Slashdot Mirror

Wrote about the coming DDoS from Hell.

The stations don't have more bandwidth, we're just using compression to utilize the bandwidth more efficiently.

See Cringley's PBS article, Bandwidth Squeeze, for more info - such as how Japanese's HDTV standard uses 20MHz of bandwidth because the signal is not compressed(at least as of 98, when the article was written)

• 802.11b Range Boost
  
• Yagi Antenna Design
  
• Build a dish antenna for $10!
  
• This server is running over a 10-mile 802.11b link
  
• Nokia Rooftop Technology
  
• community-supported, sustainable wireless nets
  

• 802.11b Range Boost
  
• Yagi Antenna Design
  
• Build a dish antenna for $10!
  
• This server is running over a 10-mile 802.11b link
  
• Nokia Rooftop Technology
  
• community-supported, sustainable wireless nets
  

On the good-for-ISP side of the equation, it sounds like this could be a very simple solution to the "last mile" problem...
--

On the good-for-ISP side of the equation, it sounds like this could be a very simple solution to the "last mile" problem...
--

Besides Junk Yard Wars, the only other good "Reality-Based" TV shows didn't even get nominated! Those being, of course, the PBS-produced The 1900 House and American High.

Executive summary:

In The 1900 House, a family is forced to live as did Victorian families did for a few months. Needless to say, the situation puts some strain on familial relations.

American High chronicled the lives of a bunch of kids at a High School in Anywhere, USA. Real kids, too, not Real World rejects. It was originally slated for a run on Fox, but Fox decided at the last moment that it wasn't for them. Perhaps this was due to the fact that it violated Fox's "all our shows suck" policy.

Both great shows. Both not even mentioned. A shame. PBS may be underfunded and underwritten, but they're still churning out solid content.

Besides Junk Yard Wars, the only other good "Reality-Based" TV shows didn't even get nominated! Those being, of course, the PBS-produced The 1900 House and American High.

Executive summary:

In The 1900 House, a family is forced to live as did Victorian families did for a few months. Needless to say, the situation puts some strain on familial relations.

American High chronicled the lives of a bunch of kids at a High School in Anywhere, USA. Real kids, too, not Real World rejects. It was originally slated for a run on Fox, but Fox decided at the last moment that it wasn't for them. Perhaps this was due to the fact that it violated Fox's "all our shows suck" policy.

Both great shows. Both not even mentioned. A shame. PBS may be underfunded and underwritten, but they're still churning out solid content.

Ah yes, remind me...

Which country has a higher percentage of its population in prison?

Which administration is more likely to launch a missile attack? Which may or may not hit its target?

Or crash their secret spy plane, for that matter?

Which country recently lost its seat on the U.N. human rights committee?

In other words, you probably have to buy one from Russia.

Yes, that could never happen. With Russia being so stable and all.

the US is pushing for increased Canadian border security and unified policies on security and entry into North America

No one ever gets anything past the Canadians.

suitcase nukes are low-yield.

Uhhhh... Yah.

After all, look how nice the world is being to China, what with giving them the Olympics and all (worked really well in Berlin in 1936, didn't it?).

This is Yes, you are absolutely right. Jesse Owens' televised humiliation of "Aryan superiority" having lead to WWII and all...

You have to understand that the Mutual Assured Destruction policies of the Cold War don't apply to unstable and fundamentalist regimes.

Hmm. Strange that the rest of the civilized world seems to disagree. Of course, I'm sure this is the only time that Bush would dare propose breaking an anti-nuke treaty. I mean, any guy who's cutting the EPA by 6.5% while giving an additional 13.6 billion to defense has his priorities totally straight. That, and his unbiased choices to head the EPA show that he isn't swayed by special interests. Which is why ultimately, other countries everywhere love and respect and cherish him and support his wise policies.

Don't let the facts stop you, though, Michael.

Yeah, whatever man.

W
-------------------

...everything innovative in the music world has been crushed by lawsuits.

What exactly has been crushed by lawsuits? The idea that you can create a company founded on file-sharing software and supported by "eyeballs" or banner ads? The idea that you can distribute someone else's work without their permission? The idea that because it's now technically possible to share music faster and more widely that suddenly corporate music will roll over and die?

Music is created by people, and the rubber meets the road at your local music club. Sharing music on the web is a far fucking cry from being innovative. Innovation in music happens when some teenage kid has to choose between suicide and picking up his guitar, when some girl writes new lyrics while she's crying of a broken heart, when a fan skips work to catch his favorite band.

The Who said it best:

There's nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the party on the left
Is now the party on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight

If you want innovation in music, support your local bands. Go see their shows and scream 'til your throat hurts. To think that you can change the music scene by downloading a few songs from the web is sad.

And to guard against the first few troll replies, yes, I know that one of the reasons Big Music is Big is that it controls all the distribution channels (e.g. radio, record stores). This is not news! It's been happening since before anyone here was born, and it will continue to happen as long as monopolies and oligarchies are rewarded by huge profits. The web never had a chance to "defeat" these companies. What's happened to popular music now that Napster has become an everyday word? Are we all listening to original, cutting-edge tunes? No - people still download Britney Spears and Metallica.

Yeah, many people have been exposed to music they otherwise wouldn't have heard by using Napster. That's true. And that will continue to happen. You don't a corporation's help to share or appreciate music. You need friends who like different music than you do, and you need to get off your ass and go see shows. Just like 10 years ago, just like when our parents were growing up.

"We all say so, so it must be true!"

From American Experience: The Rockefellers (PBS):

NARR: On May 15th, l911, the Supreme Court of the United States declared that Standard Oil was a monopoly in restraint of trade and should be dissolved. Rockefeller heard of the decision while golfing at Kykuit with a priest from the local Catholic church, Father J.P. Lennon.

CHERNOW: And Rockefeller reacted with amazing aplomb. He turned to the Catholic priest and said, "Father Lennon, have you some money?" And the priest was very startled by the question and said, "No." And then he said, "Why?" And Rockefeller replied, "Buy Standard Oil."

NARR: As Rockefeller foresaw, the individual Standard Oil companies were worth more than the single corporation. In the next few years, their shares doubled and tripled in value. By the time the rain of cash was over, Rockefeller had the greatest personal fortune in history -- nearly two percent of the American economy.

Anybody see last Thursday's Cringely? (They're dated on Thursdays but usually don't get posted 'til almost Friday) He offers the opinion that if the cost of settlement goes as high as 2 Billion Dollars that MS will just use the money to buy an island somewhere and move offshore instead. He's not joking. "I have no idea where Microsoft would move, but I know they are considering it. Let me repeat that: I KNOW THEY ARE CONSIDERING IT."

As he further says "As a diplomat, Gates couldn't even be arrested for speeding on visits back to Redmond..."

It's worth a read.

Yes, we have a severe effect on the amount of carbon dioxide, and currently there is more carbon dioxide in our atmosphere than ever in the history of the earth. The ppm of CO2 is skyrocketing off the charts.

This may not be totally bad. The show mentioned that CO2 makes great plant fertilizer. Plants grow much better under high-CO2 atmospheres. Really, the coal industry funded a major study showing that CO2 in the atmosphere isn't such a bad thing! The bad news is, well, I wouldn't want to live in Florida.

Yes, we have a severe effect on the amount of carbon dioxide, and currently there is more carbon dioxide in our atmosphere than ever in the history of the earth. The ppm of CO2 is skyrocketing off the charts.

This may not be totally bad. The show mentioned that CO2 makes great plant fertilizer. Plants grow much better under high-CO2 atmospheres. Really, the coal industry funded a major study showing that CO2 in the atmosphere isn't such a bad thing! The bad news is, well, I wouldn't want to live in Florida.

The problem with this stems from the fact that not everyone assigns the same value to content. Let's say Joe finds a piece of info on the Internet and he's willing to pay $10 for it, Jack finds that same piece of info but only thinks it is worth $2, and Jill finds the information not useful at all. Now if the information provider sets the value of that piece of information at $5, he's lost 2 customers, not one.

And how is this different from any other type of publishing? Magazine publishers need to set the appropriate price for their publications. Same with newspapers, book publishers, music labels.... If the price is set too high, they lose sales. Too low, they don't turn a profit. It sounds like the same problem to me. So why is this an issue? What's different?

To my mind, the answer is perception. The Web is perceived as being this huge, egalitarian town square, where everyone has a voice, and everyone has equal access to what's being said. Nice dream, but it's just not true. Being connected costs money, for the content provider and for the content viewer. But these costs are hidden for the most part - I can easily see that the book I hold in my hand required resources and effort to produce. The end results are here, physically in my hands, and I have no problem paying for it.

But I can't hold web content in my hand (unless I print it, using my own toner and paper). The costs of the web server or hosting service are hidden from me. I'm already paying for my ISP, my PC, the software that I'm running to get on the web. Isn't that enough?

I think that is the true problem here. People don't understand the publishing costs on the web, because the costs are intangible. And while that's true, I think it will be very difficult to get people to pay for content on a regular basis.

Oh, for the record, I would have no problem paying a small monthly or annual subscription fee to sites that I find particularly useful (like Slashdot). And the micropayment schemes mentioned a while back in Bob Cringely's columns here and here make a lot of sense to me.

The problem with this stems from the fact that not everyone assigns the same value to content. Let's say Joe finds a piece of info on the Internet and he's willing to pay $10 for it, Jack finds that same piece of info but only thinks it is worth $2, and Jill finds the information not useful at all. Now if the information provider sets the value of that piece of information at $5, he's lost 2 customers, not one.

And how is this different from any other type of publishing? Magazine publishers need to set the appropriate price for their publications. Same with newspapers, book publishers, music labels.... If the price is set too high, they lose sales. Too low, they don't turn a profit. It sounds like the same problem to me. So why is this an issue? What's different?

To my mind, the answer is perception. The Web is perceived as being this huge, egalitarian town square, where everyone has a voice, and everyone has equal access to what's being said. Nice dream, but it's just not true. Being connected costs money, for the content provider and for the content viewer. But these costs are hidden for the most part - I can easily see that the book I hold in my hand required resources and effort to produce. The end results are here, physically in my hands, and I have no problem paying for it.

But I can't hold web content in my hand (unless I print it, using my own toner and paper). The costs of the web server or hosting service are hidden from me. I'm already paying for my ISP, my PC, the software that I'm running to get on the web. Isn't that enough?

I think that is the true problem here. People don't understand the publishing costs on the web, because the costs are intangible. And while that's true, I think it will be very difficult to get people to pay for content on a regular basis.

Oh, for the record, I would have no problem paying a small monthly or annual subscription fee to sites that I find particularly useful (like Slashdot). And the micropayment schemes mentioned a while back in Bob Cringely's columns here and here make a lot of sense to me.

But can you really program a computer to find patterns in stock prices? Yes, you can, according to Jim Hall, who did just that. Hall was an engineer at Deere & Co. in Moline, Illinois, who was asked to build a combine that didn't need a driver. Deere was worried about the rising cost of farm labor, and so asked Hall for a machine that didn't require skilled labor -- a machine that would automatically learn the field and harvest without supervision. Hall built the combine, which was never marketed, then converted the software to learn another field -- the stock market. Hall became the manager of Deere's pension portfolio, successfully harvesting capital gains instead of wheat.

There's a fairly amusing article about hacking together a long-range (up to 14km) broadband connection using 802.11b at The Pulpit.

It turns out that the trickiest part is not technical. It is buying the right telescope to let you see a house 10km away, then convincing the people in that house, whom you've discovered with your telescope, that you're not some crazy stalker, just a broadband-deprived net-addict willing to buy them dsl if they're willing to beam it to your house.

Funny and clever. (Of course, I don't know about the geography in your neck of the woods. Do you have line-of-sight to that town 8km away?)

Could it be your child ?

A little bit more balanced and well researched article for you with some quotes:

"Lots of girls in this business -- and guys, too -- are dysfunctional. The girls get here at 18 and aren't mature." - Who wants to date a woman who's had sex with 60 people in two months?" - "I am on the couch for ages"

Friend, if you want to judge another nation by it's atrocities, you'd damn well better be sure that your own nation has a clean slate...

Jefferson proposed specific language for an amendment that would have allowed copyrights and patents, despite his doubts, but forbidden any other type of commercial monopoly. "For instance," Jefferson wrote, "the following alterations and additions would have pleased me: Article 9. Monopolies may be allowed to persons for their own productions in literature, and their own inventions in the arts, for a term not exceeding _____ years, but for no longer term, and no other purpose."

There are advantadges to having broad market controls, but there is a price as well. Take a look at a history of the Oil industry before Rockerfeller took it over. The PBS film (transcript here) on the Rockerfellers is enlightening.

As the oil gushed skyward, fantastic stories appeared of instant fortunes. Among the Cleveland businessmen lured to the region was John D. Rockefeller. He was no wildcatter. He saw that drilling for oil was a very risky business. Refining, not drilling, he decided, was where the steady money was to be made. Soon, a new rail line linked Cleveland with the oil region. Rockefeller built his refinery right beside it.

Rockefeller's future, however, was harnessed to an industry in trouble. "So many wells were flowing," he lamented, "that the price of oil kept falling, yet they went right on drilling." He saw an industry plagued by over-production, and his own success threatened by what he described as "ruinous, cutthroat competition."

John D. was shrewd enough and he was analytical enough that he realized that in order to figure out a way to save his own firm and his own newly-won fortune, that he had to figure out a solution for the entire industry. It was at that point that John D. began to conceive of the oil industry as one big interrelated mechanism. And you couldn't just change one component, you had to control the entire machine.

In a move that would transform the American economy, Rockefeller set out to replace a world of independent oilmen with a giant company controlled by him. In l870, begging bankers for more loans, he formed Standard Oil of Ohio. The next year, he quietly put what he called "our plan" -- his campaign to dominate the volatile oil industry - into devastating effect.

Jefferson would have been alarmed by this is the extreme. and it is something that far surpasses what they had experienced with industries in there day.

Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip

Jefferson proposed specific language for an amendment that would have allowed copyrights and patents, despite his doubts, but forbidden any other type of commercial monopoly. "For instance," Jefferson wrote, "the following alterations and additions would have pleased me: Article 9. Monopolies may be allowed to persons for their own productions in literature, and their own inventions in the arts, for a term not exceeding _____ years, but for no longer term, and no other purpose."

There are advantadges to having broad market controls, but there is a price as well. Take a look at a history of the Oil industry before Rockerfeller took it over. The PBS film (transcript here) on the Rockerfellers is enlightening.

As the oil gushed skyward, fantastic stories appeared of instant fortunes. Among the Cleveland businessmen lured to the region was John D. Rockefeller. He was no wildcatter. He saw that drilling for oil was a very risky business. Refining, not drilling, he decided, was where the steady money was to be made. Soon, a new rail line linked Cleveland with the oil region. Rockefeller built his refinery right beside it.

Rockefeller's future, however, was harnessed to an industry in trouble. "So many wells were flowing," he lamented, "that the price of oil kept falling, yet they went right on drilling." He saw an industry plagued by over-production, and his own success threatened by what he described as "ruinous, cutthroat competition."

John D. was shrewd enough and he was analytical enough that he realized that in order to figure out a way to save his own firm and his own newly-won fortune, that he had to figure out a solution for the entire industry. It was at that point that John D. began to conceive of the oil industry as one big interrelated mechanism. And you couldn't just change one component, you had to control the entire machine.

In a move that would transform the American economy, Rockefeller set out to replace a world of independent oilmen with a giant company controlled by him. In l870, begging bankers for more loans, he formed Standard Oil of Ohio. The next year, he quietly put what he called "our plan" -- his campaign to dominate the volatile oil industry - into devastating effect.

Jefferson would have been alarmed by this is the extreme. and it is something that far surpasses what they had experienced with industries in there day.

Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip

Or... Install a tesla coil in your home! That way, you at least don't need to recharge while you're at home!

For those who are wondering what this is all about: http://www.hightension.org/frameset.htm?wireless.h tm and http://www.pbs.org/tesla/res/res_art08.html.

--
ALL YOUR KARMA ARE BELONG TO US

A major goal of the Earth Liberation Front is "to speed up the collapse of industry, to scare the rich".

Even more moderate groups like the Union of Concerned Scientists betray socialist views. In a PBS Frontline story on Genetically Modified foods, Jane Rissler denounced claims that GM foods would help feed the hungry in poor countries by saying: "The biggest problem behind hungry people is lack of money" which, if believed, lays a nice foundation for redistributing wealth. Of course, most people believe that hungry people need food, not money.

The Anarchist Golfing Association (Anarchist being another name for Libertarian Socialists) is nothing more than an attack on what is viewed as the capitalist's favorite pasttime.

Some of the "anti-capitalist" views by environmentalists are likely attributed to the fact that industry does pollute, but some of these groups go beyond reasonable concern.

-bk

A major goal of the Earth Liberation Front is "to speed up the collapse of industry, to scare the rich".

Even more moderate groups like the Union of Concerned Scientists betray socialist views. In a PBS Frontline story on Genetically Modified foods, Jane Rissler denounced claims that GM foods would help feed the hungry in poor countries by saying: "The biggest problem behind hungry people is lack of money" which, if believed, lays a nice foundation for redistributing wealth. Of course, most people believe that hungry people need food, not money.

The Anarchist Golfing Association (Anarchist being another name for Libertarian Socialists) is nothing more than an attack on what is viewed as the capitalist's favorite pasttime.

Some of the "anti-capitalist" views by environmentalists are likely attributed to the fact that industry does pollute, but some of these groups go beyond reasonable concern.

-bk

Some Militias certainly *did* engage in a lot of criminal activity. Many of them have as a central tenet of their charters to overthrow the government, which they consider illegal. There are cases of bank robbery, harassing people with bogus liens, supporting anti-abortion terrorists, etc.

As for eco-terrorists being Marxists or anarchists... well, I don't doubt some of them are. But look at the numbers here. I'd be more concerned about the so-called "Captains of Industry," those corporate leaders, who openly show contempt for the people and laws of this Country in their quest for profits. Look at situations and places like Love Canal, Romulus, and countless other places where big companies poisoned an area, and then left without even bothering to inform the local residents of the danger. You want your eyes opened? Look at the TRIS - Toxic Release Inventory System published by the EPA; there's even a nice search by city interface provided by another organization.
bukra fil mish mish
-
Monitor the Web, or Track your site!

1) Bt-Corn affects in particular all species in the order Lepidoptera (moths,butterflys), not just ones that attack corn, hense the effect on the Monarch butterfly whose chief food source, milkweed, is found mostly in and around corn fields. And as alluded to earlier, when pollenating, the poison is released 24x7 making it both very effective but at the same time more likely to give rise to super-tolerant strains.

2) Other new crops in-test, planned, or already here include vitamin-A-containing (Golden) rice, aluminum-fixating corn, virus resistant sweet potatos, and hepititus-vaccine-carrying bannanas.

3) Although the US could opt not to use GM-foods, though at this point it would be problematic, and pay for food at an increased price, this is not viable for the 3rd world.

4) It appears that people are not concerned enough about the consequences if they mess up. In particular, there is this one company this wants to make a super-salmon. Their projections indicate that in the coming years, aquaculture will need to be 7 times more productive. They have modified salmon to not stop growing in the winter as normal salmon do. The result is salmon that are ready 4 times faster. But normal salmon don't grow in the winter because if they did, they would die from lack of food in the wild. Now take into account observation shows that salmon 25% larger are 400% more likely to mate. One mathematical model predicts that if enough of these super-salmon escape into the wild (many 1000's do every year), the potential is that all salmon could be wiped out. Sobering

That and the fact that the picture (posted elsewhere by pyramidiot) clearly shows them using a parafoil - invented in the late 1960's if I recall correctly.

The ancient Egyptians definitely didn't have access to the theory behind these, let alone the materials necessary to build them. Could they have done it with a regular kite? Did they have kites in ancient Egypt?

I like the sand hydraulics theory myself.

It was Nova. I don't think any of the obelisks were nearly as large as the ancient obelisks they were mimicking. Here's the link to the Nova web site:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/lostempires/obelisk/

They're not even the first to do it! The Discovery Channel (or maybe History Channel?) has aired a show a bazillion times where a researcher raised a larger obelisk. The top half rested on rock, the other half rested on sand enclosed by a wall. They just removed the sand from a small hole and as the sand escaped, the obelisk fell into position. It's similar to the levers used in this PBS Nova show, except it didn't require any heaving or pulling to bring the obelisk upright.

NOVA Obelisk Episode

They also did one on raising the Easter Island statues.

NOVA Easter Island

NOVA Obelisk Episode

They also did one on raising the Easter Island statues.

NOVA Easter Island

That sounds like a lot, but the proof is in the output.. 1080i HDTV looks incredible. It blows away DVD's.

Check out the Digital TV "crash course" on the PBS web site for a lot better info than I can provide: http://www.pbs.org/opb/crashcourse/

As far as the PS2 being a PC killer, Cringely had a column about that 2 years ago.

I note a number of people here seem to reject the notion that "cool" can be engineered. I *highly* recommend you all look at the FrontLine WWW site and look for "The Merchants of Cool" show. You will definitely have to rethink your assumptions. Their depiction of the use of anthropology-based tools to do market research on "coolness" and the way that they engineer their products around that is chilling - and the MTV empire is particularly well done.

Then tell me that cool is something wholly independent of a market.

I had heard a brief report on Australian history on National Public Radio awhile back where an Australian was saying that Australians don't much like to talk about their roots and that it's referred to as "the stain".

Did a quick web search and I just found this, which may be related to the Radio show I'd heard (this is PBS, which is TV, not NPR, but they often share content).

I'm sorry if I drew too much of a conclusion from my very limited understanding of a complex issue. Didn't mean to offend.

Man, why does nobody ever remember to credit Nikola Tesla with the things he invents, such as RADIO, AC ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION, REMOTE CONTROL, and, of course, the still popular (after 100 years!) fluorescent LAN! Sad thing is, it's not a conspiracy any more... he really has been forgotten.

Man, why does nobody ever remember to credit Nikola Tesla with the things he invents, such as RADIO, AC ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION, REMOTE CONTROL, and, of course, the still popular (after 100 years!) fluorescent LAN! Sad thing is, it's not a conspiracy any more... he really has been forgotten.

Man, why does nobody ever remember to credit Nikola Tesla with the things he invents, such as RADIO, AC ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION, REMOTE CONTROL, and, of course, the still popular (after 100 years!) fluorescent LAN! Sad thing is, it's not a conspiracy any more... he really has been forgotten.

Man, why does nobody ever remember to credit Nikola Tesla with the things he invents, such as RADIO, AC ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION, REMOTE CONTROL, and, of course, the still popular (after 100 years!) fluorescent LAN! Sad thing is, it's not a conspiracy any more... he really has been forgotten.

Speaking of electronic tip jars, check out last Thursday's Cringely and the one from the week before that.

Speaking of electronic tip jars, check out last Thursday's Cringely and the one from the week before that.

If you look at the history of writing you will see that at different times and in different periods different letter sets were used at different times by different people: consider this rendering of a simple text in a 'roman' hand (400 BC to 400AD ish) and the same one in a carolingian hand (Carolingian referring to Charlemagne, Charles The Great circa the 750 AD onwards).

Well one looks like it is all written in upper case and one in all lower case.

A general overview can be found here.

Mixed case (dual alphabet) stuff only took off with the invention of printing. The issue of whether the lower and upper case character sets are different alphabets is simply one of degree, how different are they from each other and from other alphabets (like the greek one. This article makes the point that in ancient greece there were also no "lower case" letters only "upper case" ones - modern greek developed a dual alphabet in emulation of the modern latin one.

Would you consider this to be a different alphabet? - I can barely read it, and certainly not in blocks - and it was used all over Germany until 1941 when it was banned by Hitler.

Cyrillic also only gets dual case in the time of Peter the Great, having been "upper case" only before. Lots of languages only have one case.

Check out the Frontline (excellent PBS news magazine) episode The Merchants of Cool

It's not only the radio stations...

just be be precise, this was done inthe Artic ocean.

NOVA had a show (Submarines, Secrets, and Spies) on it back in Jabuary 1999. See the transcript here

Maybe things have changed, but according to the special it was maybe halfway there when something went wrong:

It was the highest priority and the biggest budget item in the intelligence budget in the late Reagan administration. They spent about a billion dollars on it, and then it all went away, because of one guy, Pelton.

NARRATOR: Ronald Pelton was analyst working for the National Security Agency who was convicted of spying for the KGB. The on-line tap was one of the operations he compromised.

So this looks like old news, and it might not even be accurate.

Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip

just be be precise, this was done inthe Artic ocean.

NOVA had a show (Submarines, Secrets, and Spies) on it back in Jabuary 1999. See the transcript here

Maybe things have changed, but according to the special it was maybe halfway there when something went wrong:

It was the highest priority and the biggest budget item in the intelligence budget in the late Reagan administration. They spent about a billion dollars on it, and then it all went away, because of one guy, Pelton.

NARRATOR: Ronald Pelton was analyst working for the National Security Agency who was convicted of spying for the KGB. The on-line tap was one of the operations he compromised.

So this looks like old news, and it might not even be accurate.

Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip

Somewhere in the middle, that is the answer.

If all ISPs choose a solution like RBL, how is it an opt-in for their consumers?

Even if all ISPs used the RBL today you could go out and start your own ISP tomorrow that didn't use it. And given that above.net is, AFAIK, the only major ISP to use it for blocking anything other than mail, you're safe so far. And given how much outrage it seems to cause, it looks like there will always be a market for ISPs that allow non-mail traffic to RBL-listed sites.

I'm afraid your analogies don't really match up. Microsoft doesn't count; it has a monopoly, and above.net doesn't. The encryption of DVD is more a cartel, but the RBL doesn't have one of those, either. And leaded gasoline and smoky flights were both outlawed by the government because they were health hazards. Even in Paul Vixie's wildest dreams I doubt the feds will be mandating RBL usage anytime soon.

This is a frog-in-the-pot argument...

Not really; that would require that the RBL were somehow quietly infectious. Even if you, playing the role of frog, wake up to realize that the sinister anti-spam forces have assimilated some ISP other than above.net, it looks like their are plenty of cooler puddles to hop to.

Robert Cringley wrote a column the described how to solve the energy crisis. Basically, eveyone would have a battery that would store energy during the night and release energy during the peak times. I don't know if this would provide any benefit now - I believe that energy costs the same no matter what time it is sold.

Check it out:

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010510. html

All kinds of neat things, photos, etc, and you can probably order the video too.

The original story linked above looks like the human interest story of the archeologist and the political interests in China made it relevant as a story, as far as the newspaper editors were concerned.

I can see the Chinese government trying to deal with politically inconvenient truths.

Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip