Clay Tablets, they seem to have the best proven track record for data as a whole. Of course, if you have the money, you can always use a norsam disk, they may last even longer than clay- but I doubt they're cheaper. Of course, for large amounts of data, storage is a problem.
Seriously, there should be a digital->clay device, like a printer or something, for super-archival 4000 year proven quality at a bargain. I have thought about making one for a while- a sort of dot-matrix for clay. I think it would be fun!
I think it depends on what information one considers important. The more different information you have, the less durable each corpuscle of it is. The more identical, permanent, memorable information you have, the more durable it will be. Of course, I think it would be difficult to put audio on a clay tablets, but not lyrics. We have the songs to Inanna by Enheduanna even today- that's some star power.
This is correct. While MS and it's employees donated a significant amount to political parties, candidates and PACs (more than $6.1 million), the comparable statistic with Enron is how much the executives of each company gave out in soft money contributions- $2.3 million for MS compared to $1.55 million from Enron. This is actually less than twice as much- although still a significant amount.
There is no need to inflate already maligning figures, it just makes/. look too bloodthirsty and unfair.
Does anyone know how much Enron employees contributed to PAC's, etc.? In other words, a similar figure to the $6 mil. for that company?
I admire your pragmatism but cannot agree with your view...
Lawyers are indeed those who interpret law. However, they are not the only people involved in this case, as it seems to potentially involve standards of media worldwide. Those affected have the right to be heard as well.
For laws to be fair, they must be understandable by those they govern. Therefore even those people without a 'background in case law' have a legitimate right to post, and could understandably confuse your posted opinion for elitism. For us to 'concentrate our help where it [will be of the most] practical use' we first must decide what that place is. That judgement is sharpened by exposure to forums such as this one.
I realize that you are most likely speaking out of pragmatism and a sense of what really is effective in a court situation. Thank you. I think you are correct: lawyers are in this day and age the most effective and publicly visible interpreters of the constitution- they do have official sanction in the world of govt. and business. They are a neccessary part of this process- but not the only part.
As said document reads:
We the People of the United States,......do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
I am one of the people referred to in this document. I believe my views on this are exactly as important (Although perhaps not as intelligent...) as those of any other individual who lives by its (nominal) rule of law.
Only I can say what I think truly on this case; my opinion filtered through a lawyer would not be so accurate. Therefore, I consider it important that 'rants and raves' are posted here in this forum. That is the purpose of this forum, is it not?
Anybody can post here. Moderators do the job of suitability judging, not posters. Perhaps you are tired of seeing the lameness? It is unfortunately part of the voice of this community too.
Slashdot Mirror
Clay Tablets, they seem to have the best proven track record for data as a whole. Of course, if you have the money, you can always use a norsam disk, they may last even longer than clay- but I doubt they're cheaper. Of course, for large amounts of data, storage is a problem.
Seriously, there should be a digital->clay device, like a printer or something, for super-archival 4000 year proven quality at a bargain. I have thought about making one for a while- a sort of dot-matrix for clay. I think it would be fun!
I think it depends on what information one considers important. The more different information you have, the less durable each corpuscle of it is. The more identical, permanent, memorable information you have, the more durable it will be. Of course, I think it would be difficult to put audio on a clay tablets, but not lyrics. We have the songs to Inanna by Enheduanna even today- that's some star power.
This is correct. While MS and it's employees donated a significant amount to political parties, candidates and PACs (more than $6.1 million), the comparable statistic with Enron is how much the executives of each company gave out in soft money contributions- $2.3 million for MS compared to $1.55 million from Enron. This is actually less than twice as much- although still a significant amount. /. look too bloodthirsty and unfair.
There is no need to inflate already maligning figures, it just makes
Does anyone know how much Enron employees contributed to PAC's, etc.? In other words, a similar figure to the $6 mil. for that company?
I admire your pragmatism but cannot agree with your view...
Lawyers are indeed those who interpret law. However, they are not the only people involved in this case, as it seems to potentially involve standards of media worldwide. Those affected have the right to be heard as well.
For laws to be fair, they must be understandable by those they govern. Therefore even those people without a 'background in case law' have a legitimate right to post, and could understandably confuse your posted opinion for elitism. For us to 'concentrate our help where it [will be of the most] practical use' we first must decide what that place is. That judgement is sharpened by exposure to forums such as this one.
I realize that you are most likely speaking out of pragmatism and a sense of what really is effective in a court situation. Thank you. I think you are correct: lawyers are in this day and age the most effective and publicly visible interpreters of the constitution- they do have official sanction in the world of govt. and business. They are a neccessary part of this process- but not the only part.
As said document reads:
I am one of the people referred to in this document. I believe my views on this are exactly as important (Although perhaps not as intelligent...) as those of any other individual who lives by its (nominal) rule of law.Only I can say what I think truly on this case; my opinion filtered through a lawyer would not be so accurate. Therefore, I consider it important that 'rants and raves' are posted here in this forum. That is the purpose of this forum, is it not?
Anybody can post here. Moderators do the job of suitability judging, not posters. Perhaps you are tired of seeing the lameness? It is unfortunately part of the voice of this community too.