainly wasted a fortune or two trying to reign in a changing situation beyond our control. How marvelous and surprising it would be to see successful adaptation. There is hope, you know: Rick Rubin is now the president of Columbia Records. And that link is free for everyone: The New York Times is now 100% free.

It sounds like it's a related concept to this older concept but much less risky and invasive.

Sure it's just an assembly job, but in your original post you were claiming that it had been made from living parts (whatever that might mean), whereas in fact the assembly of this virus was from synthesized components (raw chemicals). The mail order gene sequences are synthesized:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/12/technology/techspecial/12gene.html?ref=techspecial

They used provided gene sequences. These gene sequences were almost certainly obtained from other viruses.

Not at all - these mail-order gene sequence shops are synthesizing them:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/12/technology/techspecial/12gene.html?ref=techspecial

I see where you are coming from. However, your analogy is not a fair comparison. You are most certainly not renting the iPhone. It is yours. By the very nature of rental agreement, you do not own anything at all. But by purchasing the iPhone, you have only exchanged money with the vendor in exchange for a piece of hardware. If you want to blend it, unlock it, or even use it with AT&T's rate plan, you can. There is no obligation to do anything with your phone. You could even use it as a paperweight after you've bought it.

But, just to play devil's advocate on your behalf, perhaps the analogy should be with a condo and a house. You do own a condo, but you are bound by certain agreements that limits your freedom. The logic behind these limitations is usually in order to foster a certain type of community for the all condo owners. In fact, Apple's own justification about limiting 3rd party development invokes a desire to avoid "gum[ming] up" the network:

But it's not like the walled garden has gone away. "You don't want your phone to be an open platform," meaning that anyone can write applications for it and potentially gum up the provider's network, says Jobs. "You need it to work when you need it to work. Cingular doesn't want to see their West Coast network go down because some application messed up."

But I believe that's bullshit. Everybody and their brother is allowing development on their phones. Also, in line with this, the U.S. is virtually alone in the world with locked phones. For the beacon of capitalism in the world that the U.S. supposedly represents, we sure don't offer the myriad choices that demand and an free market would dictate must exist. I'm even more impatient with this crap, after living in Asia. I can get cheap, unlocked phones very easily here that will work both in the U.S. and all over the world. And the incentives built-in with providers isn't very convincing except for the most frugal buyer, or perhaps for the the very first-time buyer. Nope, this locking crap (both software and carrier) is for the birds.

The notion that Japan's ability to roll out broadband everywhere is somehow the result of strategic, and forward thinking lacking in the west is so much hype.

Japan is a tiny island. The United States consists of the fairly large part of the North American continent and Europe, taken together, is not entirely tiny either. Of course it will be easier to wire Japan than it would be the USA or Europe.

People that argue that Japan is somehow doing something "unprofitable" to get a strategic gain need to wonder why Japan protects its telecommunications sector to the extent it does. AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and other telecommunications concerns would love to get into Japan, and have been pushing the governments of the USA to get Japan to open its communications backplane to foreign competition, but, really, to no avail, as evidenced by the following cites:

http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-3841226_ITM

http://www.clintonpresidentialcenter.org/legacy/050399-report-on-japan-deregulation.htm

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE5D6143DF937A15750C0A9669C8B63

So sure, you can buy into the hype, but the reality is, Japanese telecommunications are both anti-competitive and comparitively easy to do.

Heck, our government can't even secure its machines from itself.

Oh, yes. Only good. No one would ever corrupt humanitarian programs.

Oh, yes. Only good. No one would ever corrupt humanitarian programs.

So do different vodkas. More money != more better, which is the main point of this whole exercise.

Security made progress, that's granted, but nothing is absolutely sure.

There are numerous major accidents. Rarely a huge toll (here is an example: ship new to service, not a 2nd/34rd world country, 20 people KIA out of 89), because there are no more huge cruise ships nor massive advertising before their their maiden trip, therefore most go barely noticed. If, on the other hand, nuclear plants go more and more numerous and bigger (powerful) the global risk (and local cost) of an accident will rise.

>> Building a clean coal plant costs now approx the same as a nuclear one

> Are you just agreeing with what I said?

Yes, but please don't neglect that "'clean coal' approach is pretty new and disruptive, therefore there are margins for savings."

> 'Clean Coal'
> still has the increased fuel costs of coal

There is plenty of coal in the US (no strategic problem), its cost is much more stable (uranium price is now at least 5x times 2001's) and it produces no very dangerous waste.

> and that's before you consider CO2 sequestriation

As already written: nope, in the proposed case study (see IGCC)

> Oh, and your link states $1,500-$2,000/watt, not a 'very minimum 2000+ per kW.'

Nope. The Platts document states that:
-=-=-=-=
Generation II" nuclear power unit -- of the type China has built ((...)) $1,500 to $2,000 per installed kilowatt. The figures are even higher for Generation III plants
=-=-=-=-

Will somebody try to build a brand new generation 2 plant (less secure) in the US? Therefore it will be a G3, which costs are "Even higher" than $2000/kW, which is what I wrote (isn't "very minimum 2k" equivalent to "even higher than 2k"?)

> when it comes to retrofitting it frequently isn't, because it costs so much more

True on the short term, but when we have to switch a country retrofitting as soon and much as possible often makes sense because it also switches most of the existing chains (supply, skills...). Be keeping old stuff around one just makes it harder for all to switch. You are right in that most will not replace nearly new stuff, but incentives have to somewhat speed up the reform of at least middle-aged obsolete energy guzzlers.

> Homes can last centuries.

That's less and less true, helping insulating.

> IGCC still loses a couple efficiency points when you tack on sequestriation

True but marginal and could be coped in the coming years.

> As for the waste - like I keep saying, it's ~95% fuel still. The remaining 5% will reach ambient in a couple hundred years

All I know is that the DOE tries hard to ensure that the repository (Yucca) will be sure for 1 million years, by an EPA requirement.

> Decommisioning is paid for in the USA by a fund

In the UK the first major decommission campaign caused a shock: estimated costs were way, way underestimated. Let's bet that, at this point of time, taxpayer money will (as usual) cover deficient private companies.

> in seeking higher efficiencies they ended up sacrificing durability. Is saving a kw/h a week worth cutting 10-25% of a system's useful lifespan? Heck, for a while they were making homes so well sealed that many became chemical disasters from buildup of home cleaners/chemicals*.

I f

See this NYT article on both services

Your wish is the NY Times command:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D06E1D61739F930A15751C1A96F958260

" John Dunlavy, who manufactures audiophile loudspeakers and wire to go with it, does think questioning is valid. A musician and engineer, Mr. Dunlavy said as an academic exercise he used principles of physics relating to transmission line and network theory to produce a high-end cable. ''People ask if they will hear a difference, and I tell them no,'' he said.
Mr. Dunlavy has often gathered audio critics in his Colorado Springs lab for a demonstration.

''What we do is kind of dirty and stinky,'' he said. ''We say we are starting with a 12 WAG zip cord, and we position a technician behind each speaker to change the cables out.''

The technicians hold up fancy-looking cables before they disappear behind the speakers. The critics debate the sound characteristics of each wire.

''They describe huge changes and they say, 'Oh my God, John, tell me you can hear that difference,' '' Mr. Dunlavy said. The trick is the technicians never actually change the cables, he said, adding, ''It's the placebo effect.''"

From this article They are eliminating the time requirement, and letting you share music that was shared to you, but keeping the 3 listens. But you can still squirt to your heart's content! Also, it will still be DRM'd squirts. They are just a bit less limited.

Sorry dude - she's taken:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE1DC133FF933A15752C0A967958260

Always interesting when people put their foot in their mouth publicly, without stopping to consider how much of their lives are available for review.

Is this the same Sony/BMG Music that Rick Rubin became the co-president of?

The same multinational about which Rick said in a highly publicized NY Times article that (fair use quote):

"Columbia is stuck in the dark ages. I have great confidence that we will have the best record company in the industry,
but the reality is, in today's world, we might have the best dinosaur. Until a new model is agreed upon and rolling, we can be
the best at the existing paradigm, but until the paradigm shifts, it's going to be a declining business. This model is done."

as well as: "The Sony people thought I was insane. I'm also trying to get them to move out of their offices in New York.
That space is tainted with the old way."

Looks like a total lack of communication in the company's new priorities still remains between the top execs and their lawyer drones, it seems....
Mind you, when this lady lawyer is done there, she can probably look for employment at NTP for a few more years of successful ligitious lifestyle.

Z.

Your other comments are shit, and ignore research into this area. For example, the last hour is the least productive because you are fatigued. But I won't throw any more facts against your irrational beliefs.

Luckily, there are direct statistics to measure productivity. And the US--and has been for a long time--the most productive nation in the world: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/04/business/worldbusiness/04output.html

Hmm, could that also because we are the most populous first world nation?

The administration, Dr. Carmona said, would not allow him to speak or issue reports about stem cells, emergency contraception, sex education, or prison, mental and global health issues. Top officials delayed for years and tried to "water down" a landmark report on secondhand smoke, he said. Released last year, the report concluded that even brief exposure to cigarette smoke could cause immediate harm.

In the future in the US, we may need to work harder to wrap our minds around such ideas. This is from the September 23 NY Times:

GOLDEN OPPORTUNITIES -- More Profit and Less Nursing at Many Homes
By CHARLES DUHIGG
Insulated from lawsuits by their corporate structures, private investors in nursing homes have cut expenses and staff, sometimes below minimum requirements.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/23/business/23nursing.html?th&emc=th

1. Just because a company has a huge and growing audience doesn't mean it can find a huge revenue source. Skype's appeal is that it offers services free or very cheap. That limits its ability to raise prices. And it turns out that there are limited opportunities for advertising or add-on services.
2. It's almost impossible to pay for a deal through "synergies." EBay executives talked about how Skype would be useful to connect buyers and sellers in its marketplace. This always seemed to be hooey. The eBay market is already full of chatter, mainly by e-mail, and sometimes by phone. Sure, some of that might well be handled by Internet phone, but how much and what value was created by eBay owning its own voice chat system? Not much, it turns out.

There was another article in NYT magazine that had some good obserations in it:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/magazine/30wwln-essay-perlstein-t.html?ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=all

The parts that caught my eye as being especially descriptive, and troubling, about colleges today are

-- the smothering, infantile nature of the place

-- the huge expense

-- the "Organization Kids"

-- the non-Organization Kids who are bored, waiting to get out

I'd like to make the point that most of the people who talk a lot about education and educational systems and organizations, you know the kind of elementary teachers who actually get excited about those awful pep-rally motivational speaker shit fest in-teacher-day things, the kind of people who join "Beacon St. 30" groups or "re-engineering committees", are actually the WORST people to be in charge of education.

That's a kind of general point, because in other fields, the people who are most interested in managerial and organizational aspects also tend to be the worst people for those jobs. But it is especially bad in education, at all levels.

Much of what used to be the good part of college life is now a supervised Disney-fied version of it. MIT has made the hacks tradition part of it's corporate culture, and when the CMU guys stole the CalTech cannon they hired a professional moving company to move it for $15,000 ! What happened to loading it in the back of some frat boys' dad's horse trailer and driving across the country drinking, fighting at truck stops and picking up hitchhikers ? And when those CalTech guys "stole it back" they hired the same moving company to bring it back. Any "senior skip day" or other bit of independence is quickly integrated as a bit of faux rebellion into the administration, and put on the official calendar. "We had to re-schedule taking over the dorm for a big pot party, because the Student Affairs office said there was a conflict." Modern student life as all the "independence" of a company bowling league.

Tuition has been rising faster than inflation for a long time. (Of course, most things seem to rising faster than inflation, which might cause the sceptical to question the government's inflation figures.) The costs of a university are not rising particularly fast -- the costs are mostly salaries, one of the only catagories supposedly rising slower than inflation -- and aside from the occasional super-star researcher and the overpaid administration, the janitors and groundsmen aren't getting rich, and these institutions are expert at extracting free or below-market labor from grad students and untenured professors. The universities are exempt from most taxes, have mostly acquired their land long ago and don't pay property tax on it, so construction and energy costs must be a part of the remaining real costs.

My general impression, from the sum of all these observations, is that going to college is probably not a good deal for most of the people who do it. Of course, I agree that the nation needs educated people, and in particular people educated in "traditional" humanities, languages, and the science and technical fields. I don't know any good alternatives to the current crop of institutions, but just because we don't know of good alternatives yet, is no reason to keep dumping resources down the hole we know doesn't work.

From my point of view, as a post-college technically educated person, the most hopeful strategy (even if it seems weak) seems to be a temporary return to a more apprentice type, on-the-job education until the higher education bubble burns out. I think I should focus on employing people who didn't go to college but have some technical aptititude -- in my area, that consists mainly of young sys admins who never went to college or were kicked out after one year. Their knowledge of the use of computers is good, thei

My coauthor Larry Orlowski and I wrote about outsourcing CEOs in The Corner Office in Bangalore. I hope that our NY Times Op-Ed was cited in the patent application.

Think Somalia. Just before the old despot fell, he opened the armories to any yahoo who came shuffling in and parroted the right slogans.

Flooding Burma with uncontrolled military hardware would very likely produce the same result.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE3DE163DF93AA35751C1A964958260&n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FSubjects%2FF%2FFirearms

As a very happy user (still working after 7 years), I always planned on replacing it with another . However, are now produced by , an American company, and I can't quite bear to buy American while security companies like Blackwater are shooting at Iraqis with the American Government as their biggest backer. Maybe this is silly, as whatever I buy is likely to be made (at least in part) in America... but still, what are my options for something as well built as the ?"

Yeah, the SAT problem just keeps getting worse. I don't think it will ever be solved.

I would hardly call Freedom to Fascism a source of "information" on the Fed. If the movie constitutes "information," then Scientology is a source of "information" about astrophysics and geology.

Freedom to Fascism is mainly a screed by someone who has convinced himself that he has no obligation to pay income taxes (the IRS disagrees, hence the $2MM in tax liens against the director). Good debunking here: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/31/movies/31russ.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

... we have a 13 month old, and there WAS a study (again, lacking a cite) that said that kids who were in day care for 20 or fewer hours per week showed no differences from kids who were kept at home. After that, there was again no differences between the kids, so there wer really two groups: One in day care for 20 or fewer, one not.

That said, I have no idea where one would go for an unbiased study of these things. A couple of links for your viewing pleasure:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE2D6143CF935A25754C0A9659C8B63
I suspect the parent's study is the one by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. I didn't see that the article attaches NICHHD to a university. Although I'm not sure how that would alter my opinion of the study, now that I think about it.

Same link, another study from UMinn stating that kid's stress levels tend to rise during the day while in day care, but fall during the day while at home.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051101/news_1n1earlyed.html
A study showing that negative social effects are most pronounced when the kids are in day care for more than 45 hours a week, which seems pretty extreme.

In short, I dunno either. Go Buddhist. There's a middle path here somewhere.

Wow man, you think it's tough now, the dropping USD is just going to aggravate inflation. But hey let's get to the quotes:

am currently stuck at renting, which is a waste of money.

Wow, learn to do some math. Hit the web, the NY Times has a good Rent vs. Buy calculator. The concept that renting is a waste of money is just total BS and completely unsupported by the math. Unless you have a family or needs for large amounts of space, owning can end up being a big waste of money AND time. There are people making more from their side investments than you're making in salary and they're still renters, keep that in mind before you spout off non-sense.

(I can't even afford to buy a second-hand car at the moment.)

Boo-hoo man, a car is basically the single most expensive way to mitigate your transportation expenses. It's unfortunate that as a professional you can't quite afford a "professional lifestyle", but not operating a car is also one of the most wallet-efficient lifestyles around (right up there with renting small places). And the truth is, most people can't afford the car they are operating. How many people have you met that complain about car expenses or bitch that they had to cancel some outing b/c their car needed new tires or the transmission died? How many people do you know would miss payments and lose their car if they lost their job for more than two months? Yeah, well these are the guys who also "can't afford their cars", at least you know it.

Again, unless you have a family or large numbers of people to ship around, the car is just a giant money-hole for your transportation costs. Owning a car is actually a giant luxury, so you're not getting any sympathy here.

And before the hate comes from someone else, if your job "requires you to have a car" due to either job description or location; then that's part of your salary. If you can't work without a car or can't reduce car expenses b/c of your job, then you better make sure that your job is covering this aspect. If you didn't account for that when you signed up, then it's your loss, find a new job that will or move somewhere else and find a new job that doesn't need a car.

Apple has discovered that many of the unauthorized iPhone unlocking programs available on the Internet cause irreparable damage to the iPhone's software, which will likely result in the modified iPhone becoming permanently inoperable when a future Apple-supplied iPhone software update is installed. [...] Apple strongly discourages users from installing unauthorized unlocking programs on their iPhones. Users who make unauthorized modifications to the software on their iPhone violate their iPhone software license agreement and void their warranty. The permanent inability to use an iPhone due to installing unlocking software is not covered under the iPhone's warranty.

''This has nothing to do with proactively disabling a phone that is unlocked or hacked,'' Phil Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide product marketing, said in an interview. ''It's unfortunate that some of these programs have caused damage to the iPhone software, but Apple cannot be responsible for ... those consequences.''

The current unlock mechanism uses a buffer overflow in the current version of the iPhone's OS to unlock. Will that be fixed, thereby "stopping" unlockers? Yes.

This doesn't mean they're going to intentionally damage phones that have ALREADY BEEN unlocked.

So I'm sorry, but you're incorrect.

Is the added cost tax-deductible?

One of the machines will be given to a child in a developing nation, and the other one will be shipped to the purchaser by Christmas. The donated computer is a tax-deductible charitable contribution.

I doubt it.

If you look at what it costs to have a tech clean a computer, it's pretty close to the purchase price of a new one. This article in the New York Times is a bit old, but new computers are even cheaper now.

Of course, it's all part of the conspiracy, what with a large convicted monopoly based there.

Why has the bush administration kept pressing so hard for the retroactive immunity for the telcos, but has not expended the effort to get Qwest involved?

Maybe it's because they don't want the NSA to actually figure out that the terrorists are based in Redmond.

Note for astromods: Before you mod this down, ask yourself if you really are thinking outside the box, or if you are just part of the problem.

Try again....

"It was an art project, meant to entertain career-day visitors at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, an M.I.T. sophomore assured security officials after she had been arrested at Boston's airport yesterday."

She did not say that it was an art project until AFTER she was taken into custody. And I've not seen any news report that contradicts that. I've seen some that didn't specify, and I can see how someone could mistakenly come to that conclusion, but any report that started specifics on it has stated she didn't say it until she was in custody. In fact, she did not answer at all when asked before she was arrested.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/22/us/22airport.html?ref=us

I'm sorry, but all men are born with an innate right to defend themselves from others and the government. You government takes away your innate rights. People are born with the right to life, liberty and to pursue their dreams and to property, so long as they do no deprive others of their right to live, liberty and property. All people have the right to speak freely, the internet you are using to try and advocate stripping my rights is far more free than your press, all people have the right to self defense against tyranny and crime, all people have the right against search and seizure without proper warrant, all people have the right to not self incriminate, and the right against double jeopardy, all people have the right to a jury of peers and a public speedy trial, and all people have the right to a punishment that is not cruel or unusual.

I'm sorry your horrible government cant enumerate rights for you. We believe, and have shown, that free people do thrive. Your government executes more people each year than are murdered in the USA, and your government is guilty of killing tens of millions.

Lets have a list of what PROC/China is up to of late:

The PRC Chinese government has murdered countless people:
"DEATH BY GOVERNMENT: GENOCIDE AND MASS MURDER"

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.TAB1.GIF

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.FIG1.GIF

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM

China tires recalled:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/26/business/26tire.php

The organising committee of Beijing's Olympic games has promised to investigate charges that official merchandise is being manufactured using child labour.

The PRC Chinese poison dog food:
http://www.themoneytimes.com/articles/20070523/chinese_protein_export_scandal-id -104033.html

The PRC Chinese poison toothpaste:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/02/us/02toothpaste.html?ex=1181620800&en=d26dab8b 2bd85303&ei=5070

The PRC Chinese poison Children's Toys:
http://consumerist.com/consumer/chinese-poison-train/15-million-thomas--friends- toys-recalled-due-to-lead-paint-from-china-268658.php
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070614/thomas_recall_07061 4/20070614?hub=CTVNewsAt11
http://blogs.eastbayexpress.com/92510/2007/06/thomas_why_hath_thou_forsaken.php

Chinese Seafood Detained for Safety
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070628/D8Q239O00.html

CNN "The China Syndrome" Special on China's dire problems in keeping food clean:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/business/2007/07/04/vause.china.syndrome.cnn

- Cow milk so inundated with antibiotics you can not make Yogurt from it.

- Pigs force-fed waste water.

- Lard made from separating fats from sewage.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,,2118920,00.html

China Jails 2 Protestant Church Leaders

the "intelligent" and well-educated male contingent should be taking steps that the "rest" of male culture does not

What makes you think that the rest of culture hasn't already taken that step? "women of all educational levels from 21 to 30 living in New York City and working full time made 117 percent of men's wages, and even more in Dallas, 120 percent." http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/03/nyregion/03women.html?hp=&pagewanted=print Add to this that most women are promoted faster than men. (They are paid less for the same position but they get the position 5 years earlier, thus earning more than men their same age.) If anything the post gen-X generation (gen-Y?) favors women over men. Men are often portrayed alternatingly as predatory or frivolous in women's literature and television, and are considered extraneous to the family unit by the courts. (except of course for financial support) So when I hear someone bemoaning a patriarchal culture in the US, I think that perhaps want they really want is for women to be superior in the business/tech venues as the overwhelming female superiority in the legal/cultural/family venues is not enough anymore.

Poor security makes money for Microsoft because Corrupted PC's Find New Home in the Dumpster.

Remember, this guy also wrote the Forbes cover story claiming blogs were "an online lynch mob spouting liberty but spewing lies, libel and invective", then turned around and started the Fake Steve Jobs blog.

Another triumph for consistency.

in particular the kind found on the roads. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/03/arts/design/03taxi.html?ex=1262494800&en=0bf8e9ea4eada89b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

I wanted to refresh my understanding of "prisoner of war" vs "enemy combatants" I did a bit of quick research. My understanding is that "enemy combatants" don't have many rights, which appears to be true. But get this: none of the guys in custody are anything but POWs ... yet.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C01E4D71E30F933A25750C0A9649C8B63&n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FOrganizations%2FA%2FAl%20Qaeda%20

It seems that the tribunals people frown upon are a critical, and legal, step. Until then, a detainee is to be considered a POW. Once you have the tribunal, those not qualifying for POW status, well, they don't get much protection. So maybe we're all focused on the wrong thing. Sort of like a magic show where the real action is elsewhere.

In an amusing twist, they may be owed back wages.

Those who would seek to have our Constitution destroyed? You mean like Nalini Ghuman, a British musicologist who taught in the US until she was detained for no given reason, denied access to legal counsel, and excluded from any sort of due process only to have her visa and passport destroyed and be deported.

Yeah, good thing we god rid of that one. Shit, if she had had a chance to have crimes (what were they again?) reviewed by a judge, there's no telling what havoc she'd be wreaking upon our nation and our children. What a horrible, horrible person.

Yeah, destroying the Constitution in order to protect it makes so much more sense than using our existing Constitutional powers to prosecute and detain those who actually do wish to destroy it.

The rights written in the Bill of Rights apply to all humans

It's also worth pointing out that those rights aren't there to protect the guilty, they are there to protect the innocent. And there's good reason to believe that there are innocent people detained in these camps:

• The vast majority were turned in by people looking for reward money or to suck up to U.S. forces. Witch hunt, anyone?
• We know that innocent people have been detained and then killed by U.S. forces. If you're not familiar with the case of Dilawar the taxi driver, you need to read this. This guy was captured by an Iraqi warlord trying to deflect suspicion from himself for an attack on U.S. troops. Then, because they thought he screamed funny, a bunch of United States soldiers "pulped" (the words of the doctor who performed the autopsy) his legs. The other four guys were shipped to Gitmo and held for a year or so before they finally decided they posed no threat.
• The soldiers there "know" these are bad guys, and treat them that way, regardless of who they are. You ask how I know that? So, a U.S. soldier at Guantanamo is asked to impersonate an unruly detainee for a drill. Unfortunately, the soldiers sent in to subdue him aren't told it's a drill. He ends up with brain damage and seizures.

Detaining 'enemy combatants' makes sense, to an extent. But they are still entitled to a tribunal under the Geneva Convention to determine if they actually are 'enemy combatants'. Go ahead, read Convention III, Article 5 for yourself. Signatories (like the U.S.) are supposed to extend protection preemptively, until and unless a tribunal has determined that the Geneva protections don't apply.

Sure, the U.S. is better than a Soviet gulag or Saddam Hussein's torture rooms. So what? That's not much to brag about. We ought to be an example to the world of the rule of law, like when we advocated and won trial against the Nazis in WWII. The Soviets and the British were all for summary executions... how far we've fallen.