I agree. Especially for people born in the late seventies/early eighties, we have seen the first personal computers, the first modems and the very beginning of the internet which we were a part of making a reality. We'll remember the days before cell phones and before there were video games.
Ha, my roommate was an education major. Every week he had about 5 minutes of homework which he really struggled with. Our conversations went something like this:
Freshman year:
Me: "What are you working on?"
Him: "Oh, just a syllabus. Nothing too hard; I'll be done in 5 minutes."
Sophomore year:
Me: "what are you working on?
Him: "A syllabus. It has to be a whole page long. It's going to take me 10 minutes."
Junior year:
Me: "What are you working on?
Him: "This damn syllabus is taking me forever, it's like the hardest thing to write. It might take me a half hour.
Senior year:
Me: "What are you working on, a syllabus?
Him: "No, I just started student teaching so I don't have homework anymore."
But don't worry, he "double majored" in Social Studies, which is really hard--you have to take three introductory classes and other really "rigorous" classes like "Geography." He really pushed himself to get the most out of his $100k education.
First off, FISA=Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, so the idea that FISA should regulate "internal US wired calls" doesn't really make sense. Those calls fall under the purview of the regular courts.
The reason that this bill is so insidious is that it appears reasonable at a glance, but it greatly expands the power of the executive and allows for the surveillance of almost anyone. In section 105A of the statute, it redefines "electronic surveillance," and allows for any surveillance which is "directed" against a person overseas. It does not require that one of the parties in the email/phone call actually be overseas, merely that the surveillance be directed against someone overseas. Here, from the actual text of the Orwellian-named "Protect America Act of 2007":
"`Sec. 105B. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General, may for periods of up to one year authorize the acquisition of foreign intelligence information concerning persons reasonably believed to be outside the United States if the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General determine, based on the information provided to them. .."
The key point is that the information need only concern persons reasonably believed to be outside the US. For example, if I were to send you an email from Rhode Island to Massachusetts, in which I discussed Osama Bin Laden, my email would be fair game under the act because it concerns a person (OBL) reasonably believed to be overseas. This would still violate the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 because it is obviously a domestic wiretap. But Bush & Co. thought of this, so they inserted section 105(A) right in the beginning of the Protect America Act of 2007! It reads as follows:
"Sec. 105A. Nothing in the definition of electronic surveillance under section 101(f) shall be construed to encompass surveillance directed at a person reasonably believed to be located outside of the United States."
You may notice that further down in the PAA of 2007, the following:
"SECT5: (b) Table of Contents- The table of contents in the first section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 105 the following:
105A. Clarification of electronic surveillance of persons outside the United States."
The above merely points out the obvious modification of FISA--section 105A already technically modified it. So FISA has been modified by the act (obviously) and "electronic surveillance" is redefined to mean any surveillance directed against someone overseas. Think about that for a few minutes. The language change is substantial.
The statute effectively repeals the 4th Amendment (although this is not possible; a statute cannot repeal an amendment to the Constitution) because it provides for secret violation of the 4th Amendment. The government is not required to notify the person under surveillance; combined with the Military Commissions Act of last year, this statute gives the government carte blanche to secretly wiretap any person in the United States, even two citizens, and to secretly disappear them to Gitmo or anywhere else. The act is unconstitutional, but it can never be challenged; by the time someone is notified that they are under surveillance, they are already in an orange jumpsuit being tortured in an overseas concentration camp.
History should tell us that secret surveillance of an entire population, combined with extraordinary rendition and overseas camps run by government intelligence services which openly use torture to extract confessions is a recipe for disaster. But both parties in Congress are motivated only by Realpolitik considerations of re-election and fund raising. The state of the Union is secondary to their personal considerations and the
Dolphins may be "smart" but only in comparison to other non-human life. In comparison to human beings, they are downright dumb. Perhaps they possess some form of communication, but it is only the spoken form; the written word is humanity's huge edge over such life forms, in that we can pass large amounts of information down to our progeny via the written word, thus building on our knowledge base over time. A dolphin cannot write; that is an enormous disadvantage.
Second, dolphins cannot utilize tools or fire, the two other huge advantages that humankind enjoys. Tools allow us to multiply our physical and mental labor millions of times over and fire provides a portable source of energy for the operation of our tools. This allows us to be masters of our environment rather than at it's mercy, which is a fundamentally enormous advantage over the rest of the animal kingdom.
I agree with those who say that life will not necessarily resemble life on earth. Statistically, it is obscenely improbable that life will look exactly as it does here. However, our discussion on this thread is limited to a very small subset of life, that is, intelligent life capable of interstellar travel. While large exoskeletons and amorphous blobs may be other possible forms that life can take, these forms do not confer the advantages of the humanoid form, and suffer significant drawbacks. We are dominant on Earth because we possess opposable thumbs and hands capable of fine motor control. Our large brains developed in concert with our highly mobile, highly useful appendages, not in spite of them. To manufacture the advanced equipment and computers which would necessarily be required for space travel (or at least for the intermediate steps leading to interstellar travel), it would be necessary for the builder to have fine motor control appendages and possess a large brain so as to put them to work correctly. It is difficult to imagine a tentacle or claw being as useful as hand. Furthermore, it is hard to imagine a large brain developing in an enclawed or ententacled creature, as the use/control of such an appendage would not require a large brain and so it may not develop. So in sum, I would hazard a guess that extraterrestrial life may look very similar to us, maybe extremely similar.
Slashdot Mirror
Maniac Mansion on an Amiga was an experience xbox has yet to approach.
I agree. Especially for people born in the late seventies/early eighties, we have seen the first personal computers, the first modems and the very beginning of the internet which we were a part of making a reality. We'll remember the days before cell phones and before there were video games.
Ha, my roommate was an education major. Every week he had about 5 minutes of homework which he really struggled with. Our conversations went something like this:
Freshman year:
Me: "What are you working on?"
Him: "Oh, just a syllabus. Nothing too hard; I'll be done in 5 minutes."
Sophomore year:
Me: "what are you working on?
Him: "A syllabus. It has to be a whole page long. It's going to take me 10 minutes."
Junior year:
Me: "What are you working on?
Him: "This damn syllabus is taking me forever, it's like the hardest thing to write. It might take me a half hour.
Senior year:
Me: "What are you working on, a syllabus?
Him: "No, I just started student teaching so I don't have homework anymore."
But don't worry, he "double majored" in Social Studies, which is really hard--you have to take three introductory classes and other really "rigorous" classes like "Geography." He really pushed himself to get the most out of his $100k education.
First off, FISA=Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, so the idea that FISA should regulate "internal US wired calls" doesn't really make sense. Those calls fall under the purview of the regular courts.
."
The reason that this bill is so insidious is that it appears reasonable at a glance, but it greatly expands the power of the executive and allows for the surveillance of almost anyone. In section 105A of the statute, it redefines "electronic surveillance," and allows for any surveillance which is "directed" against a person overseas. It does not require that one of the parties in the email/phone call actually be overseas, merely that the surveillance be directed against someone overseas. Here, from the actual text of the Orwellian-named "Protect America Act of 2007":
"`Sec. 105B. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General, may for periods of up to one year authorize the acquisition of foreign intelligence information concerning persons reasonably believed to be outside the United States if the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General determine, based on the information provided to them. .
The key point is that the information need only concern persons reasonably believed to be outside the US. For example, if I were to send you an email from Rhode Island to Massachusetts, in which I discussed Osama Bin Laden, my email would be fair game under the act because it concerns a person (OBL) reasonably believed to be overseas. This would still violate the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 because it is obviously a domestic wiretap. But Bush & Co. thought of this, so they inserted section 105(A) right in the beginning of the Protect America Act of 2007! It reads as follows:
"Sec. 105A. Nothing in the definition of electronic surveillance under section 101(f) shall be construed to encompass surveillance directed at a person reasonably believed to be located outside of the United States."
You may notice that further down in the PAA of 2007, the following:
"SECT5: (b) Table of Contents- The table of contents in the first section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 105 the following:
105A. Clarification of electronic surveillance of persons outside the United States."
The above merely points out the obvious modification of FISA--section 105A already technically modified it. So FISA has been modified by the act (obviously) and "electronic surveillance" is redefined to mean any surveillance directed against someone overseas. Think about that for a few minutes. The language change is substantial.
The statute effectively repeals the 4th Amendment (although this is not possible; a statute cannot repeal an amendment to the Constitution) because it provides for secret violation of the 4th Amendment. The government is not required to notify the person under surveillance; combined with the Military Commissions Act of last year, this statute gives the government carte blanche to secretly wiretap any person in the United States, even two citizens, and to secretly disappear them to Gitmo or anywhere else. The act is unconstitutional, but it can never be challenged; by the time someone is notified that they are under surveillance, they are already in an orange jumpsuit being tortured in an overseas concentration camp.
History should tell us that secret surveillance of an entire population, combined with extraordinary rendition and overseas camps run by government intelligence services which openly use torture to extract confessions is a recipe for disaster. But both parties in Congress are motivated only by Realpolitik considerations of re-election and fund raising. The state of the Union is secondary to their personal considerations and the
Dolphins may be "smart" but only in comparison to other non-human life. In comparison to human beings, they are downright dumb. Perhaps they possess some form of communication, but it is only the spoken form; the written word is humanity's huge edge over such life forms, in that we can pass large amounts of information down to our progeny via the written word, thus building on our knowledge base over time. A dolphin cannot write; that is an enormous disadvantage. Second, dolphins cannot utilize tools or fire, the two other huge advantages that humankind enjoys. Tools allow us to multiply our physical and mental labor millions of times over and fire provides a portable source of energy for the operation of our tools. This allows us to be masters of our environment rather than at it's mercy, which is a fundamentally enormous advantage over the rest of the animal kingdom. I agree with those who say that life will not necessarily resemble life on earth. Statistically, it is obscenely improbable that life will look exactly as it does here. However, our discussion on this thread is limited to a very small subset of life, that is, intelligent life capable of interstellar travel. While large exoskeletons and amorphous blobs may be other possible forms that life can take, these forms do not confer the advantages of the humanoid form, and suffer significant drawbacks. We are dominant on Earth because we possess opposable thumbs and hands capable of fine motor control. Our large brains developed in concert with our highly mobile, highly useful appendages, not in spite of them. To manufacture the advanced equipment and computers which would necessarily be required for space travel (or at least for the intermediate steps leading to interstellar travel), it would be necessary for the builder to have fine motor control appendages and possess a large brain so as to put them to work correctly. It is difficult to imagine a tentacle or claw being as useful as hand. Furthermore, it is hard to imagine a large brain developing in an enclawed or ententacled creature, as the use/control of such an appendage would not require a large brain and so it may not develop. So in sum, I would hazard a guess that extraterrestrial life may look very similar to us, maybe extremely similar.