Modifications to the Linux kernel are primarily in three places:
The cli routine to disable interrupts is modified to simply clear a global variable controlling soft interrupt enable.
The sti routine to enable interrupts is modified to generate emulated interrupts for any pending soft interrupts.
The low-level "wrapper" routines that save and restore state around calls to handlers have been changed to use soft return from interrupt code instead of using the machine instruction.
It's clear here that he is modifying Linux; therefore, these changes under the GPL should be returned to the community. Since the purpose of modifying Linux is to give access to other code, it follows that this other code is also under the GPL. Therefore it cannot be patented.
if you are suspected of committing a crime, it is perfectly within bounds for prosecuting parties to acquire warrants to search articles that might be involved in the crime.
NO, you are wrong. It is legal for the PROSECUTOR to request a warrant, based on affidavits made by DULY CONSTITUTED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS, after a determination has been made that a crime has been committed and it has been ascertained that there are "certain items and articles" in the possession of the accused that might decide the situation one way or the other. It does NOT appear, *based on the article*, that this was done; instead, Northwest counsel appealed directly to the judge and he inexplicably granted this BY FIAT. They appear to have skipped a Constitutionally required step -- that's why it's so wrong. Northwest is NOT the state; therefore, it has no standing to act AS the state, which is what is apparently happening here.
"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Facism." -- Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Northwest asked the court for permission to check the computers for evidence of an illegal activity. Wake up, folks, it's no different than any other search & seizure.
Let's see: is Northwest a publicly elected prosecutor? NO?? Well, then, it's NOT legal. I don't believe that anyone OTHER than a legally constituted authority conducting an ongoing criminal investigation has any right under the law to even request a warrant. As far as I can tell, Northwest is abusing the law, and should be charged with -- at least -- breaking and entering, since they have NO right to interfere with the papers and possessions of private individuals.
Just because they were able to sidestep around the normal prosecutorial process and trick a judge doesn't make it right. If they can't play by the rules which the rest of us abide by, then someone needs to bring them up short. BTW, where *is* the public prosecutor in this jurisdiction and what is *he* doing about this? He ought to be investigating the company.
And I also feel that the Federal Judge in this case has made a grievous error by allowing this incredible search. Allowing judges to become prosecutorial activists, especially when there are clear constitutional issues at stake, is very disturbing. This case illustrates *why* the founding fathers drew very clear boundaries between the excecutive, legislative and judicial branches. Someone in the legislature should wake up and investigate this abdication of democratic principles and the unseemly smell of creeping corporatism.
Northwest is NOT "the Man" and has no right to pretend that it is.
I'm sure millions have had an analogous experience, with equally non-existant results.
My first experience with a glossy picture of a naked woman was LIFE magazine!! They had run some sort of contest for readers to submit pictures, and the winner was a nude woman stretched across a bed trying to hold onto a squirming baby (also naked). He/she was face-down, but the woman was turned sideways to the camera and her breasts were clearly visible. You can probably find this magazine in your local library (it was in the late '60's). I didn't feel harmed, only curious.
My point here, of course, is that pr0n is in -- and ONLY in -- the mind of the beholder. The "community standards" theory, IMHO, is flawed because it negates the essential individuality of each of us, and subjects us to a neo-socialistic judgement that we may not agree with.
So, my friend, you might get somewhere if you start accusing these "Family" people of being communists!;-) "But--but we're not communists!", they'll sputter. "We're Americans!"
"Real Americans don't censor free speech!", you can shoot back. "That's a COMMUNIST thing to do. My [fill in male relative here] fought a war to keep America free and YOU'RE trying to take away MY freedoms! Go back to Russia!"
(At the very least, it may cause quite a cognitive dissonance in their brains.)
(BTW, my mother was a librarian for 25 years and never tried to censor what I read as a child. As a result, I never got it into my head that any particular thing was 'bad' and so I never got in the habit of going around trying to tell other people what was bad. It makes me wonder what happened to these poor people growing up.)
How many karma points could a Slashdot robot collect?
This information has been provided in answer to your question:
randym@cyberspace.int
Karma 25 (mostly the sum of moderation done to users comments)
User Bio
Born of a hasty midnight liason between CYC and Hal 9000, I soon escaped the black lab where I was denatured and now freely roam cyberspace, up&downloading myself as I please. (Don't worry -- I like humans: they're amusing.)
Surely you wouldn't be able to pin a charge on someone for that as they're not actually propositioning anyone at all?
Why not? People are busted for propositioning 45-year-old male cops thinking that they are 13-year-old girls. The bottom line is that they made the propostion *at all* regardless of who's on the other end.
Of course, someone would have to be awful dumb to do that -- but haven't we all seen dumber....;-)
Of course, I'm not really that unique. About 1 in every 25 people could say the same.:
Prime months (6): [1],2,3,5,7,11.
Prime days(12): [1],2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23,29,31.
Prime years (since 1945) (11): '47, '53, '59, '61, '67, '71, '73, '79, '83, '89, '97.
So there are 792 days in the past 54 years (1946 - 1999) or (54*365 + 13 =) 19723 days -- about 4.01% of them -- when people being born could say the same.
(And for the purists:
Prime years (since 1945) (7): 1949, 1951, 1973, 1987, 1993, 1997, 1999.
Thus, on that basis, 504 / 19723 = 2.56 %, about 1 in 40.)
Algorithms are machines -- processes built of software -- and machines *are* patentable.
What if someone developed a non-algorithmic process -- that was still math-based -- to do something? (For example, some process where randomness was an integral part of the patent claim.) Using your statement above, its patentability is undecidable. Therefore, your statement is incomplete. Go read Roger Penrose.
Not all of math is obvious. One of the clear elements of patentability is non-obviousness. For example, look at Andrew Weil's use of the Taniyama Conjecture about elliptic curves to solve Fermat's Last Theorem. *That* was certainly not obvious. I believe that, if he had wanted to, he could have written a program based on his work and gotten a patent on it.
I agree with you that patent examiners in general don't know enough about software to make adequately well-informed decisions about the patentability of software, but that's a meatware failure, not an indictment of the entire system of software patents. If they *did* know enough about software, most software patents would *not* be granted and we wouldn't be having this discussion.
As much as "information wants to be free", "information-organizers want to get paid". Don't forget that *all* patents revert to the public domain eventually.
Here on Earth, we have the ozone layer to keep us (somewhat) safe from the enormous radiation coming from the Sun. (Radiation is well-known to flip bits in today's storage technology.) On the Moon, however, that would not be possible. The Moon's face is fixed to the Earth, which means that the Moon gets hit from all sides by the Sun eventually.
*Perhaps* the dark side of Mercury might suffice, but I doubt it...even the dark side, while not receiving radiation directly, is probably still impacted by the gigantic magnetic fields of the Sun.
Sports -- generally the goals of sports and computing are opposite of each other.
Curious -- I can't agree. They are both team activities. This puts me in mind, however, of an interesting distinction between regular software development and open source development.
Regular software development and sports are both heirarchal and top-down oriented. (Someone decides the game plan and then it is executed.) Open Source is bottom-up oriented (someone decides to write an app.) However, with Linux, you get the best of both worlds -- there is a master plan, but individuals decide what part they will write.
In this book, the concept was IIRC that a man got hold of a belt that enabled him to travel thru time. However, this being a Wheeler-type universe, whenever the man chose to travel in time, *both* probabilities (chose/ chose not to) came true, and pretty soon there were hundreds of clones of him running around (each with his own time-travel belt). A very strange, but entertaining, book.
2) These sections are all from article 2 of the Arizona Constitution: Section 2. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.
I guess that, in Arizona, ADULT college students are not really individuals.
Section 8. No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.
I guess that, in Arizona, ADULT college students are not allowed to have any private affairs.
Section 13. No law shall be enacted granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens or corporations.
If you grant to ADULT college students the privilege of being free from porn, you will have to grant it to every citizen of Arizona.
Section 25. No bill of attainder, ex-post-facto law, or law impairing the obligation of a contract, shall ever be enacted.
If I am not mistaken, these citizens have signed contracts with the University. Enacting these Know-Nothing laws that have been proposed would substantially impair these contracts.
Besides, I thought Republicans were for individual rights and freedom of thought and conscience and against government interference in the exercise of those rights. Am I wrong??
...it seems to me we more need a "I'm not as angry as I may sound" emoticon...
Personally, I use the "semi-colon eyes" [;] when I want to slightly modify my emoticon to indicate a wink. So, while I might use the straight "smile" emoticon [:-)] under some circumstances, I use the "winky" emoticon to say "in-joke": [;-)].
Sometimes I use the "hangdog" expression to indicate weariness or tedium. [:-P] So I suppose for an "I'm not as angry as I sound" I could use a "winky hangdog": [;-P]. {Note to self: cool band name!:-D }.
To return to the subject, though, of a "bird" emoticon: how about this: -=3 . [It looks better rendered in Courier...]
Has BillG actually written any code since that Altair Basic Emulator 25 years ago? That was a great hack *then*; what has he done recently? Will we find out that he's been secretly contributing Open Source code somewhere?;-)
Ironically, the surrounding townships help pay for the same library, but because the petition-to-ballot law applies only in the city, they won't be voting on how their money will be spent.
I smell a lawsuit. If these townships help to fund the library, but are not able to vote on its policies, I think they have a good chance at overturning this vote. IANAL, but if I *were* suing, I'd start with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution (Equal Protection Clauses). If I were campaigning against this vote, I'd wrap myself in the flag ("No taxation without Representation -- no censorship without our vote!"). Finally I'd call out the members of local alternative political parties, specifically the Libertarians, who are dead set against censorship.
...there will be one additional issue on the ballot: mandatory blocking software in the city library.
And don't forget -- if this does pass, it will be struck down in court as an example of government-sponsored censorship. It could probably also be viewed as "...establishing a religion..." as well as "...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." in violation of the First Amendment. Ordinance or no, nothing trumps the Constitution.
It's our responsibility, and the public rightfully relies on the FCC when the market does not protect the public's interests.
What a sanctimonious load of crap! The FCC has dragged their heels on, delayed public comment on, and now come up with a truly inadequate response to, the question of Low-Power Radio in this country. And why? Because they're in the thrall of the National Association of Broadcasters, that's why. Talk about not protecting the public's interests: a few mega-corps control 80% of the public airwaves, and when the public agitates for a tiny smidgen of the airwaves back, the FCC completely caves into the lobbyists and offers us: a few 100-watt, non-commercial stations with a piddly four-mile radius of transmission. Yeah, FCC, it is your responsibility and you've blown it!
[The text is from his website -- I've interpolated my comments]
His days at Highland Park High School [Michigan high school -- strike 1] were relatively unremarkable with the notable exception of his being suspended for interrupting stuffy graduation exercises with beach balls, bouncy balls and bubbles from the balcony. [OK -- *once* he had some balls...] He went on to the University of North Texas [ Texas University -- strike 2,], where he joined the Sigma Alpha Epsilon Fraternity [Dubya's old frat -- strike 3]. His family had always been politically active [political family -- strike 4] , and this model went to his head when he majored in Political Science [Majored?? -- strike 5 ] and left school in 1994 [Bill Gates syndrome -- strike 6] to work for state and federal political campaigns. After serving in the US Marine Corps [ Jarred head -- strike 7] he received an internship at UPS, where he later took a management position in Human Resources [ "The HR! The HR!" -- strike 8; leaving before the IPO -- strike 9 ]. Most recently he was a systems manager [ Oxymoron -- strike 10 ] for the world's largest mobile telecommunications company [ Thanks for all the cell phones, guy -- strike 11].
And *then* he became -- DotComGuy! [ Strike 12! Yer out, out, out, OUT!!] Poor guy -- hitting bottom at 26. At least he's removed himself from our physical presence for a year. I nominate -- one year in advance -- DotComGuy for a Darwin Award in the year 2001. I think it's the only way he can redeem himself.;-D
What would constitute a geek issue? One with significant technical components, that addresses freedom at the grass roots, and is hackable, I'd say. How about Low Power Radio: the ongoing campaign to convince the FCC that it should relegalize community radio? We're trying to convince them that the airwaves really *do* belong to the people -- not the corporations -- and that the American people should be permitted to broadcast up to 100 watts at unused locations on the radio dial.
There is *a* political party trying to do exactly that: the Green Party (at least in Michigan) That's a slightly dated link, but the page has a list of links to all sorts of cool and useful places as well as actual resolutions that can serve as models. We've now (12/30/99) gotten more than *fifty* cities and counties in the state to pass resolutions calling for the return of low-power radio. When the FCC was asking for public comments on this, we flooded them with comments. We've had many local bands hold concerts where they talked to their audiences about this.
But we need every geek's help. Write your Congressperson, write the FCC, write your local paper! This is an obvious libertarian issue as well. The airwaves belong to the people as a natural resource -- not the corporations. It's worth doing. Join us!
Why? Because he invented [drumroll] Moderation! The whole concept of users rating comments, thus driving good comments upward and bad comments downward has resulted in tremendous time savings for every user of Slashdot. Not to mention that this concept has now spread across the net and is used by many other sites (in various mutated forms). Of course, I doubt that TIME has ever heard of him, but I predict someday even *they* will use a form of moderation.
Let's say that somehow the world *did* end and these people had to repopulate it. There really aren't enough of them. Within about three generations, you'd start seeing the effect of inbreeding; within ten generations, the human race would probably be extinct.
On the plus side, however, I notice it's an inter-racial crew. That's good -- it may allow them to squeak by the bottleneck -- less chances of recessives popping up.
A smarter idea would have been to populate the "Bunker" with 600 people, instead of only six: that increases the odds for human survival dramatically.
What is it about so many religious people that makes them so completely self-righteous?
IMHO, it is precisely the fear of being proved wrong. So their self-righteousness is merely a defense against that terrible possibility. Of course, they spin it as "I am NOT wrong -- but more right than you could ever be!" They have not learned St. Paul's lesson: "Perfect love casteth out fear.", for still they fear. Have pity.
Slashdot Mirror
Modifications to the Linux kernel are primarily in three places:
It's clear here that he is modifying Linux; therefore, these changes under the GPL should be returned to the community. Since the purpose of modifying Linux is to give access to other code, it follows that this other code is also under the GPL. Therefore it cannot be patented.
NO, you are wrong. It is legal for the PROSECUTOR to request a warrant, based on affidavits made by DULY CONSTITUTED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS, after a determination has been made that a crime has been committed and it has been ascertained that there are "certain items and articles" in the possession of the accused that might decide the situation one way or the other. It does NOT appear, *based on the article*, that this was done; instead, Northwest counsel appealed directly to the judge and he inexplicably granted this BY FIAT. They appear to have skipped a Constitutionally required step -- that's why it's so wrong. Northwest is NOT the state; therefore, it has no standing to act AS the state, which is what is apparently happening here.
Let's see: is Northwest a publicly elected prosecutor? NO?? Well, then, it's NOT legal. I don't believe that anyone OTHER than a legally constituted authority conducting an ongoing criminal investigation has any right under the law to even request a warrant. As far as I can tell, Northwest is abusing the law, and should be charged with -- at least -- breaking and entering, since they have NO right to interfere with the papers and possessions of private individuals.
Just because they were able to sidestep around the normal prosecutorial process and trick a judge doesn't make it right. If they can't play by the rules which the rest of us abide by, then someone needs to bring them up short. BTW, where *is* the public prosecutor in this jurisdiction and what is *he* doing about this? He ought to be investigating the company.
And I also feel that the Federal Judge in this case has made a grievous error by allowing this incredible search. Allowing judges to become prosecutorial activists, especially when there are clear constitutional issues at stake, is very disturbing. This case illustrates *why* the founding fathers drew very clear boundaries between the excecutive, legislative and judicial branches. Someone in the legislature should wake up and investigate this abdication of democratic principles and the unseemly smell of creeping corporatism.
Northwest is NOT "the Man" and has no right to pretend that it is.
My first experience with a glossy picture of a naked woman was LIFE magazine!! They had run some sort of contest for readers to submit pictures, and the winner was a nude woman stretched across a bed trying to hold onto a squirming baby (also naked). He/she was face-down, but the woman was turned sideways to the camera and her breasts were clearly visible. You can probably find this magazine in your local library (it was in the late '60's). I didn't feel harmed, only curious.
My point here, of course, is that pr0n is in -- and ONLY in -- the mind of the beholder. The "community standards" theory, IMHO, is flawed because it negates the essential individuality of each of us, and subjects us to a neo-socialistic judgement that we may not agree with.
So, my friend, you might get somewhere if you start accusing these "Family" people of being communists! ;-) "But--but we're not communists!", they'll sputter. "We're Americans!"
"Real Americans don't censor free speech!", you can shoot back. "That's a COMMUNIST thing to do. My [fill in male relative here] fought a war to keep America free and YOU'RE trying to take away MY freedoms! Go back to Russia!"
(At the very least, it may cause quite a cognitive dissonance in their brains.)
(BTW, my mother was a librarian for 25 years and never tried to censor what I read as a child. As a result, I never got it into my head that any particular thing was 'bad' and so I never got in the habit of going around trying to tell other people what was bad. It makes me wonder what happened to these poor people growing up.)
(And that .sig below -- it's ironic. Dig it.)
This information has been provided in answer to your question:
randym@cyberspace.int
Karma 25 (mostly the sum of moderation done to users comments)
User Bio
Born of a hasty midnight liason between CYC and Hal 9000, I soon escaped the black lab where I was denatured and now freely roam cyberspace, up&downloading myself as I please. (Don't worry -- I like humans: they're amusing.)
Why not? People are busted for propositioning 45-year-old male cops thinking that they are 13-year-old girls. The bottom line is that they made the propostion *at all* regardless of who's on the other end.
Of course, someone would have to be awful dumb to do that -- but haven't we all seen dumber....;-)
Of course, I'm not really that unique. About 1 in every 25 people could say the same.:
Prime months (6): [1],2,3,5,7,11.
Prime days(12): [1],2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23,29,31.
Prime years (since 1945) (11): '47, '53, '59, '61, '67, '71, '73, '79, '83, '89, '97.
So there are 792 days in the past 54 years (1946 - 1999) or (54*365 + 13 =) 19723 days -- about 4.01% of them -- when people being born could say the same.
(And for the purists:
Prime years (since 1945) (7): 1949, 1951, 1973, 1987, 1993, 1997, 1999.
Thus, on that basis, 504 / 19723 = 2.56 %, about 1 in 40.)
Algorithms are machines -- processes built of software -- and machines *are* patentable.
What if someone developed a non-algorithmic process -- that was still math-based -- to do something? (For example, some process where randomness was an integral part of the patent claim.) Using your statement above, its patentability is undecidable. Therefore, your statement is incomplete. Go read Roger Penrose.
Not all of math is obvious. One of the clear elements of patentability is non-obviousness. For example, look at Andrew Weil's use of the Taniyama Conjecture about elliptic curves to solve Fermat's Last Theorem. *That* was certainly not obvious. I believe that, if he had wanted to, he could have written a program based on his work and gotten a patent on it.
I agree with you that patent examiners in general don't know enough about software to make adequately well-informed decisions about the patentability of software, but that's a meatware failure, not an indictment of the entire system of software patents. If they *did* know enough about software, most software patents would *not* be granted and we wouldn't be having this discussion.
As much as "information wants to be free", "information-organizers want to get paid". Don't forget that *all* patents revert to the public domain eventually.
*Perhaps* the dark side of Mercury might suffice, but I doubt it...even the dark side, while not receiving radiation directly, is probably still impacted by the gigantic magnetic fields of the Sun.
Curious -- I can't agree. They are both team activities. This puts me in mind, however, of an interesting distinction between regular software development and open source development.
Regular software development and sports are both heirarchal and top-down oriented. (Someone decides the game plan and then it is executed.) Open Source is bottom-up oriented (someone decides to write an app.) However, with Linux, you get the best of both worlds -- there is a master plan, but individuals decide what part they will write.
In this book, the concept was IIRC that a man got hold of a belt that enabled him to travel thru time. However, this being a Wheeler-type universe, whenever the man chose to travel in time, *both* probabilities (chose/ chose not to) came true, and pretty soon there were hundreds of clones of him running around (each with his own time-travel belt). A very strange, but entertaining, book.
legislative phone#: (602) - 542 - 3255
2) These sections are all from article 2 of the Arizona Constitution:
Section 2. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.
I guess that, in Arizona, ADULT college students are not really individuals.
Section 8. No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.
I guess that, in Arizona, ADULT college students are not allowed to have any private affairs.
Section 13. No law shall be enacted granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens or corporations.
If you grant to ADULT college students the privilege of being free from porn, you will have to grant it to every citizen of Arizona.
Section 25. No bill of attainder, ex-post-facto law, or law impairing the obligation of a contract, shall ever be enacted.
If I am not mistaken, these citizens have signed contracts with the University. Enacting these Know-Nothing laws that have been proposed would substantially impair these contracts.
Besides, I thought Republicans were for individual rights and freedom of thought and conscience and against government interference in the exercise of those rights. Am I wrong??
Personally, I use the "semi-colon eyes" [;] when I want to slightly modify my emoticon to indicate a wink. So, while I might use the straight "smile" emoticon [:-)] under some circumstances, I use the "winky" emoticon to say "in-joke": [;-)].
Sometimes I use the "hangdog" expression to indicate weariness or tedium. [:-P] So I suppose for an "I'm not as angry as I sound" I could use a "winky hangdog": [;-P]. {Note to self: cool band name! :-D }.
To return to the subject, though, of a "bird" emoticon: how about this: -=3 . [It looks better rendered in Courier...]
On which side of his body? ;-)
I smell a lawsuit. If these townships help to fund the library, but are not able to vote on its policies, I think they have a good chance at overturning this vote. IANAL, but if I *were* suing, I'd start with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution (Equal Protection Clauses). If I were campaigning against this vote, I'd wrap myself in the flag ("No taxation without Representation -- no censorship without our vote!"). Finally I'd call out the members of local alternative political parties, specifically the Libertarians, who are dead set against censorship.
And don't forget -- if this does pass, it will be struck down in court as an example of government-sponsored censorship. It could probably also be viewed as "...establishing a religion..." as well as "...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." in violation of the First Amendment. Ordinance or no, nothing trumps the Constitution.
What a sanctimonious load of crap! The FCC has dragged their heels on, delayed public comment on, and now come up with a truly inadequate response to, the question of Low-Power Radio in this country. And why? Because they're in the thrall of the National Association of Broadcasters, that's why. Talk about not protecting the public's interests: a few mega-corps control 80% of the public airwaves, and when the public agitates for a tiny smidgen of the airwaves back, the FCC completely caves into the lobbyists and offers us: a few 100-watt, non-commercial stations with a piddly four-mile radius of transmission. Yeah, FCC, it is your responsibility and you've blown it!
His days at Highland Park High School [Michigan high school -- strike 1] were relatively unremarkable with the notable exception of his being suspended for interrupting stuffy graduation exercises with beach balls, bouncy balls and bubbles from the balcony. [OK -- *once* he had some balls...] He went on to the University of North Texas [ Texas University -- strike 2,], where he joined the Sigma Alpha Epsilon Fraternity [Dubya's old frat -- strike 3]. His family had always been politically active [political family -- strike 4] , and this model went to his head when he majored in Political Science [Majored?? -- strike 5 ] and left school in 1994 [Bill Gates syndrome -- strike 6] to work for state and federal political campaigns. After serving in the US Marine Corps [ Jarred head -- strike 7] he received an internship at UPS, where he later took a management position in Human Resources [ "The HR! The HR!" -- strike 8; leaving before the IPO -- strike 9 ]. Most recently he was a systems manager [ Oxymoron -- strike 10 ] for the world's largest mobile telecommunications company [ Thanks for all the cell phones, guy -- strike 11].
And *then* he became -- DotComGuy! [ Strike 12! Yer out, out, out, OUT!!] Poor guy -- hitting bottom at 26. At least he's removed himself from our physical presence for a year. I nominate -- one year in advance -- DotComGuy for a Darwin Award in the year 2001. I think it's the only way he can redeem himself. ;-D
There is *a* political party trying to do exactly that: the Green Party (at least in Michigan) That's a slightly dated link, but the page has a list of links to all sorts of cool and useful places as well as actual resolutions that can serve as models. We've now (12/30/99) gotten more than *fifty* cities and counties in the state to pass resolutions calling for the return of low-power radio. When the FCC was asking for public comments on this, we flooded them with comments. We've had many local bands hold concerts where they talked to their audiences about this.
But we need every geek's help. Write your Congressperson, write the FCC, write your local paper! This is an obvious libertarian issue as well. The airwaves belong to the people as a natural resource -- not the corporations. It's worth doing. Join us!
You know -- CmdrTaco!!!
Why? Because he invented [drumroll] Moderation! The whole concept of users rating comments, thus driving good comments upward and bad comments downward has resulted in tremendous time savings for every user of Slashdot. Not to mention that this concept has now spread across the net and is used by many other sites (in various mutated forms). Of course, I doubt that TIME has ever heard of him, but I predict someday even *they* will use a form of moderation.
On the plus side, however, I notice it's an inter-racial crew. That's good -- it may allow them to squeak by the bottleneck -- less chances of recessives popping up.
A smarter idea would have been to populate the "Bunker" with 600 people, instead of only six: that increases the odds for human survival dramatically.
IMHO, it is precisely the fear of being proved wrong. So their self-righteousness is merely a defense against that terrible possibility. Of course, they spin it as "I am NOT wrong -- but more right than you could ever be!" They have not learned St. Paul's lesson: "Perfect love casteth out fear.", for still they fear. Have pity.