ADHD is something Big Pharma made up to sell drugs.
No, ADHD is something that is more a personality trait that's been labeled as a disorder- mainly because there ARE characteristics of the trait that could be deemed to be disruptive within the context of a manufacturing based society.
You do have something right within that remark, though... Big Pharma has it's meathooks into the mix. Vastly more people are diagnosed with ADD and ADHD than really, really have the "problem" in question- more because Big Pharma has taught everyone and his dog that we can all have better living through chemistry than anything else. Most of the people don't need to be on things like Methylphenidate (Ritalin, a chemical relative to Meth and Cocaine and used for replacement therapy for those abused substances- with a similar potency and a slightly less risk of addiction and abuse than the other two...)- most people that really DO have ADHD typically just need to learn to rein in the thought shifts (it IS possible!) and learn coping skills for when they end up in situations where they can get into problems.
In light of the fact that you can fake an address (happens all the time- part of how one commits credit fraud...), and can create a throwaway bank account through varying means...I'd not place my trust and faith in Apple protecting you if someone wanted to push something malicious out to the iPhone community with a popular trojaned app.
That's not any better than the Android store, really- you're not going to prevent this with Apple's model any better than with Google's right at the moment.
Security isn't just about models or technology. It's about applying a little bit of questioning as to whether or not something is a good idea or not.
It matters little if I, as a homeowner, have tons of security monitoring cameras, an alarm system, and ANSI Grade 1 bump-resistant locks, if I don't lock the doors and periodically monitor my intrusion detection system.
I will still get broken into if I don't lock things down, verify that fact, and then check up on the monitoring equipment from time to time. Caught a trespasser on my horse farm that way in recent times, actually. We're working to press charges against them now. Had I not, there'd been other problems and it'd been my fault.
Each time you install ANY application you're taking a chance, even from a commercial supplier or someplace like the iPhone app store. What you use for a trust metric for that risk item is your own look out.
You can have the app pass muster on the vetting process- and then do it's malicious thing on command.
There's loads of things the developer can do to side-step a vetting process and not get caught out by it. Including do an "honest" app that does what it's supposed to and then does it's malicious thing upon command like any other self-respecting bot-net zombie would do.
As for the "standards"- people have gotten certs that weren't supposed to get them. Valid certs for a time in many cases. Some certs that can't be revoked.
That's not to say that the mainline store should be doing some vetting of the apps- they would have caught this joker out of the gate. But to say this will keep it from happening or that open development's the source of the problem- bullshit. This will happen on Apple, Maemo, WebOS, Bada, etc. It's nothing new- in fact this has happened on WinMo/WinCE in the past. Get used to it. Security doesn't come from the devices. It comes from the people running the store AND the people running the phones. As it stands, I question the wisdom of allowing the level of access to the bank over the Internet that we have, let alone a smartphone, which is even more likely to get zapped than the desktops.
Shame you had to post anon there, but I understand. And I'd have to concur- that was the read I got on this whole thing once I saw the request text on Cryptome.
Because of all the BS that went on prior to today within the Government, people are unfortunately hypersensitive of this sort of thing. What's sad about that, though, is that there ARE things to be up in arms about, even now, with stuff that the Government is doing (and in some cases, isn't...) in regards to "security" that goes unnoticed because we're worrying about things that don't need the concern and the other stuff slips by.
Most people didn't. They panicked when they saw the headline.
I've known about InfraGard for a while now. It's more of a group of security consulting people, gathered together to try to get a solid handle on securing the infrastructure of the country.
I might be in the minority here, but this request is probably more in line with gathering a list for the FBI to go contact when they need an independent contractor for something. Like you said...while there's some aspects of tech they've got a handle on, there's others including this sort of thing that they just simply don't- and I'm thinking they thought it might be useful to get a list of that class of individual and what they do so they know who to turn to for help when they need it.
Heh... Normally, I'd just tell you google for "opengl api documentation" but I'll just be nice and hand you the first link from the aforementioned search...
At this page, there's an amazing array of documents, including the specification (which explains what's going on underneath the hood amongst other things...), API references for 2.1, 3.0, the OGL Shader Language, and other things.
The main reason that people say the "it's slower" is that you can easily cut your own throat on some things if you don't know the proper way to read standards documents on things. For example...
VBO's, Vertex Buffer Objects, are a good, very fast way to store vertex data on the display adapter. Being on the adapter, though, with earlier cards, meant that you might be limited in just how much space you might have had (32-64Mb cards were the average at the time the game was written...), so what the developers typically did was recycle some of the VBO's allocated spaces for dynamic vertex content.
If you read the spec on the mapping call to get a host-side pointer to the memory that was safe to use, the act of mapping the VBO into host space was said that it "may" stall the pipeline. In truth, unless you know precisely what that "may" means for all instances of the drivers, it really, really should read "shall" and you should act accordingly.
If you do the mapping call in the inter-frame gap, you don't really see much worse than a 1-2 fps hit on things.
If you do the mapping call intra-frame, evil things happen. With one vendor's parts, the game worked fine, no problems.
With another vendor's parts, the driver, before it got fixed, would be drug right down to slide-show frame rates, even with their top of the line card (which should have blasted it's way through anything...). Why? Because the vendor opted to do the easy way out and read it as a "shall" and stalled the pipeline and the game was recycling ONE VBO for about a half dozen to a dozen dynamic renderings. It was enough to crater the engine's rendering pass as it waited to pick up the smoking pieces. The vendor couldn't understand WHY someone would do that sort of thing because the "sensible" thing was to allocate, push the data, use the VBO, and then discard it, using the memory manager routines to reap the VBO's allocation. The problem is, there wasn't enough host memory on the low end to allow the manager to give the pool back fast enough and you ended up with failed allocations on the low end while you were rendering scenes.
Keep in mind, though, while there's sharp edges in OpenGL- there's at least a few in D3D like this as well.
Considering that they're no longer doing NVidia vs AMD extensions- only really ARB ones...
The obkect model's a bit clunky (Giving the ARB a nasty look over failing to give us the "real" OpenGL 3.0...), but if you're talking D3D, you can only expect to target Windows, X-Box, and Windows Mobile. If you want to find the sticking point in that line of thought, look long and hard at the last item. That's the also-ran there in the lineup. If you want to target the smart phone platforms that're actually dominant right at the moment (for titles that can go there...and there's quite a few...) you're NOT going to be using D3D as your sole one. If you're going to pick a sole target, you're better off with OpenGL/OpenGL ES as it'll pretty much hit everything out of box. If you want peak on Windows, you do a dual backend.
Unfortunately, as indicated in another post deeper in the thread, it doesn't work the way you think it does. Nobody bothered to ask Capek about 'robot' or Asimov about 'robotics' or 'USRobotics' the name of the modem company. Because they didn't need to. And this isn't a situation where Dick came up with a new word.
Nexus is a word that Dick didn't come up with. One is most definitely not one either.
Worse, if they didn't put a trademark up for this stuff, it's not protected as the Copyrights only apply to the stories Dick wrote.
Worse, even if the Estate or Dick himself had applied for a trademark, since there's little to no conflict per Trademark law, they'd not have much to go on in a suit.
This is blowing and going- sabre rattling. All done to try to rattle the Google money tree and see if something comes out of it. Unfortunately for the Dick Estate, they're burning money and credibility doing this stupid thing (and it IS stupid...) at their own financial expense.
If it were me as the Dick Estate, I'd be shutting the hell up at this point.
Actually, the word "robot" may well have been first coined in a play written by Karl Capeck in 1927, in Russums Universal Robots (or R.U.R.)- even though Russum's robots would be more along the lines of the "androids" in Dick's story.
Nobody, not even Dick, asked around to see if they needed permission from Capek for that stuff.
Mainly because they didn't NEED it.
Heh... It's even more entertaining what they're doing here...
A TESS search, while not 100% conclusive, shows 41 differing uses of the word "Android" as a trademark or part thereof, with the first usage, though dead, going back to 1959, registered in 1962 as a branding of a medicine from the Brown Pharmaceutical Company- from the TESS database entry on it:
IC 005. US 018. G & S: COMBINATION OF TESTOSTERONE, THYROID, GLUTAMIC ACID AND THIAMINE HCI IN TABLET FORM. FIRST USE: 19590400. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 19591100
Google seems to be the only registrant for "Nexus One"- but all THAT really is would be a combining of two common words to represent a branding of a phone. From Dictionary.com:
nexus/nkss/ : –noun, plural nexuses, nexus. 1. a means of connection; tie; link. 2. a connected series or group. 3. the core or center, as of a matter or situation. 4. Cell Biology. a specialized area of the cell membrane involved in intercellular communication and adhesion.
one/'wuhn'/ :
–noun 10. the first and lowest whole number, being a cardinal number; unity. 11. a symbol of this number, as 1 or I. 12. a single person or thing: If only problems would come one at a time! 13. a die face or a domino face having one pip. 14. a one-dollar bill: to change a five-dollar bill for five ones. 15. (initial capital letter) Neoplatonism. the ultimate reality, seen as a central source of being by whose emanations all entities, spiritual and corporeal, have their existence, the corporeal ones containing the fewest of the emanations.
Simply put, there's really little to nothing for the Dick Estate to "protect" here- and I question the wisdom of the same to allow a batch of lawyers make themselves look the fool at their expense.
Actually, it's my understanding that 10's junk compared to 09 and most people are, that play it, still pretty much playing 09.
But then, I don't do sports games normally. Closest thing to them I've done in recent times was Wii Sports. It's typically more fun doing these games in real life for me- when I do them.
Heh... He had it right to begin with. EA only wants your money and to screw you over to get it. Doesn't matter if it's multiplayer or not. While I can't gripe TOO hard (I've got Burnout Paradise as a gift and play it...) at least they don't do this crap too much with the non-sports titles- yet.
SIM cards are a GSM system feature that got carried forward with UMTS (3G GSM for all intents and purposes...).
CDMA handsets, speaking for the devices in the US at least, do NOT have SIM cards to identify them to the network. There was no feature set like that with the first system design.
I've had a CDMA handset since 1994 (Before rollout...my ex-wife worked for PrimeCo as one of their first customer support people and the person they tapped for doing the initial voice response system prompts...) and so far, while there's support for it in the system design (and used in China since about 2002...), nary a US CDMA phone supports CDMA SIM devices within the handsets.
I wish things worked with Verizon the way you believe them to. It'd make a migration to a Droid as simple as walking in a store, buying one on upgrade after proving I am eligible, and just swap the SIM card out. It takes a solid 15-20 minutes to swap out phones AFTER making the purchase from the store to get the phone number, etc. moved.
I'm largely convinced that the USPTO is doing much harder stuff than a bottle of Asprin per day, based on the experience I've had up to this point with the system (And I HAVE had experience, based on prior filings done by myself...).
Considering that the music companies would love nothing better than to have a locked down, you are completely renting it, means for digital distribution- they just realized that the bulk of their customers won't put up with it. If they thought for a moment that they could get away with some new DRM means, the un-DRMed music would vanish in a puff of smoke.
Don't for one second think that the battle is "won" over DRM in the music space.
Rather than looking for new and better ways to make money, they would rather do their damnedest to try to prop up their old ways of doing things, doing vast quantities of damage unto themselves and the consumers- and in the end, capitulating and finding a way to make good money in the new scheme of things.
They did it with VCRs and audio cassettes.
They can do it with digital distribution- they've just got to quit trying to control things the way they're used to. It no longer works well and they can't figure out they've got to change, right along with their customer base.
I think he's worrying more about the current crop of apps (from the posting Aaron made over at LinuxGames.com...) than worrying about Liberty or any of his other classic PalmOS titles. (not to mention that you don't need Liberty...there's quite an array of usable GB/GBA emulation options available if you've got SDL...)
I'm keen on hearing that there really IS a Native SDK out and about and brewing as an official thing from Palm. It makes my life easier once I get done- it becomes a minimal change target from the Maemo version of the game I'm working on.
During our last presidential election fraud a massive pacifist protest was launched to have every vote counted because thousands of votes from the poorest regions of the country were omitted from them count for no sane reason. The protest was huge and lasted for over a month. It didn't work.
Mainly because it wasn't those votes that chose the President. The popular vote never DOES choose him or her. Never has. Maybe never will. The choice of President comes from the Electoral College- which is established as the rules in the Constitution (To which, changing this would require a Amendment...which hasn't passed to date...). The President is indirectly elected and as such, while there might have been some bogosity going on with the election everyone thought was going on, it didn't have the significance you or anyone else thinks it does.
If you want to fix things, you need to better understand how the rules apply to yourself, to them, etc. As for realistic options for punishing politicians? Get enough people pissed off at how both parties are doing and choke them out with independents or with a third party that will, at least for a time, honestly represent your wishes. So long as you have people voting party lines and the people in office towing the mark on what their party wants, you're going to keep having that downward spiral.
Slashdot Mirror
No, ADHD is something that is more a personality trait that's been labeled as a disorder- mainly because there ARE characteristics of the trait that could be deemed to be disruptive within the context of a manufacturing based society.
You do have something right within that remark, though... Big Pharma has it's meathooks into the mix. Vastly more people are diagnosed with ADD and ADHD than really, really have the "problem" in question- more because Big Pharma has taught everyone and his dog that we can all have better living through chemistry than anything else. Most of the people don't need to be on things like Methylphenidate (Ritalin, a chemical relative to Meth and Cocaine and used for replacement therapy for those abused substances- with a similar potency and a slightly less risk of addiction and abuse than the other two...)- most people that really DO have ADHD typically just need to learn to rein in the thought shifts (it IS possible!) and learn coping skills for when they end up in situations where they can get into problems.
Let's try this again...without blown links (Need caffeine in the morning before posting
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/12/forging_ssl_cer.html
http://www.checkpoint.com/defense/advisories/public/2009/cpai-31-Dec.html
http://www.win.tue.nl/hashclash/rogue-ca/
Uh... NO.
This alone says a bit.
This is a bit more disturbing.
But the ability to generate a rogue CA cert kind of nukes the claims you just made from orbit- just to be sure.
In short, it's NOT hard to get an SSL cert of that nature- just not as easy as snapping one's fingers.
In light of the fact that you can fake an address (happens all the time- part of how one commits credit fraud...), and can create a throwaway bank account through varying means...I'd not place my trust and faith in Apple protecting you if someone wanted to push something malicious out to the iPhone community with a popular trojaned app.
For want of mod points here... :-D
That's not any better than the Android store, really- you're not going to prevent this with Apple's model any better than with Google's right at the moment.
Security isn't just about models or technology. It's about applying a little bit of questioning as to whether or not something is a good idea or not.
It matters little if I, as a homeowner, have tons of security monitoring cameras, an alarm system, and ANSI Grade 1 bump-resistant locks, if I don't lock the doors and periodically monitor my intrusion detection system.
I will still get broken into if I don't lock things down, verify that fact, and then check up on the monitoring equipment from time to time. Caught a trespasser on my horse farm that way in recent times, actually. We're working to press charges against them now. Had I not, there'd been other problems and it'd been my fault.
Each time you install ANY application you're taking a chance, even from a commercial supplier or someplace like the iPhone app store. What you use for a trust metric for that risk item is your own look out.
That's because it's an easy target, in spite of all it's "security measures".
I call BS on that one.
You can have the app pass muster on the vetting process- and then do it's malicious thing on command.
There's loads of things the developer can do to side-step a vetting process and not get caught out by it. Including do an "honest" app that does what it's supposed to and then does it's malicious thing upon command like any other self-respecting bot-net zombie would do.
As for the "standards"- people have gotten certs that weren't supposed to get them. Valid certs for a time in many cases. Some certs that can't be revoked.
That's not to say that the mainline store should be doing some vetting of the apps- they would have caught this joker out of the gate. But to say this will keep it from happening or that open development's the source of the problem- bullshit. This will happen on Apple, Maemo, WebOS, Bada, etc. It's nothing new- in fact this has happened on WinMo/WinCE in the past. Get used to it. Security doesn't come from the devices. It comes from the people running the store AND the people running the phones. As it stands, I question the wisdom of allowing the level of access to the bank over the Internet that we have, let alone a smartphone, which is even more likely to get zapped than the desktops.
Shame you had to post anon there, but I understand. And I'd have to concur- that was the read I got on this whole thing once I saw the request text on Cryptome.
Because of all the BS that went on prior to today within the Government, people are unfortunately hypersensitive of this sort of thing. What's sad about that, though, is that there ARE things to be up in arms about, even now, with stuff that the Government is doing (and in some cases, isn't...) in regards to "security" that goes unnoticed because we're worrying about things that don't need the concern and the other stuff slips by.
Most people didn't. They panicked when they saw the headline.
I've known about InfraGard for a while now. It's more of a group of security consulting people, gathered together to try to get a solid handle on securing the infrastructure of the country.
I might be in the minority here, but this request is probably more in line with gathering a list for the FBI to go contact when they need an independent contractor for something. Like you said...while there's some aspects of tech they've got a handle on, there's others including this sort of thing that they just simply don't- and I'm thinking they thought it might be useful to get a list of that class of individual and what they do so they know who to turn to for help when they need it.
Heh... Normally, I'd just tell you google for "opengl api documentation" but I'll just be nice and hand you the first link from the aforementioned search...
Why don't you look here, hm?
At this page, there's an amazing array of documents, including the specification (which explains what's going on underneath the hood amongst other things...), API references for 2.1, 3.0, the OGL Shader Language, and other things.
The main reason that people say the "it's slower" is that you can easily cut your own throat on some things if you don't know the proper way to read standards documents on things. For example...
VBO's, Vertex Buffer Objects, are a good, very fast way to store vertex data on the display adapter. Being on the adapter, though, with earlier cards, meant that you might be limited in just how much space you might have had (32-64Mb cards were the average at the time the game was written...), so what the developers typically did was recycle some of the VBO's allocated spaces for dynamic vertex content.
If you read the spec on the mapping call to get a host-side pointer to the memory that was safe to use, the act of mapping the VBO into host space was said that it "may" stall the pipeline. In truth, unless you know precisely what that "may" means for all instances of the drivers, it really, really should read " shall " and you should act accordingly.
If you do the mapping call in the inter-frame gap, you don't really see much worse than a 1-2 fps hit on things.
If you do the mapping call intra-frame, evil things happen. With one vendor's parts, the game worked fine, no problems.
With another vendor's parts, the driver, before it got fixed, would be drug right down to slide-show frame rates, even with their top of the line card (which should have blasted it's way through anything...). Why? Because the vendor opted to do the easy way out and read it as a "shall" and stalled the pipeline and the game was recycling ONE VBO for about a half dozen to a dozen dynamic renderings. It was enough to crater the engine's rendering pass as it waited to pick up the smoking pieces. The vendor couldn't understand WHY someone would do that sort of thing because the "sensible" thing was to allocate, push the data, use the VBO, and then discard it, using the memory manager routines to reap the VBO's allocation. The problem is, there wasn't enough host memory on the low end to allow the manager to give the pool back fast enough and you ended up with failed allocations on the low end while you were rendering scenes.
Keep in mind, though, while there's sharp edges in OpenGL- there's at least a few in D3D like this as well.
Considering that they're no longer doing NVidia vs AMD extensions- only really ARB ones...
The obkect model's a bit clunky (Giving the ARB a nasty look over failing to give us the "real" OpenGL 3.0...), but if you're talking D3D, you can only expect to target Windows, X-Box, and Windows Mobile. If you want to find the sticking point in that line of thought, look long and hard at the last item. That's the also-ran there in the lineup. If you want to target the smart phone platforms that're actually dominant right at the moment (for titles that can go there...and there's quite a few...) you're NOT going to be using D3D as your sole one. If you're going to pick a sole target, you're better off with OpenGL/OpenGL ES as it'll pretty much hit everything out of box. If you want peak on Windows, you do a dual backend.
Unfortunately, as indicated in another post deeper in the thread, it doesn't work the way you think it does. Nobody bothered to ask Capek about 'robot' or Asimov about 'robotics' or 'USRobotics' the name of the modem company. Because they didn't need to. And this isn't a situation where Dick came up with a new word.
Nexus is a word that Dick didn't come up with.
One is most definitely not one either.
Worse, if they didn't put a trademark up for this stuff, it's not protected as the Copyrights only apply to the stories Dick wrote.
Worse, even if the Estate or Dick himself had applied for a trademark, since there's little to no conflict per Trademark law, they'd not have much to go on in a suit.
This is blowing and going- sabre rattling. All done to try to rattle the Google money tree and see if something comes out of it. Unfortunately for the Dick Estate, they're burning money and credibility doing this stupid thing (and it IS stupid...) at their own financial expense.
If it were me as the Dick Estate, I'd be shutting the hell up at this point.
Actually, the word "robot" may well have been first coined in a play written by Karl Capeck in 1927, in Russums Universal Robots (or R.U.R.)- even though Russum's robots would be more along the lines of the "androids" in Dick's story.
Nobody, not even Dick, asked around to see if they needed permission from Capek for that stuff.
Mainly because they didn't NEED it.
Heh... It's even more entertaining what they're doing here...
A TESS search, while not 100% conclusive, shows 41 differing uses of the word "Android" as a trademark or part thereof, with the first usage, though dead, going back to 1959, registered in 1962 as a branding of a medicine from the Brown Pharmaceutical Company- from the TESS database entry on it:
Google seems to be the only registrant for "Nexus One"- but all THAT really is would be a combining of two common words to represent a branding of a phone. From Dictionary.com:
Simply put, there's really little to nothing for the Dick Estate to "protect" here- and I question the wisdom of the same to allow a batch of lawyers make themselves look the fool at their expense.
Actually, it's my understanding that 10's junk compared to 09 and most people are, that play it, still pretty much playing 09.
But then, I don't do sports games normally. Closest thing to them I've done in recent times was Wii Sports. It's typically more fun doing these games in real life for me- when I do them.
Heh... He had it right to begin with. EA only wants your money and to screw you over to get it. Doesn't matter if it's multiplayer or not. While I can't gripe TOO hard (I've got Burnout Paradise as a gift and play it...) at least they don't do this crap too much with the non-sports titles- yet.
Yeah... But this shutdown is mild in comparison to some of the things they've done
Heh...
SIM cards are a GSM system feature that got carried forward with UMTS (3G GSM for all intents and purposes...).
CDMA handsets, speaking for the devices in the US at least, do NOT have SIM cards to identify them to the network. There was no feature set like that with the first system design.
I've had a CDMA handset since 1994 (Before rollout...my ex-wife worked for PrimeCo as one of their first customer support people and the person they tapped for doing the initial voice response system prompts...) and so far, while there's support for it in the system design (and used in China since about 2002...), nary a US CDMA phone supports CDMA SIM devices within the handsets.
I wish things worked with Verizon the way you believe them to. It'd make a migration to a Droid as simple as walking in a store, buying one on upgrade after proving I am eligible, and just swap the SIM card out. It takes a solid 15-20 minutes to swap out phones AFTER making the purchase from the store to get the phone number, etc. moved.
Lord...that's beyond vile if it's THAT bad.
I'm largely convinced that the USPTO is doing much harder stuff than a bottle of Asprin per day, based on the experience I've had up to this point with the system (And I HAVE had experience, based on prior filings done by myself...).
Considering that the music companies would love nothing better than to have a locked down, you are completely renting it, means for digital distribution- they just realized that the bulk of their customers won't put up with it. If they thought for a moment that they could get away with some new DRM means, the un-DRMed music would vanish in a puff of smoke.
Don't for one second think that the battle is "won" over DRM in the music space.
Rather than looking for new and better ways to make money, they would rather do their damnedest to try to prop up their old ways of doing things, doing vast quantities of damage unto themselves and the consumers- and in the end, capitulating and finding a way to make good money in the new scheme of things.
They did it with VCRs and audio cassettes.
They can do it with digital distribution- they've just got to quit trying to control things the way they're used to. It no longer works well and they can't figure out they've got to change, right along with their customer base.
I think he's worrying more about the current crop of apps (from the posting Aaron made over at LinuxGames.com...) than worrying about Liberty or any of his other classic PalmOS titles. (not to mention that you don't need Liberty...there's quite an array of usable GB/GBA emulation options available if you've got SDL...)
I'm keen on hearing that there really IS a Native SDK out and about and brewing as an official thing from Palm. It makes my life easier once I get done- it becomes a minimal change target from the Maemo version of the game I'm working on.
Mainly because it wasn't those votes that chose the President. The popular vote never DOES choose him or her. Never has. Maybe never will. The choice of President comes from the Electoral College- which is established as the rules in the Constitution (To which, changing this would require a Amendment...which hasn't passed to date...). The President is indirectly elected and as such, while there might have been some bogosity going on with the election everyone thought was going on, it didn't have the significance you or anyone else thinks it does.
If you want to fix things, you need to better understand how the rules apply to yourself, to them, etc. As for realistic options for punishing politicians? Get enough people pissed off at how both parties are doing and choke them out with independents or with a third party that will, at least for a time, honestly represent your wishes. So long as you have people voting party lines and the people in office towing the mark on what their party wants, you're going to keep having that downward spiral.