As much as I'd like for the discovery of life "out there" directly improving our lives, I'm afraid we can't underestimate human-kind's ability to be short-sighted. Think of every petty dictator who would like to have an "in" with the technology of an advanced alien civilization. You know, how many soldiers could one man with a "phaser" kill?
Yeah, I know, a big stretch from an intergalactic hello to actual physical contact. But, I can see the mad dash by would-be-world-dictators to get plans for the new ultimate weapon in return for being the "Governor" of a new colonial planet of the alien culture.
I don't by the expansion of consciousness argument. If we're going to have an enlightened view of sharing our universe with aliens we'll need to end our squabbles so we don't sound like savages when we communicate with them.
Your concern about needing to "defend" ourselves against aliens would probably be our first response. Actually, it's probably a legitimate function of government to initiate steps to protect us from an attack, wherever it comes from. Just so long as neither they or us accidentally misunderstand a "hello" for a "you're momma's ugly and dresses you funny":).
Interestingly, many Christian Conservatives I know are comfortable with the idea of life "out there". Those who are more versed in the Bible have pointed out that certain language in Genesis (I think) would leave one to infer there are other planets with life on them. Just so long as they aren't red with pointed ears and a spade tail things ought to go swimmingly with them!
Don't press the F1 key in XP after running Internet Explorer... unless it's Wednesday, a third Tuesday of the month, or the moon is Gibbous. A browser should NOT be so integrated to the operating system to allow this sort of behavior!
My point was, and is, there are exposure limits already in place. The cell company has a legal limit to how much it can expose people to and it's bad business to waste your money on a tower that's pointed towards an obstruction.
The actual limits are 450 W/cm2 @ 900 MHz and 950 W/cm2 @ 1900 MHz. We're not talking watts of exposure, we're talking.00045 watts to.001 watts worst case. 3G systems tend to emit lower power and won't even get close to these levels.
But, given the level ignorance most folks have of almost everything technical, I'd be concerned about resale/leasing. Shoot, most reasonably intelligent people wouldn't waste their time determining safety, they'll just go find a place where they don't have to worry about it... and if their luck is like mine, watch a company start construction of a cell tower out the kitchen window right after moving in!
:) Oh, that's rich! But, it proves a point that perception can be just as important as facts when dealing with something you may ultimately try to rent or sell.
I mean, it's the ultimate standard. Right? 2,3,7 - swap 2&3 if things don't work.
Well, there is sometimes that pesky DTR signal, so sometimes you have to hook up 20. Unless you swap 2 and 3, in which case you need to swap pins 20 and 6 too.
Then, sometimes you need DSR, so just hook up six. Unless you swapped 2 and 3, then you have to swap 6 and twenty for that.
Of course, then there's the device that emulates a MODEM and you have to hook up CD...
Yeah, serial interfacing is just so straight forward and simple, we can't get rid of it!:)
NASA works in a world where what you say, wish, or want to believe matters not a wit. The exact opposite of politics. Politicians will promise the impossible in order to get votes, with voters often willingly suspending all reason because they want to believe.
Meanwhile, NASA needs to operate in a world where physical laws will either propel you to orbit or leave a trail of debris.
Politicians wish for something to be so and impose it on NASA. The reason you see "upper management" going along with the foolishness is they are politicians first and scientists and engineers second. Challenger proved that, engineers sitting at the table warning them the seals wouldn't hold in cold temperatures and management sarcastically asking if we had to wait until Spring to launch. Someone even remarked about taking their engineers cap off and putting their management hat on.
So yeah, you'll see upper NASA management (and bad middle management) making decisions just as idiotic as the elected politicians - but only as a result of the politicians and NASA being a government agency.
I was thinking the same thing. The original Space Shuttle wasn't supposed to be the kludge it became. SRBs weren't even part of the original design. The Apollo program was killed early to focus on Near Earth Orbit projects, which was killed even as Skylab was launched.
How can they have a vision for the future if every vision they've ever had has been scaled back, butchered in mid-design, or killed mid-project.
I've gone with four hosting companies in the last 15 years. I'm currently with Hostgator, using a virtual host package, and my only complaint is the 500 emails/hr limit. I have the need to randomly distribute a few thousand emails and hate that it must be throttled over several hours. Other than that, I've had good results with no complaints from my clients or myself.
Hostgator offers both virtual and dedicated packages. Like any vendor, they aren't perfect - they can't read my mind and know what my experience level and skills are. I've worked with both virtual and dedicated servers and have generally been satisfied.
The Hostgator virtual packages are bandwidth/storage based, so you can upgrade/downgrade based upon bandwidth and storage rather than number of domains.
No, I have no affiliation with the company and will not gain a darn thing for this endorsement or any customers they might get.
I doubt many of these companies knew they were locking themselves into IE6. Who could predict what Microsoft would do when they came out with subsequent releases? Code gets written, it works under IE6, often with some bug that doesn't manifest itself under IE6 or uses an evolving browser function, and then IE7 (or 8, or Firefox) comes out and processes the code more literally or in a different way or maybe the way a browser function call operates changes, and things go Boom. Just like unexpected compatibility issues between Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
This is a problem that extends well beyond web browsers. We've seen it happen when operating systems change, network servers change (Novel vs. Microsoft vs Lantastic, Invisible Lan, and all those other P2P networks that were out there), and even drive formats (Fat12 vs Fat16 or 32, or NTFS).
By the way, it seems the Global Warming alarmists looked out the window, saw the snow and declared it was proof of Global Warming! Not only is it foolish on the surface, it's exactly what you accuse the rational skeptics of!
What is it that the Global Warming alarmists talk about? Temperatures and Precipitation. Why? They are part of what defines a climate. To not talk about weather when discussing climate would be like trying to describe a rainbow without talking about color.
As NOAA defines it: The average of weather over at least a 30-year period...
I didn't say that, but someone with a losing argument usually resorts to setting up a straw man to knock down.
My point has always been that weather prediction is still a statistical science. The accuracy of weather predictions become increasingly worse with time. We have no evidence the models being used are accurate 1000, 500, 100, or 10 years out. The "evidence" that isn't tainted is still not conclusive and at least some remaining evidence is starting to crumble under scrutiny (how much remains to be seen).
Couple all of this with the fact that our planet has undergone warmer and cooler periods, that Mars' polar regions are shrinking, and the case for man-made Global Warming looks very week.
Finally, Global Warming alarmists had been pointing to yearly or decade-by-decade changes as evidence of Global Warming. Glaciers disappearing in 35 years? Global Warming scientists claiming there will be a 10 or 20 year break as the planet cools - now that we're having bone-chilling Winters and moderate Summers? Who's "looking out the window" and making excuses and predictions now?
The truth is that we don't know. People are placing their faith in marginal data, much of it fabricated (or 'adjusted' to remove contradictory data), unproven "science", people who ignore and then attempt to cover up contradictory results, and similar short-sighted predictions based on fear.
I'm all for the Scientific Method. I'm ready for the Global Warming community to put it to better use.
I love how opposing government theft of private property becomes wanting old folks dying in the streets and a snipe against welfare recipients in the eyes of social liberals.
My point is I'd rather charity be voluntary and delivered somewhere closer to the person needing it.
Local communities are the best place, followed by the local government when desired, followed by the state when necessary, and the federal government when idiots like the governor of Louisiana and the Mayor of New Orleans are too incompetent to evacuate their communities and accept outside help when offered.
Nobody says other civilizations will move to quieter technology as quickly as us. On the other hand, we may be the morons of the universe and all of our galactic neighbors are thinking "Thank God those idiots finally found the volume control!". Besides, we might have a need for some lesser developed civilization to exploit and we'll need to know where to find them!
Alpha Cenrauri is about 4-1/2 light years away. Electromagnetic energy would get there in 4-1/2 years. As a result, they've long since lost interest in I Love Lucy (if anyone is there and listening). There are about 50 stars within 15 light years.
We can't uncap that bottle, so we'll have a stream of broadcast television and radio signals continuing on the journey, lasting for decades. The fact we stop doesn't mean we're suddenly invisible. We've left some tracks in the sand on a calm beach.
I'm pretty confident we don't have an invasion fleet coming at this point in the game, but if they are, I bet they think we taste like chicken.
It's been painful, but that's what I did. I warned of the dangers of not taking particular IT actions, watched them be ignored, and took the heat when there was pain as a result. The environment was unprofessional with the management appearing to have no ability to conceptualize the effects of a failure/loss or the sense to heed warnings of the risks of failing to follow IT recommendations.
I'm working harder and making less but am no longer in an environment where I have to wonder when I'm going to take the punches for a systems failure or loss of data as a result of my recommendations being ignored.
The only thing more dangerous than authority with no responsibility is being the one with responsibility and no authority.
If it doesn't bother you enough to quit then take the pay check and be happy:).
Republicans tax poor people by eliminating social services? Since when is NOT gifting charity to the recipients suddenly a tax? By what right should the government gift them anything while forcing others to pay for it? You really call the decision to discontinue charity as a tax?
"... giving tax breaks to the people who don't need them..." - Spoken like a true Marxist. Need as defined by who? What the heck does need have to do with it? Just because someone manages to acquire, without committing a crime, more than another person they should be forced to give it up? By what right should the government take from one person and give to another when no theft or other crime has been committed?
"Democrats tax rich people to pay for social services for poor people." - just plain wrong. Democrats tax anyone who makes anything and wastes most of it on operating the government, sending a small percentage of the budgeted money to the recipients. They just do it under the "from those who have more than they need to those who don't" argument. I'll ask again, how do you decide when someone has more than they "need"? Who's the determiner? Why should those people be punished for success by having the fruits of their efforts taken from them?
That's great! It does fit too. I'm wondering if market forces won't buy us a lot more time. As your link points out, demand is not fixed or necessarily going to increase.
If a network is "public" then it may as well be open. If you're going to make it available for public use, why bother with WEP or anything else? If you're going to give the key to guests who ask for it then it's like locking your front door and standing out at the sidewalk and giving out keys to strangers who walk by.
Private wireless is a whole different ball of wax, but I'm very surprised anyone is concerned that a PUBLIC hotspot is unsecured.
No, you're not missing anything. I was thinking the same thing as I was reading the article. It was an interesting article though.
Yeah, it's a lot easier to get 10 people together to do something than 100. Therefore, you'll have more activity with 10 participants than 100 participants.
I read the article thinking they were going to be able to accurately predict probabilities by day - which would be really useful.
Sounds a little fishy to me. I doubt a firearm can be discharged without an investigation of the weapons discharge. I also doubt, if the laptop was considered a possible bomb, that they would shoot it and risk it blowing up. If the thing had potential terrorist information (or if they just wanted to mess with her) they could have (and would have) confiscated the laptop. It seems unlikely there would be a decision to disable the laptop without going for the hard drive - but, again, the could seize it and let a professional deal with it.
On top of that, I find it doubtful they would give her the bullet riddled carcass of her laptop back!
There are just too many unlikely events piled up. Not to mention the obvious slant of her blog: http://lilysussman.wordpress.com/. Those poor innocent Muslims are just misunderstood, but as for those evil Israeli soldiers her sentiment is “These guys shoot every day at unarmed people, even children. Why so much surprise about a simple laptop?”
I slipped up connecting CFCs to the Ice Age. It was the blame for the Ozone Hole, which we now know is a cyclic event having nothing to do with CFCs.
I never mentioned "Nuclear Winter", and the doomsday via Ice Age predictions I remember from those days had nothing to do with Nuclear Winter.
Of course we know there are too many variables to predict weather patterns because we have daily reminders that the weather forecasters are so often wrong. The problem with these other theories is we have no way of knowing if they are any more accurate than the short-term models because we have to wait to find out if they are right.
Unfortunately, you demonstrated the circular logic of the Global Warming logic with the reference to CFCs. We really don't know if there's a direct cause and effect between banning CFCs and any claimed pattern changes because we don't know if the model works. We may have seen essentially the same results if we'd done nothing. It's like proving I don't see an angel on your shoulder. It doesn't mean there is one, just that you can't disprove it.
My point was, and is, that the weather models didn't, and don't, match the facts reliably. While global level analysis would theoretically decrease the deviation in the model, it would still require that the model be remotely correct.
We know that hurricane or other general weather patterns can't be predicted for the upcoming year or out 10 years either. Look how many years in a a row severe hurricane seasons were predicted after Katrina.
Nothing against the prediction/modeling efforts (without them we'll never actually figure out how), but it is hardly perfected science and recent events have shown how politicized it has become.
Slashdot Mirror
As much as I'd like for the discovery of life "out there" directly improving our lives, I'm afraid we can't underestimate human-kind's ability to be short-sighted. Think of every petty dictator who would like to have an "in" with the technology of an advanced alien civilization. You know, how many soldiers could one man with a "phaser" kill?
:).
Interestingly, many Christian Conservatives I know are comfortable with the idea of life "out there". Those who are more versed in the Bible have pointed out that certain language in Genesis (I think) would leave one to infer there are other planets with life on them. Just so long as they aren't red with pointed ears and a spade tail things ought to go swimmingly with them!
Yeah, I know, a big stretch from an intergalactic hello to actual physical contact. But, I can see the mad dash by would-be-world-dictators to get plans for the new ultimate weapon in return for being the "Governor" of a new colonial planet of the alien culture.
I don't by the expansion of consciousness argument. If we're going to have an enlightened view of sharing our universe with aliens we'll need to end our squabbles so we don't sound like savages when we communicate with them. Your concern about needing to "defend" ourselves against aliens would probably be our first response. Actually, it's probably a legitimate function of government to initiate steps to protect us from an attack, wherever it comes from. Just so long as neither they or us accidentally misunderstand a "hello" for a "you're momma's ugly and dresses you funny"
Don't press the F1 key in XP after running Internet Explorer ... unless it's Wednesday, a third Tuesday of the month, or the moon is Gibbous. A browser should NOT be so integrated to the operating system to allow this sort of behavior!
My point was, and is, there are exposure limits already in place. The cell company has a legal limit to how much it can expose people to and it's bad business to waste your money on a tower that's pointed towards an obstruction. The actual limits are 450 W/cm2 @ 900 MHz and 950 W/cm2 @ 1900 MHz. We're not talking watts of exposure, we're talking .00045 watts to .001 watts worst case. 3G systems tend to emit lower power and won't even get close to these levels.
... and if their luck is like mine, watch a company start construction of a cell tower out the kitchen window right after moving in!
But, given the level ignorance most folks have of almost everything technical, I'd be concerned about resale/leasing. Shoot, most reasonably intelligent people wouldn't waste their time determining safety, they'll just go find a place where they don't have to worry about it
That being said, there are several reasons to not be overly concerned:
:) Oh, that's rich! But, it proves a point that perception can be just as important as facts when dealing with something you may ultimately try to rent or sell.
I mean, it's the ultimate standard. Right? 2,3,7 - swap 2&3 if things don't work. Well, there is sometimes that pesky DTR signal, so sometimes you have to hook up 20. Unless you swap 2 and 3, in which case you need to swap pins 20 and 6 too. Then, sometimes you need DSR, so just hook up six. Unless you swapped 2 and 3, then you have to swap 6 and twenty for that. Of course, then there's the device that emulates a MODEM and you have to hook up CD ...
Yeah, serial interfacing is just so straight forward and simple, we can't get rid of it! :)
NASA works in a world where what you say, wish, or want to believe matters not a wit. The exact opposite of politics. Politicians will promise the impossible in order to get votes, with voters often willingly suspending all reason because they want to believe. Meanwhile, NASA needs to operate in a world where physical laws will either propel you to orbit or leave a trail of debris. Politicians wish for something to be so and impose it on NASA. The reason you see "upper management" going along with the foolishness is they are politicians first and scientists and engineers second. Challenger proved that, engineers sitting at the table warning them the seals wouldn't hold in cold temperatures and management sarcastically asking if we had to wait until Spring to launch. Someone even remarked about taking their engineers cap off and putting their management hat on. So yeah, you'll see upper NASA management (and bad middle management) making decisions just as idiotic as the elected politicians - but only as a result of the politicians and NASA being a government agency.
I was thinking the same thing. The original Space Shuttle wasn't supposed to be the kludge it became. SRBs weren't even part of the original design. The Apollo program was killed early to focus on Near Earth Orbit projects, which was killed even as Skylab was launched. How can they have a vision for the future if every vision they've ever had has been scaled back, butchered in mid-design, or killed mid-project.
I've gone with four hosting companies in the last 15 years. I'm currently with Hostgator, using a virtual host package, and my only complaint is the 500 emails/hr limit. I have the need to randomly distribute a few thousand emails and hate that it must be throttled over several hours. Other than that, I've had good results with no complaints from my clients or myself. Hostgator offers both virtual and dedicated packages. Like any vendor, they aren't perfect - they can't read my mind and know what my experience level and skills are. I've worked with both virtual and dedicated servers and have generally been satisfied. The Hostgator virtual packages are bandwidth/storage based, so you can upgrade/downgrade based upon bandwidth and storage rather than number of domains. No, I have no affiliation with the company and will not gain a darn thing for this endorsement or any customers they might get.
I doubt many of these companies knew they were locking themselves into IE6. Who could predict what Microsoft would do when they came out with subsequent releases? Code gets written, it works under IE6, often with some bug that doesn't manifest itself under IE6 or uses an evolving browser function, and then IE7 (or 8, or Firefox) comes out and processes the code more literally or in a different way or maybe the way a browser function call operates changes, and things go Boom. Just like unexpected compatibility issues between Windows 2000 and Windows XP. This is a problem that extends well beyond web browsers. We've seen it happen when operating systems change, network servers change (Novel vs. Microsoft vs Lantastic, Invisible Lan, and all those other P2P networks that were out there), and even drive formats (Fat12 vs Fat16 or 32, or NTFS).
By the way, it seems the Global Warming alarmists looked out the window, saw the snow and declared it was proof of Global Warming! Not only is it foolish on the surface, it's exactly what you accuse the rational skeptics of!
What is it that the Global Warming alarmists talk about? Temperatures and Precipitation. Why? They are part of what defines a climate. To not talk about weather when discussing climate would be like trying to describe a rainbow without talking about color.
As NOAA defines it: The average of weather over at least a 30-year period ...
I didn't say that, but someone with a losing argument usually resorts to setting up a straw man to knock down.
My point has always been that weather prediction is still a statistical science. The accuracy of weather predictions become increasingly worse with time. We have no evidence the models being used are accurate 1000, 500, 100, or 10 years out. The "evidence" that isn't tainted is still not conclusive and at least some remaining evidence is starting to crumble under scrutiny (how much remains to be seen).
Couple all of this with the fact that our planet has undergone warmer and cooler periods, that Mars' polar regions are shrinking, and the case for man-made Global Warming looks very week.
Finally, Global Warming alarmists had been pointing to yearly or decade-by-decade changes as evidence of Global Warming. Glaciers disappearing in 35 years? Global Warming scientists claiming there will be a 10 or 20 year break as the planet cools - now that we're having bone-chilling Winters and moderate Summers? Who's "looking out the window" and making excuses and predictions now?
The truth is that we don't know. People are placing their faith in marginal data, much of it fabricated (or 'adjusted' to remove contradictory data), unproven "science", people who ignore and then attempt to cover up contradictory results, and similar short-sighted predictions based on fear.
I'm all for the Scientific Method. I'm ready for the Global Warming community to put it to better use.
And it's about as legitimate as giving him one for the internet would be. Checked the global weather and the action of the researchers lately?
Shoot, just nominate Al Gore for creating it! Do I have to think of everything? :).
I love how opposing government theft of private property becomes wanting old folks dying in the streets and a snipe against welfare recipients in the eyes of social liberals.
My point is I'd rather charity be voluntary and delivered somewhere closer to the person needing it.
Local communities are the best place, followed by the local government when desired, followed by the state when necessary, and the federal government when idiots like the governor of Louisiana and the Mayor of New Orleans are too incompetent to evacuate their communities and accept outside help when offered.
Nobody says other civilizations will move to quieter technology as quickly as us. On the other hand, we may be the morons of the universe and all of our galactic neighbors are thinking "Thank God those idiots finally found the volume control!". Besides, we might have a need for some lesser developed civilization to exploit and we'll need to know where to find them!
Alpha Cenrauri is about 4-1/2 light years away. Electromagnetic energy would get there in 4-1/2 years. As a result, they've long since lost interest in I Love Lucy (if anyone is there and listening). There are about 50 stars within 15 light years. We can't uncap that bottle, so we'll have a stream of broadcast television and radio signals continuing on the journey, lasting for decades. The fact we stop doesn't mean we're suddenly invisible. We've left some tracks in the sand on a calm beach. I'm pretty confident we don't have an invasion fleet coming at this point in the game, but if they are, I bet they think we taste like chicken.
It's been painful, but that's what I did. I warned of the dangers of not taking particular IT actions, watched them be ignored, and took the heat when there was pain as a result. The environment was unprofessional with the management appearing to have no ability to conceptualize the effects of a failure/loss or the sense to heed warnings of the risks of failing to follow IT recommendations.
I'm working harder and making less but am no longer in an environment where I have to wonder when I'm going to take the punches for a systems failure or loss of data as a result of my recommendations being ignored.
The only thing more dangerous than authority with no responsibility is being the one with responsibility and no authority.
If it doesn't bother you enough to quit then take the pay check and be happy :).
Republicans tax poor people by eliminating social services? Since when is NOT gifting charity to the recipients suddenly a tax? By what right should the government gift them anything while forcing others to pay for it? You really call the decision to discontinue charity as a tax? "... giving tax breaks to the people who don't need them ..." - Spoken like a true Marxist. Need as defined by who? What the heck does need have to do with it? Just because someone manages to acquire, without committing a crime, more than another person they should be forced to give it up? By what right should the government take from one person and give to another when no theft or other crime has been committed?
"Democrats tax rich people to pay for social services for poor people." - just plain wrong. Democrats tax anyone who makes anything and wastes most of it on operating the government, sending a small percentage of the budgeted money to the recipients. They just do it under the "from those who have more than they need to those who don't" argument. I'll ask again, how do you decide when someone has more than they "need"? Who's the determiner? Why should those people be punished for success by having the fruits of their efforts taken from them?
That's great! It does fit too. I'm wondering if market forces won't buy us a lot more time. As your link points out, demand is not fixed or necessarily going to increase.
If a network is "public" then it may as well be open. If you're going to make it available for public use, why bother with WEP or anything else? If you're going to give the key to guests who ask for it then it's like locking your front door and standing out at the sidewalk and giving out keys to strangers who walk by. Private wireless is a whole different ball of wax, but I'm very surprised anyone is concerned that a PUBLIC hotspot is unsecured.
No, you're not missing anything. I was thinking the same thing as I was reading the article. It was an interesting article though. Yeah, it's a lot easier to get 10 people together to do something than 100. Therefore, you'll have more activity with 10 participants than 100 participants. I read the article thinking they were going to be able to accurately predict probabilities by day - which would be really useful.
Sounds a little fishy to me. I doubt a firearm can be discharged without an investigation of the weapons discharge. I also doubt, if the laptop was considered a possible bomb, that they would shoot it and risk it blowing up. If the thing had potential terrorist information (or if they just wanted to mess with her) they could have (and would have) confiscated the laptop. It seems unlikely there would be a decision to disable the laptop without going for the hard drive - but, again, the could seize it and let a professional deal with it. On top of that, I find it doubtful they would give her the bullet riddled carcass of her laptop back! There are just too many unlikely events piled up. Not to mention the obvious slant of her blog: http://lilysussman.wordpress.com/. Those poor innocent Muslims are just misunderstood, but as for those evil Israeli soldiers her sentiment is “These guys shoot every day at unarmed people, even children. Why so much surprise about a simple laptop?”
I slipped up connecting CFCs to the Ice Age. It was the blame for the Ozone Hole, which we now know is a cyclic event having nothing to do with CFCs. I never mentioned "Nuclear Winter", and the doomsday via Ice Age predictions I remember from those days had nothing to do with Nuclear Winter. Of course we know there are too many variables to predict weather patterns because we have daily reminders that the weather forecasters are so often wrong. The problem with these other theories is we have no way of knowing if they are any more accurate than the short-term models because we have to wait to find out if they are right. Unfortunately, you demonstrated the circular logic of the Global Warming logic with the reference to CFCs. We really don't know if there's a direct cause and effect between banning CFCs and any claimed pattern changes because we don't know if the model works. We may have seen essentially the same results if we'd done nothing. It's like proving I don't see an angel on your shoulder. It doesn't mean there is one, just that you can't disprove it. My point was, and is, that the weather models didn't, and don't, match the facts reliably. While global level analysis would theoretically decrease the deviation in the model, it would still require that the model be remotely correct. We know that hurricane or other general weather patterns can't be predicted for the upcoming year or out 10 years either. Look how many years in a a row severe hurricane seasons were predicted after Katrina. Nothing against the prediction/modeling efforts (without them we'll never actually figure out how), but it is hardly perfected science and recent events have shown how politicized it has become.