This is not final yet. Sec. Abraham has given the go ahead from the Dept. Of Energy for Yucca Mountain. Next, Pres. Bush must sign off from the Whitehouse. It is expected that the President will as he has indicated strong support of Yucca Mountain as a National Repository. Nevada of course, as a State, is highly opposed to the repository being sited there. Under a 1982 law, Congress must grant the final go ahead on the repository. Sen. Harry Reid is the Senior Senator from Nevada and on Senate Majority Leader Daschles leadership team. He has pledged to do whatever possible to stop the repository being located at Yucca Mountain.
Here is where the politics gets real thick. Enter the wayback machine with me to Washington DC a year ago. The Republicans control the Whitehouse, the House of Representatives and the Senate. Sen. Jim Jeffords, a liberal Republican from Vermont opposes the Bush Tax Cuts and angers the Republican Leadership. In retaliation, the Whitehouse threatens Vermonts Dairy Subsidy among other key issues dear to Jeffords heart. Enter the picture Sen. Harry Reid. Sen. Reid promises Jeffords a powerful chairmanship and support for Dairy subsidies from the Democrats if Jeffords will caucus with the Democrats. Reid approaches Daschle with many delicate negotiated details. In exchange for working with Jeffords, Daschle cuts a deal with Reid to oppose Yucca Mountain. Jeffords becomes an independent and caucuses with the Democrats making Sen. Daschle Majority Leader. Daschle of course owes his Majority Leader status to Reid and as such opposes Yucca Mountain.
Of course this doesn't even go into the many pending and future court cases which will tie this issue up well beyond any 2010 expected opening date.
The Senator you are referring too is Russell Feingold (D)of Wisconsin. He proposed a series of amendments which would have tempered the "worst" aspects of this bill. Only six Senators voted with him on the amendments. When time came for passage of the bill, Sen. Feingold was the only dissenting vote.
I have read several comments extolling neuromancer and snow crash. While I highly enjoyed those novels, and in the case of neuromancer, the old C-64 game, I think that the most prophetic work on the sociological impact of modern networking is from John Brunner. His novel Shockwave Rider far predates Neuromancer, yet is seldom recognized.
Talking to a District Staffer over the phone will likely result in your comment being added to a database of other callers on an issue. In a well run office, they will get your name and address and a from letter will be generated (hopefully) pertaining to your issue.
Remember, if you do not care enough about an issue to draft a reasoned letter, your elected official is not going to want to spend a large amount of office resources responding.
The most effective way of communictaing with your Rep or Senator is to meet with them personally. If your Member of Congress holds office hours or town hall meetings, attend the meeting. Be prepared with rational questions. Do not launch into a diatribe or attack on a position. Present a reasoned analysis of why you may disagree with you Rep. Provide eveidence which backs up your position. The key here is that Congressional folk are constantly beset by irrational people. If you do not present a professional manner, you will be dismissed out of hand.
If you cannot meet with your elected Rep, do meet with their staffer. Elected officials keep District and State offices. They have staffers who brief them on issues. Be prepared for your meeting with a letter addressed to the official outlining your concerns. Bring any supporting docs. It is important to have your concerns in writing when meeting with staff, they have very limited time and will likely appreciate any effort which makes their job easier.
If you cannot meet with staff. WRITE A LETTER!!! DO NOT USE E-MAIL. I have stated this several times on/. over the years. E-mail is the worst way to communicate with Congress. Congress is simply overwhelmed with e-mail. A good rule of thumb in lobbying your elected officials is the easier it is to send a message, the more likely it is to be ignored. Do not inundate your official with mail. the worst thing you can do is write a letter a week or more. Congressional offices receive tens of thousands of pieces of mail every week. The more mail you send, the more likely your mail is to be buried. Each piece of constituent mail is entered into a database as it is processed. If your name and address shows up a hundred times, you will recieve a low priority of response.
The most important thing is be patient. Congress is under extreme pressure right now. Mail is up and phones are ringing off the hook. Every constituent has become an expert in counter-terrorism. I would give your official 4 to 6 weeks to respond. While this may seem like a long time, realize the logistical problems of responding to the sheer volume of requests these offices are handling.
If you have not received a response in that time period, a follow-up letter or phone call of inquiry to the office is warranted. Again, keep your cool. If this does not shake out a reponse, then you likely will not receive one.
Believe it or not, elected officials who do not at least respond with form letters, tend to not get reelected.
There is such a concept in the House and Senate known as Congressional Courtesy. Members of Congress typically do not reply to other Represenatives or Senators constituents. As a courtesy, any correpsondence recieved from out of district or state will be forwarded back to your Rep or Senator. While there are exceptions to this rule, it is usually followed. While you may have a legit reason to be contacting a committee on a subject, Representatives and Senators have a difficult time responding to their own constiuents, let alone someone elses.
The aftermath of the Sept. 11th tragedies will be felt by the United States for years to come. My greater concern at this point is the effort Attorney General Ashcroft is exerting to pass an anti-terrorism bill. His requests would give considerable leeway to the gov't regarding electronic surveillance and wiretaps, continue the use of secret evidence and give much more leeway in obtaining warrants. Under his proposal immigrants could be detained without judicial review or consent. The requests which he has made would put a considerable dent in the 4th amendment and other parts of the Constitution.
While steps need to be taken to ensure terrorism does not occur in the United States, to do so at the expense of our civil liberties is unacceptable.
The most effective way to lobby is to make one on one contact with your Representative or Senator. It is actually much easier to meet with your Representative than most people think. If you are travelling to DC, simply call their office and set up a meeting. Explain that you want to discuss Tech Policy. Even if the elected official is unable to meet with you, most offices will set up a meeting with a staffer who specializes in certain issue areas. This staffer is typically called a Legislative Assistant. Be aware that this staffer may have only a rudimentary knowledge of how technology works. They are policy geeks after all, not tech geeks.
If you are not travelling to DC, find out where your Representatives nearest State/District office is located. Contact the staffer at that location and arrange to set up a meeting with the staffer. During the meeting explain that you would like to meet with your Representative the next time they are in the area.
If you are overly shy, write an old fashioned snail mail to your Representative's DC office. Elected officials typically have a policy of responding to all letters. Believe it or not, those officials who do not respond, typically do not get reelected.
DO NOT USE E-MAIL! E-MAIL is the worst way to communicate your concerns. As has been posted on/. in the past, Congress is deluged with tens of thousands of e-mails every month.
I find myself very concerned about a large number of posts on this subject. Many/. posters seem to feel that there is an inevitability to human cloning or indeed most any new technological capability. This feeling of inevitability is a dangerous belief. Just because we have the capability of doing something, does not mean it will be done. Inevitability allows one to overlook the serious ethical and moral dilemnas a situation may pose. To say that it is inevitable that a human will be cloned, so why not just do it does not answer these questions. Morality and ethics are situational. When a human life is at stake, the situation should be carefully studied.
This case does not IMO meet moral and ethical standards. I believe that human cloning in the future, in certain situations, could hold great promise. However, this group of scientists are willing to perform human experientation with unproven technology. Here in the U.S. we hold strict standards for human experientation just so as not to cause unwarranted harm. In the case of terminally ill patients, these standards might morally and ethically (though I'm not sure legally) be eased with the knowledge of the patient. But to create a human life, who obviously has no say in this process, as an experiment, with technology which has so many unanswered questions, is monstrous.
While I am no biologist, I do know that there are questions as to inserting adult cells into embryonic tissue as a cloning technology. One major issue is that Tolemeres (sp) are significantly shorter in the cloned animal. Remember, Tolemeres are the stopwatch of a cell's aging process. Shorter Tolemeres mean shorter life. This is just one problem known by a layman. Reading through previous posts details many other problems which I will not delve into.
Knowing that these problems exist, a responsible scientist would refrain from leaping into this line of experimentation. I call on this group to reconsider their course of action and consider the ramifications of their actions on the human life they propose to create.
Just because something can be done, does not mean it should be done!
You may want to check out a book by columnist David Broder entitled "Democracy Derailed." The book gives an exhaustive look at Government by Initiative. Instead of laws being debated under public scrutiny in a legislative body, more and more laws are being drafted by special interest groups and passed by ballot initiative.
Another excellent book on this subject is "Government's End" by Jonathon Rauch. Mr. Rauch, a writer for National Journal magazine gives a detailed analysis of hyper-pluralism. More and more laws are being written wholesale by special interest groups for special interest groups.
Remember however, that everyone is a special interest. As these groups write more laws which benefit a particular group, they are simply reaching for a piece of the pie. It is easier for politicians to pass laws benefitting a group (read donaters/voters) than to vote to deny a benefit to that group.
There is an old saying in DC, One mans pork is another mans bacon.
I remember back in the day when my commodore computer user group had contests for the best painted case. Some of those folk probably spent more time painting their computers than using them.
You miss the point of a loss leader. If every CD retailer was selling for $18, they would certainly be making money. However, lets assume you are a major appliance chain making large profits off of TV's, Stereo's and dishwashers. Lets also assume you have placed a large CD selection in you store. You are paying approx $11.18 for each CD. You then decide to sell those CD's at $11.88. Considering your store rent, wages, etc... the 70 cent markup is certainly a loss on those CD's. however, considering the extra appliances you sell, you simply write that department off.
Now imagine you do not sell appliances, but instead have to simply depend on CD's to generate your profits. A 70 cent markup will quickly lead you into bankruptcy.
Several regional retail music chains went entirely out of business or closed a majority of their stores in the early nineties due to loss leading tactics. Kemp Mill in the DC area and Rose Records in Chicago are prime examples
IANASWF - I am not a star wars fanatic, however, your assumption on timelines and technological development is flawed. One of the tenets of the star wars universe is that the Old Republic has been around for several millenia. It has faded from its golden age and is rotting from within. This is what enables Senator Palpatine to manipulate the senate. Considering that this is a decaying culture, they would not be discovering new technologies or growing. In fact, this republic very well may have had more advanced technology as it was expanding around the galaxy than what exists during ep 1. 4 millenium previous may in fact have been the Republics Golden Age.
I would submit that decreased sales in and near college towns is indicative of an advanced wired society. University's were the first to offer highspeed internet connections to a population base. Due to this high bandwidth, University towns also have tended to be the first where residential highspeed connections have become avaible. As such these communities are more advanced in utilization of a wired society's conveniences. So, instead of trotting down to the neighborhood cd store, residents of these communities, I submit, will be more likely to shop online. Consider, your listening to streaming audio and are really struck by a particular tune. Do you A. write down the artist on a piece of paper and head out to the music store the next day or B. place an order on-line? As for the Jupiter study, remember cassette tapes. The music industry used to cry that taping was destroying the industry, yet study after study indicated tapers bought more music than non-tapers.
Actually, the common rabble used off the shelf avatars (Brandies were the female, can't remember the male). The techno-elite used slick custom models. That is the distinction which sets them apart. The deal with facial expressions was that only two people in the entire meta-verse could have accurate facial expressions. Juanita used Hiro and herself as models for all Avatars facial expressions. As such, she feels that Hiro and herself are the only two people in the entire meta-verse who can have genuine interaction.
Slashdot Mirror
This is not final yet. Sec. Abraham has given the go ahead from the Dept. Of Energy for Yucca Mountain. Next, Pres. Bush must sign off from the Whitehouse. It is expected that the President will as he has indicated strong support of Yucca Mountain as a National Repository. Nevada of course, as a State, is highly opposed to the repository being sited there. Under a 1982 law, Congress must grant the final go ahead on the repository. Sen. Harry Reid is the Senior Senator from Nevada and on Senate Majority Leader Daschles leadership team. He has pledged to do whatever possible to stop the repository being located at Yucca Mountain.
Here is where the politics gets real thick. Enter the wayback machine with me to Washington DC a year ago. The Republicans control the Whitehouse, the House of Representatives and the Senate. Sen. Jim Jeffords, a liberal Republican from Vermont opposes the Bush Tax Cuts and angers the Republican Leadership. In retaliation, the Whitehouse threatens Vermonts Dairy Subsidy among other key issues dear to Jeffords heart. Enter the picture Sen. Harry Reid. Sen. Reid promises Jeffords a powerful chairmanship and support for Dairy subsidies from the Democrats if Jeffords will caucus with the Democrats. Reid approaches Daschle with many delicate negotiated details. In exchange for working with Jeffords, Daschle cuts a deal with Reid to oppose Yucca Mountain. Jeffords becomes an independent and caucuses with the Democrats making Sen. Daschle Majority Leader. Daschle of course owes his Majority Leader status to Reid and as such opposes Yucca Mountain.
Of course this doesn't even go into the many pending and future court cases which will tie this issue up well beyond any 2010 expected opening date.
The Senator you are referring too is Russell Feingold (D)of Wisconsin. He proposed a series of amendments which would have tempered the "worst" aspects of this bill. Only six Senators voted with him on the amendments. When time came for passage of the bill, Sen. Feingold was the only dissenting vote.
I have read several comments extolling neuromancer and snow crash. While I highly enjoyed those novels, and in the case of neuromancer, the old C-64 game, I think that the most prophetic work on the sociological impact of modern networking is from John Brunner. His novel Shockwave Rider far predates Neuromancer, yet is seldom recognized.
Talking to a District Staffer over the phone will likely result in your comment being added to a database of other callers on an issue. In a well run office, they will get your name and address and a from letter will be generated (hopefully) pertaining to your issue.
Remember, if you do not care enough about an issue to draft a reasoned letter, your elected official is not going to want to spend a large amount of office resources responding.
The most effective way of communictaing with your Rep or Senator is to meet with them personally. If your Member of Congress holds office hours or town hall meetings, attend the meeting. Be prepared with rational questions. Do not launch into a diatribe or attack on a position. Present a reasoned analysis of why you may disagree with you Rep. Provide eveidence which backs up your position. The key here is that Congressional folk are constantly beset by irrational people. If you do not present a professional manner, you will be dismissed out of hand.
/. over the years. E-mail is the worst way to communicate with Congress. Congress is simply overwhelmed with e-mail. A good rule of thumb in lobbying your elected officials is the easier it is to send a message, the more likely it is to be ignored. Do not inundate your official with mail. the worst thing you can do is write a letter a week or more. Congressional offices receive tens of thousands of pieces of mail every week. The more mail you send, the more likely your mail is to be buried. Each piece of constituent mail is entered into a database as it is processed. If your name and address shows up a hundred times, you will recieve a low priority of response.
If you cannot meet with your elected Rep, do meet with their staffer. Elected officials keep District and State offices. They have staffers who brief them on issues. Be prepared for your meeting with a letter addressed to the official outlining your concerns. Bring any supporting docs. It is important to have your concerns in writing when meeting with staff, they have very limited time and will likely appreciate any effort which makes their job easier.
If you cannot meet with staff. WRITE A LETTER!!! DO NOT USE E-MAIL. I have stated this several times on
The most important thing is be patient. Congress is under extreme pressure right now. Mail is up and phones are ringing off the hook. Every constituent has become an expert in counter-terrorism. I would give your official 4 to 6 weeks to respond. While this may seem like a long time, realize the logistical problems of responding to the sheer volume of requests these offices are handling.
If you have not received a response in that time period, a follow-up letter or phone call of inquiry to the office is warranted. Again, keep your cool. If this does not shake out a reponse, then you likely will not receive one.
Believe it or not, elected officials who do not at least respond with form letters, tend to not get reelected.
There is such a concept in the House and Senate known as Congressional Courtesy. Members of Congress typically do not reply to other Represenatives or Senators constituents. As a courtesy, any correpsondence recieved from out of district or state will be forwarded back to your Rep or Senator. While there are exceptions to this rule, it is usually followed. While you may have a legit reason to be contacting a committee on a subject, Representatives and Senators have a difficult time responding to their own constiuents, let alone someone elses.
The aftermath of the Sept. 11th tragedies will be felt by the United States for years to come. My greater concern at this point is the effort Attorney General Ashcroft is exerting to pass an anti-terrorism bill. His requests would give considerable leeway to the gov't regarding electronic surveillance and wiretaps, continue the use of secret evidence and give much more leeway in obtaining warrants. Under his proposal immigrants could be detained without judicial review or consent. The requests which he has made would put a considerable dent in the 4th amendment and other parts of the Constitution.
While steps need to be taken to ensure terrorism does not occur in the United States, to do so at the expense of our civil liberties is unacceptable.
The most effective way to lobby is to make one on one contact with your Representative or Senator. It is actually much easier to meet with your Representative than most people think. If you are travelling to DC, simply call their office and set up a meeting. Explain that you want to discuss Tech Policy. Even if the elected official is unable to meet with you, most offices will set up a meeting with a staffer who specializes in certain issue areas. This staffer is typically called a Legislative Assistant. Be aware that this staffer may have only a rudimentary knowledge of how technology works. They are policy geeks after all, not tech geeks.
/. in the past, Congress is deluged with tens of thousands of e-mails every month.
If you are not travelling to DC, find out where your Representatives nearest State/District office is located. Contact the staffer at that location and arrange to set up a meeting with the staffer. During the meeting explain that you would like to meet with your Representative the next time they are in the area.
If you are overly shy, write an old fashioned snail mail to your Representative's DC office. Elected officials typically have a policy of responding to all letters. Believe it or not, those officials who do not respond, typically do not get reelected.
DO NOT USE E-MAIL! E-MAIL is the worst way to communicate your concerns. As has been posted on
I find myself very concerned about a large number of posts on this subject. Many /. posters seem to feel that there is an inevitability to human cloning or indeed most any new technological capability. This feeling of inevitability is a dangerous belief. Just because we have the capability of doing something, does not mean it will be done. Inevitability allows one to overlook the serious ethical and moral dilemnas a situation may pose. To say that it is inevitable that a human will be cloned, so why not just do it does not answer these questions. Morality and ethics are situational. When a human life is at stake, the situation should be carefully studied.
This case does not IMO meet moral and ethical standards. I believe that human cloning in the future, in certain situations, could hold great promise. However, this group of scientists are willing to perform human experientation with unproven technology. Here in the U.S. we hold strict standards for human experientation just so as not to cause unwarranted harm. In the case of terminally ill patients, these standards might morally and ethically (though I'm not sure legally) be eased with the knowledge of the patient. But to create a human life, who obviously has no say in this process, as an experiment, with technology which has so many unanswered questions, is monstrous.
While I am no biologist, I do know that there are questions as to inserting adult cells into embryonic tissue as a cloning technology. One major issue is that Tolemeres (sp) are significantly shorter in the cloned animal. Remember, Tolemeres are the stopwatch of a cell's aging process. Shorter Tolemeres mean shorter life. This is just one problem known by a layman. Reading through previous posts details many other problems which I will not delve into.
Knowing that these problems exist, a responsible scientist would refrain from leaping into this line of experimentation. I call on this group to reconsider their course of action and consider the ramifications of their actions on the human life they propose to create.
Just because something can be done, does not mean it should be done!
You may want to check out a book by columnist David Broder entitled "Democracy Derailed." The book gives an exhaustive look at Government by Initiative. Instead of laws being debated under public scrutiny in a legislative body, more and more laws are being drafted by special interest groups and passed by ballot initiative.
Another excellent book on this subject is "Government's End" by Jonathon Rauch. Mr. Rauch, a writer for National Journal magazine gives a detailed analysis of hyper-pluralism. More and more laws are being written wholesale by special interest groups for special interest groups.
Remember however, that everyone is a special interest. As these groups write more laws which benefit a particular group, they are simply reaching for a piece of the pie. It is easier for politicians to pass laws benefitting a group (read donaters/voters) than to vote to deny a benefit to that group.
There is an old saying in DC, One mans pork is another mans bacon.
I remember back in the day when my commodore computer user group had contests for the best painted case. Some of those folk probably spent more time painting their computers than using them.
You miss the point of a loss leader. If every CD retailer was selling for $18, they would certainly be making money. However, lets assume you are a major appliance chain making large profits off of TV's, Stereo's and dishwashers. Lets also assume you have placed a large CD selection in you store. You are paying approx $11.18 for each CD. You then decide to sell those CD's at $11.88. Considering your store rent, wages, etc... the 70 cent markup is certainly a loss on those CD's. however, considering the extra appliances you sell, you simply write that department off.
Now imagine you do not sell appliances, but instead have to simply depend on CD's to generate your profits. A 70 cent markup will quickly lead you into bankruptcy.
Several regional retail music chains went entirely out of business or closed a majority of their stores in the early nineties due to loss leading tactics. Kemp Mill in the DC area and Rose Records in Chicago are prime examples
IANASWF - I am not a star wars fanatic, however, your assumption on timelines and technological development is flawed. One of the tenets of the star wars universe is that the Old Republic has been around for several millenia. It has faded from its golden age and is rotting from within. This is what enables Senator Palpatine to manipulate the senate. Considering that this is a decaying culture, they would not be discovering new technologies or growing. In fact, this republic very well may have had more advanced technology as it was expanding around the galaxy than what exists during ep 1. 4 millenium previous may in fact have been the Republics Golden Age.
I would submit that decreased sales in and near college towns is indicative of an advanced wired society. University's were the first to offer highspeed internet connections to a population base. Due to this high bandwidth, University towns also have tended to be the first where residential highspeed connections have become avaible. As such these communities are more advanced in utilization of a wired society's conveniences. So, instead of trotting down to the neighborhood cd store, residents of these communities, I submit, will be more likely to shop online. Consider, your listening to streaming audio and are really struck by a particular tune. Do you A. write down the artist on a piece of paper and head out to the music store the next day or B. place an order on-line? As for the Jupiter study, remember cassette tapes. The music industry used to cry that taping was destroying the industry, yet study after study indicated tapers bought more music than non-tapers.
Actually, the common rabble used off the shelf avatars (Brandies were the female, can't remember the male). The techno-elite used slick custom models. That is the distinction which sets them apart. The deal with facial expressions was that only two people in the entire meta-verse could have accurate facial expressions. Juanita used Hiro and herself as models for all Avatars facial expressions. As such, she feels that Hiro and herself are the only two people in the entire meta-verse who can have genuine interaction.
problem solved