One of the major advantages is that the mainframe has much more power per CPU. This avoids the problem Linux (and other PC based UNIX's) can have with scaling to large numbers of CPU's, say more than 8.
It is a real problem with CPU's now coming with 4 cores per chip, with more cores planned in the future.
What the link shows is that the Whitehouse is choosing arrogance over prudent law. It is clear the taps aren't covered by the current FISA law, so he does not need warrents. It is a pretty easy case to show, and it is why democrats have not tried to spitroast him over it. There is no violation there at all.
So why go after the whole law? Very silly, and an example of the hubris this administration could have done without. And it is why if someone starts an intellegent conservative alternative to the GOP, I am sooo there.
P.S. Thank you for a very civil discussion of what normally desolves into name calling. I hope the mods don't delete our accounts...
I think you are mistaken about what is going on here. The wiretaps do not fall under FISA court juristiction. They are non-citizens being tapped with calls to overseas non-citizens, or phonecalls orginating outside the USA. These are fair game for national security taps.
"Under the agency's longstanding rules, the N.S.A. can target for interception phone calls or e-mail messages on foreign soil, even if the recipients of those communications are in the United States. Usually, though, the government can only target phones and e-mail messages in this country by first obtaining a court order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which holds its closed sessions at the Justice Department.... Warrants are still required for eavesdropping on entirely domestic-to-domestic communications, those officials say, meaning that calls from that New Yorker to someone in California could not be monitored without first going to the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court. " Now, the New York Times claims that entirely domestic-to-domestic communications happened. However, as I pointed out before, several congresspeople, including Harry Reid, current Majority Leader got to look at the full records. They did not come out with a smoking gun. Now, maybe there was one, maybe there was not, niether of us know unless you have a clearnce for such things. BUT, I have no doubt Reid would have come out swinging. I think that is a fair representation of what they would do, not unlike yours about assuming the Administration would toot their own horn about using the wiretaps.
Now, here is where you and I probably differ. My guess is that if you and I were presented satifactory evidence of what really happened we would walk away with different views.
I would take the view that it is much like the Rodney King deal. The outrage is not that they beat King and they got off scott free. It is that the jury read the protocols of the LAPD and determined that they acted within those rules and therefore not legally responsible!
Outrage? Sure thing. But not illegal.
The same applies here, imo. You have a viceral reaction that the tappings were illegal, but you can not support that with facts, just as I cannot prove they did not do it.
Should it be changed? Maybe. But the law does not cover what they are doing. Change the law if you want, but you can't say he is liable for doing something illegal if it was not under the letter of the law.
If evidence showing that the did in fact wiretap ala Nixon and Hoover then I am all for getting the rope. But show me something concrete, like a tape or a transcript, any kind of record.
(P.S. there is one other loophole. if a US citizen is shown to be the agent of another country or power, they are fair game for wiretapping. But that requires a hearing and proof to set that status. Those do exist, how many I don't know.)
PPS. I will grant you that ALL of the terrorist plots were theoretically stoppable via normal police proceedures. However, America has a real problem following its own laws. Heck, the guy with Drug Resistant TB showed up as a "Detain" but the border guard let him go. Just like the 9/11 guys 15 of the 19 had false or expired travel visas. Simply enforcing those laws might have (not would have) stopped the plot cold.
The whitehouse did not leak the wiretapping, it was Democrats in congress who were briefed about it.
And besides, they are no dumb enough to think that lefties are going to give them any credit for protecting them, they won't even admit there is a problem with terrorists.
Because you don't tip off the enemy how you are cracking their intellegence. Should the USSR sent us a list of moles? Should Eisenhower told us how we were intercepting an underwater cable in Russia? Should Franklin told us we were winning the war in the Pacific because we had a copy of the Japanese codebook? Should Churchill told the English about cracking the Enigma machine?
No, because you don't reveil such advantages. In several of the cases above alternate methods of detection were listed to throw off suspicions. Britian knew EXACTLY when and where convoys to north africa were happening. Yet, according to Churchill, they risked reconn pilots to go out and "discover" them so the Germans would think it was just bad luck.
And this is no exception. Despite the NYT blowing the cover on it, and four top democrats checking it out, Reed and Fienstien included, there is nothing to stop or laws broken.
I bought a Trager. Runs on wood pellets made from furniture wood shavings/scraps with forced air to keep it buring.
It produces a heat from about 120 up to 500 degrees. No matter what you throw on there, it gets a nice red smoke ring on it. I routinely get asked "My god, what did you put on this steak? It tastes great!"
Just a little salt and pepper, the smoke does the rest.
Oh, and for an interesting taste on a steak, add a little dried mint to your herb shake. It gives it a very nice taste and people often say "Wow, that is good. But there is a flavor I can't quite figure out..."
Dust is a result of a poor quality grinder. I get no dust with my Simonelli grinder.
For home brewing my favorite is a french press or making an Americano. At work I use a drip with gold filter for ease of cleaning and a vacuum pot to keep it warm.
For beans I like Bean Central. Nitrogen packed beans at less than most places, free shipping on $50 orders.
The Malabar Gold is amazing for Espresso and the Ethiopian Yrgacheffe is devine for drip. Both for less than $10 a pound.
At work the guys gave me a mug that says "Jimmy" (a vendor mug they stuck a sticker on!) on it for my coffee brewing skills.
Symantics aside about the word"domestic", as they don't matter. What matters is legal definitions, and in this case one end in the US does not make it domestic spying.
Go read that. Even a US citizen can be tapped under the follow requirements:
(b) "Agent of a foreign power" means-- (1) any person other than a United States person, who-- (A) acts in the United States as an officer or employee of a foreign power, or as a member of a foreign power as defined in subsection (a)(4) of this section; (B) acts for or on behalf of a foreign power which engages in clandestine intelligence activities in the United States contrary to the interests of the United States, when the circumstances of such person's presence in the United States indicate that such person may engage in such activities in the United States, or when such person knowingly aids or abets any person in the conduct of such activities or knowingly conspires with any person to engage in such activities; or (C) engages in international terrorism or activities in preparation therefore; or This section immediate follows the first, without interruption. Notice the "or". So here is the "or"
(2) any person who-- (A) knowingly engages in clandestine intelligence gathering activities for or on behalf of a foreign power, which activities involve or may involve a violation of the criminal statutes of the United States; (B) pursuant to the direction of an intelligence service or network of a foreign power, knowingly engages in any other clandestine intelligence activities for or on behalf of such foreign power, which activities involve or are about to involve a violation of the criminal statutes of the United States; (C) knowingly engages in sabotage or international terrorism, or activities that are in preparation therefor, for or on behalf of a foreign power; (D) knowingly enters the United States under a false or fraudulent identity for or on behalf of a foreign power or, while in the United States, knowingly assumes a false or fraudulent identity for or on behalf of a foreign power; or (E) knowingly aids or abets any person in the conduct of activities described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) or knowingly conspires with any person to engage in activities described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C). It says any person. That means anybody. When they don't include citizens, they use the more restrictive definition in the first paragraph.
You still CANT tap it and use it in a court of law as evidence without a warrent, and that is the protection you get as a US citizen.
You can intercept international mail as well as internation calls without a wiretap. You can use them for National Security only and they are not admissable in a normal court of law. Only one end needs to be international for it to be intercepted legally, and even a citizen abroad can be tapped.
They called it Domestic Spying you work up lefties like yourself, not because its true.
If they tapped domestic calls with two citizens and/or perminate resident aliens, then I would be all for impeachments. But they did not, and if they had the Democratic Congress people who saw the full documentation and scope of the program would have been on it in a second.
Now, if you have some actual proof, I am all eyeballs.
Symantics is causing the Media to do backflips. See, nothing was wrong with the wiretaps, they met the letter of the law. (No, I won't explain why. Suffice it to say that if Pelosi or Ried could have come out of that full NSA breifing with a smoking gun, they would have. Instantant impeachment if the wiretaps had been domestic only. That was the gotcha, one end of the wiretap was outside the US, therefore that end of the wire tap was legal. Damn. I explained it anyway.)
So congress is going to pass a law making something currently legal, illegal. But they can't say that because it shows they were legal in the first place. Thus the Orwellian double speak about outlawing illegal wiretaps.
Wonder if they will pass a law that outlaw illegal immigrants.
If you cannot measure, you cannot improve... or at least you cannot prove you improved.
One thing to watch out for: System uptime and application uptime are different things! A good program on a squirrely system is no good, and a solid box with flakey software is just as bad. Network is also different altogether, if that is unstable nothing else is stable. Again, networking is a well understood problem and you should not have to worry about it if you have good people.
Making the OS stable is fairly well understood, so do that first and show how stable it is. Getting a house-written software stable is more difficult, but it can be done. One way to show how unstable a program is is to pair it with a well running program. Then when they say our program X failed because of a OS bug, you point to the uptime on the box and on app Y that is been up for a long time as well. Assuming logic has any sway at your company, they will be exposed as the problem child.
You are exactly right on MAD, it is an insane idea that somehow worked. Sting got it right in the song "Russians", it was only the realization that not fighting an atomic war is the only way to win it. Now, if they Jihadist's think that they can detonate in a US city and we will not respond by destroying all or part of the Middle East, they might just do it, MAD no longer works.
BTW, I am pretty sure they will sack Washington after we elect them into office.
Oh, and the massive Iraq causalities? Sorry, you have no idea if you think Iraq was a devisating war on civialians, we did not kill very many compared to any previous war even if you take the debunked Lancet numbers.
As for our own troops, I think you will find that the average death rate in the US is 800 or so per year per 100000 people. With 150000 troops that means 1200 deaths per year would be expected even if they stayed home. Far more were lost in the first day of Normandy!
(Caveat: There is a slight fallacy there, see if you can correctly identify it. I am just to lazy to go find the right statistic so I used the one for the entire US population)
They will sack Washington the same way they sacked Kabuul. They got elected.
Well, what you are really suggesting is that limited warfare does not work.
Now the question is, when can we afford to use troops in the following situtations:
1. Limited, humane "war". Oxymoron if their ever was one. Usually a failure, re: Vietnam. 2. Geneva Convention "war". Works pretty well. Won in WWII and Korea. 3. Total war. Pre-Convention war, no quarter given, civilization at risk. This is the long history of warfare and is true war.
We are fighting an enemy using level 3 warfare while we remain at level 1.
Level one is total stupidity. If that is all that was needed, you should have used other means like special forces hit and run. Don't send in long term troops unless you are ready to fight level 2.
So go to level 2, or get out and wait for them to sack Washington.
The scary thing for me is that as they get nukes, and they will one way or another, there is no way to do MAD style containment. They are not going to launch anything at us because they don't have the technology. So they sneak it in and detonate. Meanwhile, because we are so hung up on national boundries they don't really recognize, we don't know who to nuke.
And we lost our ablity to fight as a civilization, like Rome, and just nuke the barbarians, period.
I really don't see a way out until we shake out of our lethergy and understand that they want us all dead or converted to Islam. Anything else is al-Taqiyya.
Oh gee, if the Slippery Slope is open for rides, and limiting the use of the WAN is a bad idea and I have a right to use it anyway I want, why stop at that? Why can anybody filter what people can do with their property?
Oh I suppose now you will argue it is government property and you have some sort of right to it because your tax dollars paid for it.
If I can't stop you from using the school WAN for something inapproprate, why can I stop you from using school propery to warm yourself by setting it on fire? After all, your tax dollars paid for it.
Well, thats your grade for poor logic. It is the schools WAN, they can set the standard.
Care to argue it from the point that the WAN is owned by the school, and just as the school will restrict who you call with their phones (computers) they can restrict where you go?
or you can argue it from Wikipedia being a good/bad source.
My thoughts? Sure, but ban it as a source for term papers/essays.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the major advantages is that the mainframe has much more power per CPU. This avoids the problem Linux (and other PC based UNIX's) can have with scaling to large numbers of CPU's, say more than 8.
It is a real problem with CPU's now coming with 4 cores per chip, with more cores planned in the future.
All that still exists for VMS, and it runs on Itanium. There is some serious work being done on getting it to run on Opertion as well.
What they have failed to do is avertize properly so people know what it can do and what it cannot.
You thread Nazi!
There... now it is flogged too.
Gah. wrong button.
What the link shows is that the Whitehouse is choosing arrogance over prudent law. It is clear the taps aren't covered by the current FISA law, so he does not need warrents. It is a pretty easy case to show, and it is why democrats have not tried to spitroast him over it. There is no violation there at all.
So why go after the whole law? Very silly, and an example of the hubris this administration could have done without. And it is why if someone starts an intellegent conservative alternative to the GOP, I am sooo there.
P.S. Thank you for a very civil discussion of what normally desolves into name calling. I hope the mods don't delete our accounts...
Is that all? Here I thought you had a actual complaint.
Looks like the famous three step plan. You cannot prove item 2, although 1 and 3 are solid.
Absense of proof is not proof of absense.
I think you are mistaken about what is going on here. The wiretaps do not fall under FISA court juristiction. They are non-citizens being tapped with calls to overseas non-citizens, or phonecalls orginating outside the USA. These are fair game for national security taps.
p rogram.html?pagewanted=5&ei=5070&en=d86ae7e83e8477 91&ex=1181534400
...
The orginal article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/15/politics/15cnd-
says:
"Under the agency's longstanding rules, the N.S.A. can target for interception phone calls or e-mail messages on foreign soil, even if the recipients of those communications are in the United States. Usually, though, the government can only target phones and e-mail messages in this country by first obtaining a court order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which holds its closed sessions at the Justice Department.
Warrants are still required for eavesdropping on entirely domestic-to-domestic communications, those officials say, meaning that calls from that New Yorker to someone in California could not be monitored without first going to the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Court.
"
Now, the New York Times claims that entirely domestic-to-domestic communications happened. However, as I pointed out before, several congresspeople, including Harry Reid, current Majority Leader got to look at the full records. They did not come out with a smoking gun. Now, maybe there was one, maybe there was not, niether of us know unless you have a clearnce for such things. BUT, I have no doubt Reid would have come out swinging. I think that is a fair representation of what they would do, not unlike yours about assuming the Administration would toot their own horn about using the wiretaps.
Now, here is where you and I probably differ. My guess is that if you and I were presented satifactory evidence of what really happened we would walk away with different views.
I would take the view that it is much like the Rodney King deal. The outrage is not that they beat King and they got off scott free. It is that the jury read the protocols of the LAPD and determined that they acted within those rules and therefore not legally responsible!
Outrage? Sure thing. But not illegal.
The same applies here, imo. You have a viceral reaction that the tappings were illegal, but you can not support that with facts, just as I cannot prove they did not do it.
Should it be changed? Maybe. But the law does not cover what they are doing. Change the law if you want, but you can't say he is liable for doing something illegal if it was not under the letter of the law.
If evidence showing that the did in fact wiretap ala Nixon and Hoover then I am all for getting the rope. But show me something concrete, like a tape or a transcript, any kind of record.
(P.S. there is one other loophole. if a US citizen is shown to be the agent of another country or power, they are fair game for wiretapping. But that requires a hearing and proof to set that status. Those do exist, how many I don't know.)
PPS. I will grant you that ALL of the terrorist plots were theoretically stoppable via normal police proceedures. However, America has a real problem following its own laws. Heck, the guy with Drug Resistant TB showed up as a "Detain" but the border guard let him go. Just like the 9/11 guys 15 of the 19 had false or expired travel visas. Simply enforcing those laws might have (not would have) stopped the plot cold.
Utter nonsense.
The whitehouse did not leak the wiretapping, it was Democrats in congress who were briefed about it.
And besides, they are no dumb enough to think that lefties are going to give them any credit for protecting them, they won't even admit there is a problem with terrorists.
Because you don't tip off the enemy how you are cracking their intellegence.
Should the USSR sent us a list of moles?
Should Eisenhower told us how we were intercepting an underwater cable in Russia?
Should Franklin told us we were winning the war in the Pacific because we had a copy of the Japanese codebook?
Should Churchill told the English about cracking the Enigma machine?
No, because you don't reveil such advantages. In several of the cases above alternate methods of detection were listed to throw off suspicions. Britian knew EXACTLY when and where convoys to north africa were happening. Yet, according to Churchill, they risked reconn pilots to go out and "discover" them so the Germans would think it was just bad luck.
And this is no exception. Despite the NYT blowing the cover on it, and four top democrats checking it out, Reed and Fienstien included, there is nothing to stop or laws broken.
Because there is no "there" there.
Given there is no PvP, and few ways to grief... I suspect the kiddies will stay away. Monster play is far less greif inducing than PvP.
Second, they paid dearly for that LOTR license, they would be fools to violate it and lose it.
Lastly, the one known as Patience uses chairs to keep the dev's in line...
It would seem they are on the other half of the pipe where people might want to go.
Nah, until the US was involved it was just a "most of the world war".
I jest!
I bought a Trager. Runs on wood pellets made from furniture wood shavings/scraps with forced air to keep it buring.
It produces a heat from about 120 up to 500 degrees. No matter what you throw on there, it gets a nice red smoke ring on it. I routinely get asked "My god, what did you put on this steak? It tastes great!"
Just a little salt and pepper, the smoke does the rest.
Oh, and for an interesting taste on a steak, add a little dried mint to your herb shake. It gives it a very nice taste and people often say "Wow, that is good. But there is a flavor I can't quite figure out..."
Dust is a result of a poor quality grinder. I get no dust with my Simonelli grinder.
For home brewing my favorite is a french press or making an Americano. At work I use a drip with gold filter for ease of cleaning and a vacuum pot to keep it warm.
For beans I like Bean Central. Nitrogen packed beans at less than most places, free shipping on $50 orders.
The Malabar Gold is amazing for Espresso and the Ethiopian Yrgacheffe is devine for drip. Both for less than $10 a pound.
At work the guys gave me a mug that says "Jimmy" (a vendor mug they stuck a sticker on!) on it for my coffee brewing skills.
No plug in hyrids?
l _retr.html
Don't tell these folks:
http://www.calcars.org/priusplus.html
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/05/commercia
Not to mention the GM Volt.
It is not that hard, they just didn't think people wanted to plug them in!
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/
Go read that. Even a US citizen can be tapped under the follow requirements: (b) "Agent of a foreign power" means--
(1) any person other than a United States person, who--
(A) acts in the United States as an officer or employee of a foreign power, or as a member of a foreign power as defined in subsection (a)(4) of this section;
(B) acts for or on behalf of a foreign power which engages in clandestine intelligence activities in the United States contrary to the interests of the United States, when the circumstances of such person's presence in the United States indicate that such person may engage in such activities in the United States, or when such person knowingly aids or abets any person in the conduct of such activities or knowingly conspires with any person to engage in such activities; or
(C) engages in international terrorism or activities in preparation therefore; or This section immediate follows the first, without interruption. Notice the "or". So here is the "or" (2) any person who--
(A) knowingly engages in clandestine intelligence gathering activities for or on behalf of a foreign power, which activities involve or may involve a violation of the criminal statutes of the United States;
(B) pursuant to the direction of an intelligence service or network of a foreign power, knowingly engages in any other clandestine intelligence activities for or on behalf of such foreign power, which activities involve or are about to involve a violation of the criminal statutes of the United States;
(C) knowingly engages in sabotage or international terrorism, or activities that are in preparation therefor, for or on behalf of a foreign power;
(D) knowingly enters the United States under a false or fraudulent identity for or on behalf of a foreign power or, while in the United States, knowingly assumes a false or fraudulent identity for or on behalf of a foreign power; or
(E) knowingly aids or abets any person in the conduct of activities described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) or knowingly conspires with any person to engage in activities described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C). It says any person. That means anybody. When they don't include citizens, they use the more restrictive definition in the first paragraph.
You still CANT tap it and use it in a court of law as evidence without a warrent, and that is the protection you get as a US citizen.
I did explain it, but very quickly.
You can intercept international mail as well as internation calls without a wiretap. You can use them for National Security only and they are not admissable in a normal court of law. Only one end needs to be international for it to be intercepted legally, and even a citizen abroad can be tapped.
They called it Domestic Spying you work up lefties like yourself, not because its true.
If they tapped domestic calls with two citizens and/or perminate resident aliens, then I would be all for impeachments. But they did not, and if they had the Democratic Congress people who saw the full documentation and scope of the program would have been on it in a second.
Now, if you have some actual proof, I am all eyeballs.
Symantics is causing the Media to do backflips. See, nothing was wrong with the wiretaps, they met the letter of the law. (No, I won't explain why. Suffice it to say that if Pelosi or Ried could have come out of that full NSA breifing with a smoking gun, they would have. Instantant impeachment if the wiretaps had been domestic only. That was the gotcha, one end of the wiretap was outside the US, therefore that end of the wire tap was legal. Damn. I explained it anyway.)
So congress is going to pass a law making something currently legal, illegal. But they can't say that because it shows they were legal in the first place. Thus the Orwellian double speak about outlawing illegal wiretaps.
Wonder if they will pass a law that outlaw illegal immigrants.
Psst.
Sun's complier suite is free. Has been for a few years. Just go download it... or use gcc, your pick.
So anyone with a billion dollars has no right to protect his assets?
Tax the Rich to feed the poor...
'til there are no more rich no more.
If you cannot measure, you cannot improve... or at least you cannot prove you improved.
One thing to watch out for: System uptime and application uptime are different things! A good program on a squirrely system is no good, and a solid box with flakey software is just as bad. Network is also different altogether, if that is unstable nothing else is stable. Again, networking is a well understood problem and you should not have to worry about it if you have good people.
Making the OS stable is fairly well understood, so do that first and show how stable it is.
Getting a house-written software stable is more difficult, but it can be done. One way to show how unstable a program is is to pair it with a well running program. Then when they say our program X failed because of a OS bug, you point to the uptime on the box and on app Y that is been up for a long time as well. Assuming logic has any sway at your company, they will be exposed as the problem child.
You are exactly right on MAD, it is an insane idea that somehow worked. Sting got it right in the song "Russians", it was only the realization that not fighting an atomic war is the only way to win it. Now, if they Jihadist's think that they can detonate in a US city and we will not respond by destroying all or part of the Middle East, they might just do it, MAD no longer works.
BTW, I am pretty sure they will sack Washington after we elect them into office.
Oh, and the massive Iraq causalities? Sorry, you have no idea if you think Iraq was a devisating war on civialians, we did not kill very many compared to any previous war even if you take the debunked Lancet numbers.
As for our own troops, I think you will find that the average death rate in the US is 800 or so per year per 100000 people. With 150000 troops that means 1200 deaths per year would be expected even if they stayed home. Far more were lost in the first day of Normandy!
(Caveat: There is a slight fallacy there, see if you can correctly identify it. I am just to lazy to go find the right statistic so I used the one for the entire US population)
They will sack Washington the same way they sacked Kabuul. They got elected.
Well, what you are really suggesting is that limited warfare does not work.
Now the question is, when can we afford to use troops in the following situtations:
1. Limited, humane "war". Oxymoron if their ever was one. Usually a failure, re: Vietnam.
2. Geneva Convention "war". Works pretty well. Won in WWII and Korea.
3. Total war. Pre-Convention war, no quarter given, civilization at risk. This is the long history of warfare and is true war.
We are fighting an enemy using level 3 warfare while we remain at level 1.
Level one is total stupidity. If that is all that was needed, you should have used other means like special forces hit and run. Don't send in long term troops unless you are ready to fight level 2.
So go to level 2, or get out and wait for them to sack Washington.
The scary thing for me is that as they get nukes, and they will one way or another, there is no way to do MAD style containment. They are not going to launch anything at us because they don't have the technology. So they sneak it in and detonate. Meanwhile, because we are so hung up on national boundries they don't really recognize, we don't know who to nuke.
And we lost our ablity to fight as a civilization, like Rome, and just nuke the barbarians, period.
I really don't see a way out until we shake out of our lethergy and understand that they want us all dead or converted to Islam. Anything else is al-Taqiyya.
Oh gee, if the Slippery Slope is open for rides, and limiting the use of the WAN is a bad idea and I have a right to use it anyway I want, why stop at that? Why can anybody filter what people can do with their property?
Oh I suppose now you will argue it is government property and you have some sort of right to it because your tax dollars paid for it.
If I can't stop you from using the school WAN for something inapproprate, why can I stop you from using school propery to warm yourself by setting it on fire? After all, your tax dollars paid for it.
Logic grade dropped to a F.
Try again for Mental Junk Bond status?
Bastards!
Well, thats your grade for poor logic. It is the schools WAN, they can set the standard.
Care to argue it from the point that the WAN is owned by the school, and just as the school will restrict who you call with their phones (computers) they can restrict where you go?
or you can argue it from Wikipedia being a good/bad source.
My thoughts? Sure, but ban it as a source for term papers/essays.