I definitely agree that we need a national discussion on this. Unfortunately, the idea of Public Domain seems to be dead in many people's minds. They just don't see why someone's "property" (a book they wrote) should be "taken away from them by the government" after X years. They just don't understand the importance of the Public Domain. So I think we need discussion, but also education as to why a strong Public Domain is good for everyone. (Also, education on why copyright terms are limited and the government isn't "taking away" a person's work by having that work move to the Public Domain.)
As for the specifics, I'm more in favor of a simpler method of copyright: Going back to a 14-20 year copyright term plus a one-time, optional 14-20 year extension. The initial term would be automatic. So if I post something on my blog, it is copyrighted. However, in 14-20 years (assuming I don't renew the copyright), you can take that blog post and publish it in a book titled "500 Different Blog Posts In The Public Domain."
Also, when it comes to existing works, Congress was more than happy to extend the copyright on existing works when they lengthened copyright (even going so far as removing stuff from the Public Domain). Therefore, I think that the new terms should apply to existing works also. I am willing to compromise a bit, though. First of all, all existing works over 5 years old could be assumed to be renewed. Second of all, the movement to the Public Domain would be phased in over time starting with the older works. So in Year 2 (assuming a 1 year grace period), works from 1922 - 1931 would enter Public Domain. In Year 3, works from 1932 - 1941 would go into Public Domain, etc. This way, companies would have time to adapt to the new system.
In addition, they would be encouraged to wring what money they could from their old works. You can bet studios would be raiding their vaults and releasing DVDs of many of their old films and TV Shows. Record labels would be releasing "Best Of" CDs from artists who hadn't been published in decades. It could actually turn out to be quite a boon for the RIAA/MPAA. Sure, they would fight tooth and nail like they did against the VCR, but in the end they would find a way to make money from it.
Now add "must be 100% untraceably anonymous" as a fundamental requirement.
Easy. The machine asks you who you voted for. You make your selections and it then prints out a receipt. A giant warning appears on the screen. YOUR VOTE HAS NOT BEEN COUNTED YET. PUT YOUR RECEIPT IN THE SLOT TO ENTER YOUR VOTE. There is a slot marked "PUT RECEIPT IN HERE TO CONFIRM VOTE." You look at the receipt and make sure it lists the candidates you voted for. If it doesn't, you contact an election official. If it does, you put it in the slot and the machine enters the vote electronically. The paper receipts themselves are saved for possible recounts.
Now, let's suppose that it is the day after election day and the vote count is challenged. You can take a percentage of the paper receipts and count them. If they are off by a certain amount from the machine count, you can do a full paper recount. Nowhere does the paper receipt trace back to you.
Yes, it introduces some complexity to the process, but I'm sure it can be done and would guard against hacking of the voting machines.
I first read the title as "Stellar Scientologists Record "Music" From Stars" then read it correctly, but wondered if it had to do with the RIAA. I think this is a sign that my brain needs more sleep.;-)
I don't think that the Fermi Paradox is valid. The Wikipedia link basically raises two questions:
1. If advanced extraterrestrial civilizations exist, why haven't they made contact?
2. If advanced extraterrestrial civilizations exist, why haven't we detected their radio transmissions?
The first one is easily addressed. If rapid space travel isn't possible at all, then that would answer Question #1 right away. However, assuming that rapid space travel is possible, who's to say that any alien would *want* to visit us? Imagine a Native American living in North America the year 1300 saying that there couldn't be any white skinned people across the ocean because they had never seen any white skinned people visiting before. There's a huge logical flaw there. Just because something hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it is impossible. It just means that it hasn't happened yet. Depending on the event in question, it might reduce the likelihood, but it doesn't eliminate it. Alien civilizations that can rapidly travel space might exist, but might not want to contact us openly for various reasons. (Xenophobia, viewing Earth as a technological backwater, a "Prime Directive" type of rule, etc.)
The second one is even easier to address. We have only been listening for radio communications for a short period of time (less than 50 years) and have only scanned a small fraction of the sky. In addition, advanced civilizations might only use radio for a short period of time. If a solar system is to be colonized even partially, a more advanced form of communication would need to be developed. Even if radio were relied on, the beams could be focused more, thus spilling less signal into space for us to detect.
In short, Fermi's Paradox doesn't disprove intelligent alien life any more than Drake's equation proves it.
What about those born pre-TV? In the radio era, did they dream in audio only? Did those who were born pre-radio have their all of their dreams take place on a stage?
Since my house looks like a tornado just struck. My wife and I used to clean up our kids' toys, but they would just scatter them around again so we stopped. (One is 5 so he could learn to clean up, but the other is only 17 months and won't know what "clean up" is for awhile.)
Then there's the dining room table that seems to be a magnet for miscellaneous junk. Old mail, my son's drawings, magazines, etc, all wind up there. Eventually, we clean it up, but it doesn't last.
The kitchen is no better. I try to stay on top of it but we don't have enough cabinet space. The cabinets wind up overflowing onto the counters and canvas bags (to avoid the paper/plastic decision) litter the ground.
We would love to clean up but working and taking care of two little ones leaves us tired at the end of the day. Once both boys are asleep, we have about 2 hours at most before we turn in. It is hard to do all of the cleaning (as well as all other household chores) during that time.
She said: "Our ability to intercept communications and obtain communications data is vital to fighting terrorism and combating serious crime, including child sex abuse, murder and drugs trafficking.
Terrorism? Check.
Protecting Children/Child Pornography? Check.
Looks like it's got everything that would be needed to pass it were it introduced here in the US. Plus, it has Murder and Drugs as bonuses. (And before someone misreads my post, yes I know this is happening in the UK.)
Nor are we going to give local authorities the power to trawl through such a database in the interest of investigating lower level criminality under the spurious cover of counter terrorist legislation.
Of course not. You can trust the highly trustworthy, never corrupt Federal government to keep the corrupt local government's fingers out of that database and to never misuse that database itself. Suuuuure.
Al Gore ran on a campaign of even further deficit reduction, basically saying: let's finish the job, take those SS taxes you're paying, and put them in a special fund ("lockbox") where the government can't spend them. Republicans scoffed, and promised an even bigger round of income tax cuts (focused at the very wealthy) which we could now afford because we had a surplus.
And, perhaps in a prelude to his changing reasons for invading Iraq, Bush changed the reasons for his tax cuts. When he was running for office, he lauded the tax cuts as: 1) a way to keep the economy booming and 2) a way to return the surpluses back to the people. After he took office, a recession hit. Bush moved forward with the tax cuts, though, claiming that the reason for the tax cuts was now (and perhaps "always had been") to fix the recession. In other words, he wanted to take a course of action and was going to do it no matter what. The justification for the actions were decided on after the action was taken. (Call me crazy, but I'd prefer to have the justification come *before* the action.)
I have thought over it many times and, regarding myself, I have concluded: I would prefer to live freely and unobserved and someday die in a terrorist attack, than live in a "security" hell for all my life with cameras and RFIDs up my ass.
Something just occurred to me. Israel is a much bigger terrorism target than the UK. To my knowledge, they haven't implemented a huge Big Brother surveillance system. So if a country continually threatened by suicide bombers and other terrorists hasn't delved heavily into 1984-tactics, why are the UK (and, to a lesser extent, the US)? The answer is that the real reason isn't terrorism. Of course, everyone here knows that.
So basically, CSS Dock is now illegal despite the fact that it is just JavaScript (written using jQuery) and CSS? Great. Now when I'm doing web development, I need to make sure I'm not stepping on the patents of people in completely different arenas.
We should reduce copyright terms instead as long copyright terms have resulted in 7 trillion jobs lost, fifty million babies being carried off by wolves, and terrorists dancing in the streets*. If you love America, hate terrorists, and care about poor, defenseless children, you *must* support shorter copyright terms!
* All statistics have been obtained from the Institute of Extraction of Random Numbers from Collective Posteriors. Coincidentally, this is the same place that the Commerce Department got their figures.
Every so often there's a story about a quick-recharge battery being developed. I think the last one I heard of was able to be recharged in 5 minutes. If they could take that technology and make it work in an electric car sized battery, then I could definitely see gas stations being replaced by charging stations. Of course, the charging stations would need to charge you more than the base electric rate to make money which would mean that you could save money by charging at home. A charging station might still be a good idea, though (assuming sub-5 minutes rechargeable batteries) in the event that you forgot to charge your car last night and you find yourself on the road with a low battery. You would still be paying a premium price, but it would be better than getting stuck on the side of the road.
I'm not that worried about what my kids (5 years and 16 months) watch because my wife and I supervise them. The oldest knows that he is not to touch the TV (or the remote) without our permission. When he does turn on the TV, he's interested only in watching Noggin, Playhouse Disney (both kids' networks) or sometimes channel 11 (which broadcasts kids shows in the morning here). Actually, it's the younger one I'm worried about. He grabs the remote, presses buttons, and invariably lands on Penthouse, Howard Stern, etc. Sure, he can't see anything due to it being Pay-Per-View, but how long until he figures out how to press the "Order Now" buttons before Mommy or Daddy can take the remote from him?;-)
I don't browse at -1 very often, but I happened to catch this post. I hope this isn't indicative of most Slashdot Trolls nowadays. Slashdot has a long, proud history of trolling and it brings a tear to my eye to think that they may have degenerated into this drivel. Come on Trolls, you can do better!
Well, horse racing and the lottery are fine. It's those other forms of gambling that are dangerous. Why? Well, John Stewart explained it best and this is from memory, but...
Horse racing is ok, because those horses can just run through the tubes. Poker chips, however tend to get clogged in the tubes, preventing your other Internets from getting through. When that happens, you want to send a nice big lottery ball rolling through the tube to break up the clog and get things moving again.
So today we have stories in which the DOJ opposes becoming the Federal Copyright Cops, the RIAA loses a couple hundred thousand dollar lawsuit, and Jack Thompson gets disbarred. To quote Perfect Strangers: Now we are so happy, we do the Dance of Joy!
Anyone who sees science as some immutable dogma, or as some choice between this dogma and that one, isn't doing science in the first place. That's religion.
The "science as dogma" argument is often used by creationists trying to refute evolution (and other religious-based arguments trying to "unseat" science). Having spent time with very religious people, I know first hand that they take great comfort in "knowing" that their holy books (whichever ones they may be) contain all knowledge. They are used to having a certainty that there are no real unknowns in the world. Sure, we humans might not know it all, but the holy books prove that God, Jesus, Flying Spaghetti Monster, whoever, *does* know it all and by praying/studying real hard you can get a glimpse at that knowledge.
When these religious folks look at science, they just can't conceive that scientists would be OK with not knowing everything. They assume that scientists must look to "science" as their holy book and thus they must pray to/study science in an effort to gain greater knowledge the same way that the religious folks pray to God. Of course, all religious folks also tend to believe that all Gods who aren't their own are false gods. This means (to them) that science is a false god to be banished.
Getting back to the subject of cognitive dissonance, they are presented with two conflicting world views:
1 - This holy book which you have been studying for years holds all knowledge. Pray to The Great Whoever to attain this knowledge. 2 - Science can learn many things about the world without prayer and while being OK with the idea that their theories can change at any moment (e.g. with new evidence).
Their brains can't accept both as true and they've invested a lot of their lives in #1, so #1 becomes "TRUTH" and #2 gets warped into Science Is A Threat To My God.
When my wife was teaching, she would often drop the lowest grade when computing a student's final grade. This would let a student have an off day (or a bad start) and still recover. That's a much better policy than mandating that all scores below 50% get scored as 50%.
Of course, it would be best if it was left teacher-to-teacher and not enforced school policy. However, if you *have* to enforce a policy, Drop The Lowest Grade is much better than Lowest You Can Get Is A Fifty.
Re:Good news cause PDF's should be shunned
on
PDF Exploits On the Rise
·
· Score: 5, Informative
For Windows the best (and free/open source) tool I've found is PDFCreator. It installs a "printer" on your computer that outputs to PDF. Using PDFCreator, you can make a PDF in any application that allows you to print. Using some of the "advanced" features (not really advanced, but slightly more complex than Print->PDF), you can even combine multiple print-outs from different applications into a single PDF.
I would support the Line Item Veto to keep those unneeded riders from being attached to bills. But you're right, the Executive Branch is already too powerful. So we should approach that problem from the other end. All items on a bill would be required to be related to the overall bill. No sticking $10 million for the study of moose droppings into a bill designed to help fight crime. No adding $3 million for a park statue into a bill related to health care. Either those spending items stand on their own or they fail, but they shouldn't leech onto otherwise important legislation in order to get passed.
I'd like to see how long the Entertainment Industry would support a "we must follow everyone else's laws also" bill once they realized that all of their pop stars and actresses would have to wear burkas. I guess my wife would have to be stoned to death since she has the audacity to go out to the store with her face uncovered and without being accompanied by a male relative. We're Jewish also so I'm sure that'll drive Sharia law into spastic fits.
Even if we were to (in a moment of insanity) think about doing this, how would we resolve conflicts like women being able to vote in the USA and being barred from voting in Saudi Arabia? As with all the sane minds here, I think that you should be held accountable for breaking laws only if you are in the country whose law you have broken.
Slashdot Mirror
I definitely agree that we need a national discussion on this. Unfortunately, the idea of Public Domain seems to be dead in many people's minds. They just don't see why someone's "property" (a book they wrote) should be "taken away from them by the government" after X years. They just don't understand the importance of the Public Domain. So I think we need discussion, but also education as to why a strong Public Domain is good for everyone. (Also, education on why copyright terms are limited and the government isn't "taking away" a person's work by having that work move to the Public Domain.)
As for the specifics, I'm more in favor of a simpler method of copyright: Going back to a 14-20 year copyright term plus a one-time, optional 14-20 year extension. The initial term would be automatic. So if I post something on my blog, it is copyrighted. However, in 14-20 years (assuming I don't renew the copyright), you can take that blog post and publish it in a book titled "500 Different Blog Posts In The Public Domain."
Also, when it comes to existing works, Congress was more than happy to extend the copyright on existing works when they lengthened copyright (even going so far as removing stuff from the Public Domain). Therefore, I think that the new terms should apply to existing works also. I am willing to compromise a bit, though. First of all, all existing works over 5 years old could be assumed to be renewed. Second of all, the movement to the Public Domain would be phased in over time starting with the older works. So in Year 2 (assuming a 1 year grace period), works from 1922 - 1931 would enter Public Domain. In Year 3, works from 1932 - 1941 would go into Public Domain, etc. This way, companies would have time to adapt to the new system.
In addition, they would be encouraged to wring what money they could from their old works. You can bet studios would be raiding their vaults and releasing DVDs of many of their old films and TV Shows. Record labels would be releasing "Best Of" CDs from artists who hadn't been published in decades. It could actually turn out to be quite a boon for the RIAA/MPAA. Sure, they would fight tooth and nail like they did against the VCR, but in the end they would find a way to make money from it.
Easy. The machine asks you who you voted for. You make your selections and it then prints out a receipt. A giant warning appears on the screen. YOUR VOTE HAS NOT BEEN COUNTED YET. PUT YOUR RECEIPT IN THE SLOT TO ENTER YOUR VOTE. There is a slot marked "PUT RECEIPT IN HERE TO CONFIRM VOTE." You look at the receipt and make sure it lists the candidates you voted for. If it doesn't, you contact an election official. If it does, you put it in the slot and the machine enters the vote electronically. The paper receipts themselves are saved for possible recounts.
Now, let's suppose that it is the day after election day and the vote count is challenged. You can take a percentage of the paper receipts and count them. If they are off by a certain amount from the machine count, you can do a full paper recount. Nowhere does the paper receipt trace back to you.
Yes, it introduces some complexity to the process, but I'm sure it can be done and would guard against hacking of the voting machines.
I first read the title as "Stellar Scientologists Record "Music" From Stars" then read it correctly, but wondered if it had to do with the RIAA. I think this is a sign that my brain needs more sleep. ;-)
I don't think that the Fermi Paradox is valid. The Wikipedia link basically raises two questions:
1. If advanced extraterrestrial civilizations exist, why haven't they made contact?
2. If advanced extraterrestrial civilizations exist, why haven't we detected their radio transmissions?
The first one is easily addressed. If rapid space travel isn't possible at all, then that would answer Question #1 right away. However, assuming that rapid space travel is possible, who's to say that any alien would *want* to visit us? Imagine a Native American living in North America the year 1300 saying that there couldn't be any white skinned people across the ocean because they had never seen any white skinned people visiting before. There's a huge logical flaw there. Just because something hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it is impossible. It just means that it hasn't happened yet. Depending on the event in question, it might reduce the likelihood, but it doesn't eliminate it. Alien civilizations that can rapidly travel space might exist, but might not want to contact us openly for various reasons. (Xenophobia, viewing Earth as a technological backwater, a "Prime Directive" type of rule, etc.)
The second one is even easier to address. We have only been listening for radio communications for a short period of time (less than 50 years) and have only scanned a small fraction of the sky. In addition, advanced civilizations might only use radio for a short period of time. If a solar system is to be colonized even partially, a more advanced form of communication would need to be developed. Even if radio were relied on, the beams could be focused more, thus spilling less signal into space for us to detect.
In short, Fermi's Paradox doesn't disprove intelligent alien life any more than Drake's equation proves it.
What about those born pre-TV? In the radio era, did they dream in audio only? Did those who were born pre-radio have their all of their dreams take place on a stage?
Since my house looks like a tornado just struck. My wife and I used to clean up our kids' toys, but they would just scatter them around again so we stopped. (One is 5 so he could learn to clean up, but the other is only 17 months and won't know what "clean up" is for awhile.)
Then there's the dining room table that seems to be a magnet for miscellaneous junk. Old mail, my son's drawings, magazines, etc, all wind up there. Eventually, we clean it up, but it doesn't last.
The kitchen is no better. I try to stay on top of it but we don't have enough cabinet space. The cabinets wind up overflowing onto the counters and canvas bags (to avoid the paper/plastic decision) litter the ground.
We would love to clean up but working and taking care of two little ones leaves us tired at the end of the day. Once both boys are asleep, we have about 2 hours at most before we turn in. It is hard to do all of the cleaning (as well as all other household chores) during that time.
Terrorism? Check.
Protecting Children/Child Pornography? Check.
Looks like it's got everything that would be needed to pass it were it introduced here in the US. Plus, it has Murder and Drugs as bonuses. (And before someone misreads my post, yes I know this is happening in the UK.)
Of course not. You can trust the highly trustworthy, never corrupt Federal government to keep the corrupt local government's fingers out of that database and to never misuse that database itself. Suuuuure.
And, perhaps in a prelude to his changing reasons for invading Iraq, Bush changed the reasons for his tax cuts. When he was running for office, he lauded the tax cuts as: 1) a way to keep the economy booming and 2) a way to return the surpluses back to the people. After he took office, a recession hit. Bush moved forward with the tax cuts, though, claiming that the reason for the tax cuts was now (and perhaps "always had been") to fix the recession. In other words, he wanted to take a course of action and was going to do it no matter what. The justification for the actions were decided on after the action was taken. (Call me crazy, but I'd prefer to have the justification come *before* the action.)
Something just occurred to me. Israel is a much bigger terrorism target than the UK. To my knowledge, they haven't implemented a huge Big Brother surveillance system. So if a country continually threatened by suicide bombers and other terrorists hasn't delved heavily into 1984-tactics, why are the UK (and, to a lesser extent, the US)? The answer is that the real reason isn't terrorism. Of course, everyone here knows that.
So basically, CSS Dock is now illegal despite the fact that it is just JavaScript (written using jQuery) and CSS? Great. Now when I'm doing web development, I need to make sure I'm not stepping on the patents of people in completely different arenas.
We should reduce copyright terms instead as long copyright terms have resulted in 7 trillion jobs lost, fifty million babies being carried off by wolves, and terrorists dancing in the streets*. If you love America, hate terrorists, and care about poor, defenseless children, you *must* support shorter copyright terms!
* All statistics have been obtained from the Institute of Extraction of Random Numbers from Collective Posteriors. Coincidentally, this is the same place that the Commerce Department got their figures.
Ah, but did you hear that Microsoft was adding jQuery to Visual Studio? Maybe I should submit it as a Slashdot story.
(Seriously, I wonder what the record is for the most times the same story has made it onto Slashdot? Two? Three? A dozen?)
Every so often there's a story about a quick-recharge battery being developed. I think the last one I heard of was able to be recharged in 5 minutes. If they could take that technology and make it work in an electric car sized battery, then I could definitely see gas stations being replaced by charging stations. Of course, the charging stations would need to charge you more than the base electric rate to make money which would mean that you could save money by charging at home. A charging station might still be a good idea, though (assuming sub-5 minutes rechargeable batteries) in the event that you forgot to charge your car last night and you find yourself on the road with a low battery. You would still be paying a premium price, but it would be better than getting stuck on the side of the road.
I'm not that worried about what my kids (5 years and 16 months) watch because my wife and I supervise them. The oldest knows that he is not to touch the TV (or the remote) without our permission. When he does turn on the TV, he's interested only in watching Noggin, Playhouse Disney (both kids' networks) or sometimes channel 11 (which broadcasts kids shows in the morning here). Actually, it's the younger one I'm worried about. He grabs the remote, presses buttons, and invariably lands on Penthouse, Howard Stern, etc. Sure, he can't see anything due to it being Pay-Per-View, but how long until he figures out how to press the "Order Now" buttons before Mommy or Daddy can take the remote from him? ;-)
I don't browse at -1 very often, but I happened to catch this post. I hope this isn't indicative of most Slashdot Trolls nowadays. Slashdot has a long, proud history of trolling and it brings a tear to my eye to think that they may have degenerated into this drivel. Come on Trolls, you can do better!
Well, horse racing and the lottery are fine. It's those other forms of gambling that are dangerous. Why? Well, John Stewart explained it best and this is from memory, but...
Horse racing is ok, because those horses can just run through the tubes. Poker chips, however tend to get clogged in the tubes, preventing your other Internets from getting through. When that happens, you want to send a nice big lottery ball rolling through the tube to break up the clog and get things moving again.
So today we have stories in which the DOJ opposes becoming the Federal Copyright Cops, the RIAA loses a couple hundred thousand dollar lawsuit, and Jack Thompson gets disbarred. To quote Perfect Strangers: Now we are so happy, we do the Dance of Joy!
Great, just what we need, Web 2.0 applications that get big, green and wear purple pants when they get angry. "GMail smash!!!"
The "science as dogma" argument is often used by creationists trying to refute evolution (and other religious-based arguments trying to "unseat" science). Having spent time with very religious people, I know first hand that they take great comfort in "knowing" that their holy books (whichever ones they may be) contain all knowledge. They are used to having a certainty that there are no real unknowns in the world. Sure, we humans might not know it all, but the holy books prove that God, Jesus, Flying Spaghetti Monster, whoever, *does* know it all and by praying/studying real hard you can get a glimpse at that knowledge.
When these religious folks look at science, they just can't conceive that scientists would be OK with not knowing everything. They assume that scientists must look to "science" as their holy book and thus they must pray to/study science in an effort to gain greater knowledge the same way that the religious folks pray to God. Of course, all religious folks also tend to believe that all Gods who aren't their own are false gods. This means (to them) that science is a false god to be banished.
Getting back to the subject of cognitive dissonance, they are presented with two conflicting world views:
1 - This holy book which you have been studying for years holds all knowledge. Pray to The Great Whoever to attain this knowledge.
2 - Science can learn many things about the world without prayer and while being OK with the idea that their theories can change at any moment (e.g. with new evidence).
Their brains can't accept both as true and they've invested a lot of their lives in #1, so #1 becomes "TRUTH" and #2 gets warped into Science Is A Threat To My God.
I agree with the Bush Administration on something? Quick! Everyone duck! There are aviating porcine about!
When my wife was teaching, she would often drop the lowest grade when computing a student's final grade. This would let a student have an off day (or a bad start) and still recover. That's a much better policy than mandating that all scores below 50% get scored as 50%.
Of course, it would be best if it was left teacher-to-teacher and not enforced school policy. However, if you *have* to enforce a policy, Drop The Lowest Grade is much better than Lowest You Can Get Is A Fifty.
For Windows the best (and free/open source) tool I've found is PDFCreator. It installs a "printer" on your computer that outputs to PDF. Using PDFCreator, you can make a PDF in any application that allows you to print. Using some of the "advanced" features (not really advanced, but slightly more complex than Print->PDF), you can even combine multiple print-outs from different applications into a single PDF.
I would support the Line Item Veto to keep those unneeded riders from being attached to bills. But you're right, the Executive Branch is already too powerful. So we should approach that problem from the other end. All items on a bill would be required to be related to the overall bill. No sticking $10 million for the study of moose droppings into a bill designed to help fight crime. No adding $3 million for a park statue into a bill related to health care. Either those spending items stand on their own or they fail, but they shouldn't leech onto otherwise important legislation in order to get passed.
I completely agree and would add:
I'd like to see how long the Entertainment Industry would support a "we must follow everyone else's laws also" bill once they realized that all of their pop stars and actresses would have to wear burkas. I guess my wife would have to be stoned to death since she has the audacity to go out to the store with her face uncovered and without being accompanied by a male relative. We're Jewish also so I'm sure that'll drive Sharia law into spastic fits.
Even if we were to (in a moment of insanity) think about doing this, how would we resolve conflicts like women being able to vote in the USA and being barred from voting in Saudi Arabia? As with all the sane minds here, I think that you should be held accountable for breaking laws only if you are in the country whose law you have broken.
There we go! To help fight terrorism, we need to encourage Internet Piracy. Just tie in "for the children" somehow and you'll have a winning strategy.