Slashdot Mirror

...a lot of very simple statutes are hard to read, simply because of the formatting, but properly formatted, are not hard at all. For example, 18 USC 1001 :

"...whoever, in any matter

within the jurisdiction of the
executive,
legislative,
or judicial branch
of the Government of the United States,

knowingly and willfully--

falsifies,
conceals, or
covers up
by any trick, scheme, or device

a material fact...

Shall be fined under this title,
imprisoned not more than 5 years
...or both."

VOICE OF GORGOS
Every time we excavate it bothers your friends
That you'd let the mammals be the cause of your end
Was it something special that we can't comprehend?
Why could you not stick around until the Age of Men?
If you came today you could have eaten whole nations
The Mesozoic era had no overpopulation
Don't you get me wrong - I only want to know.

CHOIR
Tyro Rex, Tyro Rex
Are you the best that Nature selects?
Tyro Rex, Supersaur
Why is it that you exist no more?

VOICE OF GORGOS
Tell me your opinion of the great carnivores
Who'd you think could ever rival King of the Saurs?
Sabertooth was mighty tough the stories do tell
But Tyro you were greatest and you knew that very well
Could you know of Barnum Brown who'd be first to find you?
Did you think Roy Chapman Andrews
Would today enshrine you?
Don't you get me wrong - I only want to know.

CHOIR
Tyro Rex, Tyro Rex
Are you the best that Nature selects?
Tyro Rex, Supersaur
Why is it that you exist no more?"

FULL LIBRETTO: Tyro Rex Supersaur

Fiddlesticks!

Tyrants everywhere LOVE the idea that fundamental human rights don't apply to THEIR people -- especially free speech.

Scientists have found nothing in the genetic makeup of Asians (or black slaves in 19th century America, or Christian slaves in today's Africa) or any subgroup a particular dictatorship happens to own, that justifies denying them of fundamental human rights. It is NOT relevant that the objects of an oppressive government assert they don't care about free speech; torture and execution are powerful incentives.

But we have experimental data on the subject of how people feel when they are free to speak their minds: in historical times, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have moved from dictatorships (justified on the basis of Asain cultural identity) to democracies ... and guess what ... they like free speech & other fundamental accoutrements of democracy just as much as Europeans and Americans did, once we were free to express our opinions.

2. Equating the supression of kiddie porn to the supression of truthful reporting of government-sponsored massacres is simply fatuuous. There is no fundamental right to have sex with people who cannot give consent, which is a necessary component of the production of kiddie porn. OTOH there is a fundamental right not to be summarily massacred. Do you see the difference?

3. Evoking America's failure to live up to our human rights responsibilities is likewise foolish. No-one is perfect; fundmental rights do not depend on the existence of perfect people to advocate them.
And, as the Irish said when the Brits justified their massacres of the Irish on the basis of Irish crimes:
"I think it is a poor whitewash of men's reputation, that others have committed crimes"
Memoirs of William Sampson (1817 edition)

MySpace is an apparently successful implementation of the concept that "anyone can have a useful web site without much work."

TruGeeks may prefer to buy (actually "rent") a domain name, rent space somewhere, AND maintaine the site using the technology du jour, but for a great many people, myspace does what they need without their having to think too hard about it, or to pay for it.

The question I still have is whether myspace URLs connote poorly, relative to unique-domain URLs, in the same way that AOL or hotmail addresses connote poorly, compared to unique-domain URLs do. In case this is unclear, let me offer an example. I think most people will agree that zzxyz@aol.com connotes something a little less classy than zzxyz@zzxyz.com. The question is, will myspace have sufficient acceptance that a URL such as http://www.myspace.com/rewinn will be an acceptable substitute for something like http://rewinn.com?

The deliberate intrasigience of the feddies is not the last word. Technology to combat catastrophic climate change is the next big economic opportunity. The only question is whether we make it here and sell it there, or vice versa.

As long as our political leadership are tied to old-fashioned energy sources, they have no incentive to develop & implement the new technologies that will replace the old ... it's a classic "Innovator's Dilemma".

And it has an "Innovator's Dilemma" solution: outsiders develop small, nimble technologies, some of which fail, some of which succeed; eventually they eat the dinosaurs (...sorta like the desktop PC in the era of the mainframe.) You, yourself, can probably figure out a few clever ways to create or implent a green tech in your own city. Give it a try! [A few suggestions here]

What is better than making an honest buck while thumbing your nose at the anti-scientists!

"... There are men of ambition so depraved, who would rejoice to be called wicked, if with that they could appear what the corruptions of the word, and the servility of historians, have denominated great.

"But these same men would never have courage to consummate their crimes, were they taught that these crimes would render them contemptible, and still more, ridiculous."

... William Sampson, "The Causes of the Troubles in Ireland", 1806

... I just keep thinking back at the Brits' attempt to subdue Ireland in the 1800s. They had vastly better technology (...and you better BELIEVE that Private Smith discharged his Weapon at the pike-wielding Paddy when ordered...) but, as a contemporary stated:

"...the half naked peasants of a few counties of Ireland, without arms or ammunition, or any other leaders than those there was not wisdom to deprive them of, their misery and their despair, could wage war and gain victories over the most costly army of Europe."

-- Memoirs of William Sampson (1817).

Sure it's better to have better-trained troops than not-so-well-trained troops, but America's problem right now is at the strategic, not the tactical, level.

Really. What Problem Does This Solve?

The article gushes enthusiastic "Companies can then invent additional Web site addresses in front of their top-level domain (TLD) name, such as flights.schiphol or parking.schiphol but, frankly, companies can already provide webaddresses such as flights.schiphol.com and parking.schiphol.com.

The only benefit is saving the website's customers the effort of typing in ".com" but what is this worth? A great many customers get to a particular site via search engine, link, or favorite anyway ... so there's no savings there.

Furthermore, the ".com" typology distinguishes a company's web presence from its other emanations, such as product or physical existence. For example, we understand without having to think about it the difference between Seattle Mariners and seattlemariners.com (or R.E.Winn and rewinn.com. That's not an insignificant benefit.

But I'm willing to be educated. What is the problem that the proposal would solve?