I've said this before, but I thought it was worth bringing up again here...
You can send a fax to all of your congressmen via aclu.org even easier than you can send an email. If you go to http://www.aclu.org/action/liberty107.html, at the bottom of the page you will see an option to fax your congressmen. It will figure out who they are based on your physical address and fax them whatever content you enter into the web form.
I don't want to repost the whole thing here, but I posted the letter that I wrote to my congressmen regarding the SSSCA and the other recent oppressive IP legislation. If you're writing a letter to your congressmen, you might use it for fodder.
Actually, two open source projects have been spun off, Autoupdater and ARMI at sourceforge. Our plan is to open source the 'engine' parts once we release the game. Major parts (MOB AI, spell code, monster stats, etc.) will remain proprietary.
We don't want to open source the engine earlier because we do actually want to make money on this. Also, it will be a significant amount of work to figure out what to open source. ARMI and Autoupdater had obvious delineation.
We aren't going to open source the other parts since we think it would be detrimental to the game.
Those with serious interest in contributing, especially 3D artists, should contact me via email.
Per your link to the CDC:
"Inhalation: Initial symptoms may resemble a common cold. After several days, the symptoms may progress to severe breathing problems and shock. Inhalation anthrax is usually fatal."
Yes, anthrax is treatable. They can give you an IV of 2 million units of penicillin every two hours and you will die anyway, the vast majority of the time. Note that I didn't say all anthrax is fatal, just inhalational. I am unsure about gastrointestinal or cutaneous infection, but it is my understanding that it can be treated with good success.
Per the Defence Journal "Within twenty-four to thirty-six hours, the victim experiences the rapid onset of shock and subsequent death. Inhalation anthrax has a mortality of 95-100% despite antibiotic treatment."
Per the Biological Weapons FAQ "Some authors maintain that anthrax is an even more deadly agent. According to one study, in principle, if its spores were distributed appropriately, a single gram would be sufficient to kill more than one-third of the population of the US. Of course, the authors were quick to point out that an attack of such magnitude would not be feasible. However, more realistic, smaller-scale scenarios still posit large numbers of casualties. For example, the US Law Enforcement Assistance Administration reported in March 1977 that a single ounce of anthrax introduced into the air-conditioning system of a domed stadium could infect 70-80,000 spectators within an hour). And a 1972 study by the Advanced Concepts Research Corporation of Santa Barbara, California, postulated that an aerosol attack with anthrax spores on the New York City area would result in more than 600,000 deaths."
I agree wholeheartedly that getting hysterical is not going to solve anything. However, it is just as naive to discount real, viable threats as it is to fret about weak or unlikely threats. Certainly it is true that anthrax is not going to cause a plague; it doesn't really spread very well. But it just as certainly is true that anthrax is a very potent, low-tech weapon for the psychotically discontent when spores are directly blown into the air.
Certainly it is not safe to produce biological weapons. I think that goes without saying.
Thanks for the link to Bioport, btw! I hadn't found that. And thanks also for the note about Aum Shinrikyo. I hadn't known of any publicized anthrax attacks in modern times. The sources I've looked at so far casually mention that he tried one attack. If it is in fact true that there is some factor that I haven't seen yet that invalidates anthrax as such an easy and potent weapon, I would love to know about it so I can find something else to worry about : )
More links on anthrax:
http://www.metrokc.gov/health/phnr/prot_res/anth ra x.htm
Actually, I don't think you're being nasty at all. Seems very polite, we just differ in opinion.
I will cede that my original assertion was phrased in an inflammatory way, and I'm sorry. Nonetheless,
1) the US government has supplies of anthrax vaccine. Probably way too little, but they have it.
2) No one else seems to have human vaccine. Ask around, you get directed to the Dept of Health.
3) They won't give you any.
Once again, I say that since they have all of the vaccine, and they're not giving any out, they are preventing us from getting vaccinated.
Frankly, I'm going to buy some veterinary vaccine and if we have an outbreak, then I'll consider whether I think it's worth the risk to vaccinate myself and my family.
And you can see my position on the actual topic here.
Er, see my other reply on this subject. I am sure that you are correct, it is just due to a shortage. Nonetheless, the government isn't letting anyone but military have vaccine, or the person we spoke with at the Texas Dept of Health lied to us.
Yup, I suppose if I'm going to advocate anthrax vaccinations, I should also point out the caveats. Some doctors associate the gulf war syndrome with anthrax vaccine.
We called the Texas Department of Health (after calling our doctor) and were told that only those in the military would be vaccinated. I suppose you could say that they would let us be vaccinated if we could magically conjure some vaccine. Since no one else seems to have vaccine other than veterinary vaccine, I'd say they're pretty effectively preventing us from getting vaccinated.
I said what I meant. Certainly what you say is also true, but if there is no vaccine other than what they provide, it is equivalent to what I said:)
And I still think that someone somewhere screwed up big time if we don't have enough anthrax vaccine to go around.
Well, I'm going to weigh in on your side on this one. Facial recognition software could be a boon, in my opinion.
I'll agree that a few people will find it to be something of a consistent hassle. It should be relatively simple for them to verify that they are not whoever they look like via fingerprints.
IMO, we definitely need to also put cameras in the rooms where folks are questioned, too, though. And all of the cameras should be available over the internet in real-time!!! With these two provisos, facilities that victimize those with unfortunate resemblances can be caught very quickly, and it should radically reduce other abuses of authority.
I'm sure that it will bring about new abuses, but IMO the system I outlined above would by far eliminate more abuses than it introduces.
BTW, if you're going to have a sig that says you have no toleranse(sic) for stupidity, you ought to spell check it. Also, apprehensive is spelled like I spelled it, and entrys should be entries.
Anthrax isn't deliverable by water. Your worst fear should be clouds of anthrax delivered via air, since anthrax:
*lasts 30-40 years in the open
*is easy to produce
*is infectious in miniscule amounts
*when inhaled is nearly 100% fatal once symptoms occur, regardless of treatment
*the US government isn't letting anyone but the military be vaccinated!
Vaccination appears to provide a 95%+ immunity to airborn anthrax (evidence is sketchy for humans, since we don't experiment with infecting the vaccinated;) If we don't have enough vaccine for everyone, why the hell not? Anthrax has been well known to be a major bio warfare hazard for years, and the vaccine has likewise been known for years. Livestock handlers and livestock have been getting vaccinated for anthrax for ages.
Can you point me at this? I have a Tivo, but hadn't hacked it because I didn't see any big advantage. I thought due to the proprietary file system, you couldn't extend the time beyond the max time for the standard Tivo boxes.
I'm quite sure that it's not legal, considering the trouble some folks have gotten into for rebroadcasting TV signals over the internet.
I'm not at all sure that I understand the mindset. If the commercials are included, why would you not want more viewers? Personally, I think the big media corporations have morons making their policy. I have tried very hard to understand how their policies benefit even the policy-makers.
Firstly, I didn't necessarily advocate that this be done; I simply pointed out that it would be in the government's interest.
Secondly, who proposed a national database? What I proposed involved:
1) create a private/public key pairs on multiple machines somewhere, and don't copy the private keys anywhere. Physically secure the machines and only allow remote access through one interface, and all that interface can do is submit the picture, thumbprint, and name for signing.
2) when someone gets an ID (US Visa or driver's license, etc.), verify their identity, verify that they don't already have an id via their thumbprint, then send the data off for signing by all machines.
3) put the signed data on their card.
OK, so that would require a database of thumbprints indexed by name. What do you want to bet the gov't doesn't already have that? If such a database was cracked, how would it hurt anyone?
Other than that, all it requires is some machines with private keys on them. You sign with multiple private keys so if one is compromised the entire system isn't invalidated. The worst that could happen is that all machines get compromised (exceedingly unlikely IMO with some care) and you can no longer identify people so certainly.
All this system does is help stop counterfeit IDs. And as reluctant as I am to give the government power, as far as I'm concerned counterfeiting IDs is illegal and bad, and we should stop it.
Certainly this is not uncrackable. Nothing is. There is such a thing as risk management, though. You do it every time you decide to buckle your seat belt. It is sensible.
Finally, starting your comment by insulting the person to whom you're replying doesn't discredit their comment, but it does call into question yours.
Oh, sorry. FastTrack is the network protocol used by KaZaA (it's laden with spyware crap, but it's a no-brainer to use on Windows and supports multi-source downloads well), giFT (an open source client), Morpheus, and Grokster (don't know anything about these two).
From what I'm told, it shares the files over port 80 so wget will get files from a FastTrack peer. The really great thing about it is the multi-source download. I can get full use of my bandwidth at home while I download the 300meg+ video files from multiple users. Of course, I only download bits to which I have a legal right.
What's ironic is that the government could embrace encryption and more effectively eliminate terrorism.
Imagine if everyone was required to have an ID card. This ID card has your name, photo and thumbprint, encrypted with a centrally held government private key. You would need the card to take a flight, get into government buildings, etc. It would be simple to make a small, self-contained device that would have the public key and could compare thumbprints or show a photograph. You would be guaranteed to be who you said you were, no name spelling alterations or alter egos possible.
Before a plane takes off, a computer program looks for people who are associated with the same criminal organization, and if too many flags go off we station extra sky marshals on that plane.
It's kind of scary to give up a basic right to anonymity (although I don't think it's guaranteed anywhere). However, I think I've actually convinced myself that in a time when a handful of people can cause so much damage, we need to know who is in a high risk location.
I know this has been brought up before, but I'd like to comment on it again... If you have an interest in privacy, you should try reading "The Truth Machine" by James Halperin for an alternative view. In my opinion, he makes a very good case that we would be better off to require cameras that are accessible by anyone in every public place than to have privacy. The 'accessible by anyone' is critical, of course.
Yes, I did intend to put in a comment regarding the fellow, whats-his-name, the ISP employee who found a security hole in one of the ISP's client's web server while building some advertising pages for the client. Good samaritan that he was, he quickly reported it to them. Evil fucking corporation that they were, they prosecuted him over it. If anyone can give me this guy's name and a link to a story about it, I would much appreciate it. I have searched online and can't find it again.
Many of the congressmen claim on their web site or in their automated email response that they will contact you back if you are a constituent of theirs and you included your physical address.
Since I didn't include my physical address on any of my emails, but I did on the fax via aclu.org, I should know in a few weeks, max, whether or not they did in fact fax my requested documents.
I'm reposting it since reynaert gave a bad link to it;)
I haven't tried out giFT yet, but I use Kazaa occasionally, and the number of files and users on the network is astounding (~half million!) You can also regularly find movies on FastTrack that are still in theaters, but don't tell anyone you heard it from me;)
Wow. Firstly, I'll say that this post doesn't look like it was made by the same person as the first. Whether that's an artifact of my mindset or yours, I'm unsure.
As for figuring out WITH CERTAINTY who is responsible, your definition of certainty will be the only thing that determines whether or not that happens. There is growing, credible evidence that the obvious was true. If you're not convinced, that's okay. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. And I don't mind mounting some more evidence before we start military action. I do, however, believe strongly enough to consider Osama Bin Laden the guilty party for this conversation. I believe this not only from the things being presented in the media; but from historical evidence as well.
I agree with you there, on all counts. "With certainty" was a foolish way to put that. I do believe that we need to examine this more carefully than we have so far before we go to war. I also believe Osama Bin Laden is the most likely culprit. Early on, it concerned me that we apparently weren't being let in on the information that the tlas used to decide he was the culprit, but much of that has been released by now.
Excellent advice regarding the reading of memoirs. I consider myself essentially uneducated with regard to current events. My opinions are based on ethical considerations and a call for rational thought, not a knowledge of current events. I hope to rectify this.
They obviously take the issues more seriously than you have, given your remarks above.
Just when I thought you were going to reply to my flames without any of your own. Ah well, I probably deserved it. And, I do believe that, in general, they take the issues more seriously than I do, considering that it is their life to make the right decisions. I do frequently question their motivations, though. I also doubt that they value the life of the enemy soldiers and civilians very highly. And, frankly, I think Bush is a total idiot. I doubt that he actually considers much of anything; I think he acts on an emotional level, and most of his emotions fall in the 'pissed off' category.
I'm unsure that I or you understand the motivations of Bin Laden. For his followers, I'm sure that your characterization is near correct. For Ladin himself, I wouldn't be surprised if worldly power didn't have something to do with it. I will say that you've put enough context in that some of your original statements make more sense to me.
I still stand by the statement that we need to review foreign policy and eliminate any policies that cause deaths, unless we have strong evidence that these policies save more lives in the long run. Whether or not the lives saved are American.
Your patronizing analogy of the obnoxious neighbor falls so short of the mark as to be useless in this discussion.
My remark was not intended to be patronizing; I was simply trying to bring the idea back to the realm of the everyday. And while I will agree that I'm awful at coming up with analogies with punch, once again I stand by my analogy. It may be that changes in our foreign policy wouldn't have changed the results of this particular attack, in my opinion we should expect to be attacked as long as we are hiding within our borders and sending arms or soldiers into other countries to kill civilians.
(and I don't see any evil in buying a gas grill, even if I don't need it, or a play-station, or cute clothes for my little girl, or anything else.)
I wouldn't fault you for any of the above examples, frankly you hit a hot-button prejudice of mine with regard to SUVs in your original post.
However, in fact I do see a small evil in buying things for which you have no use when the money could be saving people who really need it. I understand that others don't think that way. I also don't practice what I preach very well in that regard, but I feel my actions rather than my principles are in error. There are a lot of people in the world dying of hunger, disease, and bullets who could benefit from our money. Can you actually imagine these people, their environment, their emotional and physical pain? Then, also realize that you might have significantly changed someone's life for the better by buying a car that was $15K instead of $35K. Do you not believe that there is any evil there?
I have children too, and I'm trying to teach them to be better than I in these regards.
By the way, I don't think it's evil to buy something you don't "need". I do think that conspicuous consumption of things for which you have no use is to some degree evil, when carried to extremes. And I believe most all Americans take it to extremes.
You're right, I did assume that you had given little thought to the issues. I've re-read your original comment, and I still don't see how I could have gotten your true meaning from it.
ironic. That's exactly how the extremists see us. Let's try to show a little more depth.
And, once again, you've gone over my head. I don't know who the extremists are that we're talking about. If it's the Bin Laden Muslims, from your descriptions above you don't believe that they think we've given little thought on the issue, just that we're heathen infidels unworthy to live. And I agree with your characterization of them.
Let's try to show a little composure. Agreed wholeheartedly.
Slashdot Mirror
I've said this before, but I thought it was worth bringing up again here...
You can send a fax to all of your congressmen via aclu.org even easier than you can send an email. If you go to http://www.aclu.org/action/liberty107.html, at the bottom of the page you will see an option to fax your congressmen. It will figure out who they are based on your physical address and fax them whatever content you enter into the web form.
I don't want to repost the whole thing here, but I posted the letter that I wrote to my congressmen regarding the SSSCA and the other recent oppressive IP legislation. If you're writing a letter to your congressmen, you might use it for fodder.
Actually, two open source projects have been spun off, Autoupdater and ARMI at sourceforge. Our plan is to open source the 'engine' parts once we release the game. Major parts (MOB AI, spell code, monster stats, etc.) will remain proprietary.
We don't want to open source the engine earlier because we do actually want to make money on this. Also, it will be a significant amount of work to figure out what to open source. ARMI and Autoupdater had obvious delineation.
We aren't going to open source the other parts since we think it would be detrimental to the game.
Those with serious interest in contributing, especially 3D artists, should contact me via email.
Sick of MS? Still love your MMORPG? The answer is not here now, but it's coming...
;)
See my sig
Add some factual information, indeed.
h ra x.htm
Per your link to the CDC:
"Inhalation: Initial symptoms may resemble a common cold. After several days, the symptoms may progress to severe breathing problems and shock. Inhalation anthrax is usually fatal."
Yes, anthrax is treatable. They can give you an IV of 2 million units of penicillin every two hours and you will die anyway, the vast majority of the time. Note that I didn't say all anthrax is fatal, just inhalational. I am unsure about gastrointestinal or cutaneous infection, but it is my understanding that it can be treated with good success.
Per the Defence Journal
"Within twenty-four to thirty-six hours, the victim experiences the rapid onset of shock and subsequent death. Inhalation anthrax has a mortality of 95-100% despite antibiotic treatment."
Per the Biological Weapons FAQ
"Some authors maintain that anthrax is an even more deadly agent. According to one study, in principle, if its spores were distributed appropriately, a single gram would be sufficient to kill more than one-third of the population of the US. Of course, the authors were quick to point out that an attack of such magnitude would not be feasible. However, more realistic, smaller-scale scenarios still posit large numbers of casualties. For example, the US Law Enforcement Assistance Administration reported in March 1977 that a single ounce of anthrax introduced into the air-conditioning system of a domed stadium could infect 70-80,000 spectators within an hour). And a 1972 study by the Advanced Concepts Research Corporation of Santa Barbara, California, postulated that an aerosol attack with anthrax spores on the New York City area would result in more than 600,000 deaths."
I agree wholeheartedly that getting hysterical is not going to solve anything. However, it is just as naive to discount real, viable threats as it is to fret about weak or unlikely threats. Certainly it is true that anthrax is not going to cause a plague; it doesn't really spread very well. But it just as certainly is true that anthrax is a very potent, low-tech weapon for the psychotically discontent when spores are directly blown into the air.
Certainly it is not safe to produce biological weapons. I think that goes without saying.
Thanks for the link to Bioport, btw! I hadn't found that. And thanks also for the note about Aum Shinrikyo. I hadn't known of any publicized anthrax attacks in modern times. The sources I've looked at so far casually mention that he tried one attack. If it is in fact true that there is some factor that I haven't seen yet that invalidates anthrax as such an easy and potent weapon, I would love to know about it so I can find something else to worry about : )
More links on anthrax:
http://www.metrokc.gov/health/phnr/prot_res/ant
Actually, I don't think you're being nasty at all. Seems very polite, we just differ in opinion.
I will cede that my original assertion was phrased in an inflammatory way, and I'm sorry. Nonetheless,
1) the US government has supplies of anthrax vaccine. Probably way too little, but they have it.
2) No one else seems to have human vaccine. Ask around, you get directed to the Dept of Health.
3) They won't give you any.
Once again, I say that since they have all of the vaccine, and they're not giving any out, they are preventing us from getting vaccinated.
Frankly, I'm going to buy some veterinary vaccine and if we have an outbreak, then I'll consider whether I think it's worth the risk to vaccinate myself and my family.
And you can see my position on the actual topic here.
Er, see my other reply on this subject. I am sure that you are correct, it is just due to a shortage. Nonetheless, the government isn't letting anyone but military have vaccine, or the person we spoke with at the Texas Dept of Health lied to us.
Yup, I suppose if I'm going to advocate anthrax vaccinations, I should also point out the caveats. Some doctors associate the gulf war syndrome with anthrax vaccine.
See http://www.gulfwarvets.com/anthrax.htm
We called the Texas Department of Health (after calling our doctor) and were told that only those in the military would be vaccinated. I suppose you could say that they would let us be vaccinated if we could magically conjure some vaccine. Since no one else seems to have vaccine other than veterinary vaccine, I'd say they're pretty effectively preventing us from getting vaccinated.
:)
I said what I meant. Certainly what you say is also true, but if there is no vaccine other than what they provide, it is equivalent to what I said
And I still think that someone somewhere screwed up big time if we don't have enough anthrax vaccine to go around.
Well, I'm going to weigh in on your side on this one. Facial recognition software could be a boon, in my opinion.
I'll agree that a few people will find it to be something of a consistent hassle. It should be relatively simple for them to verify that they are not whoever they look like via fingerprints.
IMO, we definitely need to also put cameras in the rooms where folks are questioned, too, though. And all of the cameras should be available over the internet in real-time!!! With these two provisos, facilities that victimize those with unfortunate resemblances can be caught very quickly, and it should radically reduce other abuses of authority.
I'm sure that it will bring about new abuses, but IMO the system I outlined above would by far eliminate more abuses than it introduces.
BTW, if you're going to have a sig that says you have no toleranse(sic) for stupidity, you ought to spell check it. Also, apprehensive is spelled like I spelled it, and entrys should be entries.
Anthrax isn't deliverable by water. Your worst fear should be clouds of anthrax delivered via air, since anthrax:
;) If we don't have enough vaccine for everyone, why the hell not? Anthrax has been well known to be a major bio warfare hazard for years, and the vaccine has likewise been known for years. Livestock handlers and livestock have been getting vaccinated for anthrax for ages.
*lasts 30-40 years in the open
*is easy to produce
*is infectious in miniscule amounts
*when inhaled is nearly 100% fatal once symptoms occur, regardless of treatment
*the US government isn't letting anyone but the military be vaccinated!
Vaccination appears to provide a 95%+ immunity to airborn anthrax (evidence is sketchy for humans, since we don't experiment with infecting the vaccinated
Can you point me at this? I have a Tivo, but hadn't hacked it because I didn't see any big advantage. I thought due to the proprietary file system, you couldn't extend the time beyond the max time for the standard Tivo boxes.
That was freaking hilarious. Thanks!
It fights me back. I'm allergic to corn. It took me years to figure out why I always had a cold for a week after I ate Mexican.
Cocksuckers.
I'm quite sure that it's not legal, considering the trouble some folks have gotten into for rebroadcasting TV signals over the internet.
I'm not at all sure that I understand the mindset. If the commercials are included, why would you not want more viewers? Personally, I think the big media corporations have morons making their policy. I have tried very hard to understand how their policies benefit even the policy-makers.
Firstly, I didn't necessarily advocate that this be done; I simply pointed out that it would be in the government's interest.
Secondly, who proposed a national database? What I proposed involved:
1) create a private/public key pairs on multiple machines somewhere, and don't copy the private keys anywhere. Physically secure the machines and only allow remote access through one interface, and all that interface can do is submit the picture, thumbprint, and name for signing.
2) when someone gets an ID (US Visa or driver's license, etc.), verify their identity, verify that they don't already have an id via their thumbprint, then send the data off for signing by all machines.
3) put the signed data on their card.
OK, so that would require a database of thumbprints indexed by name. What do you want to bet the gov't doesn't already have that? If such a database was cracked, how would it hurt anyone?
Other than that, all it requires is some machines with private keys on them. You sign with multiple private keys so if one is compromised the entire system isn't invalidated. The worst that could happen is that all machines get compromised (exceedingly unlikely IMO with some care) and you can no longer identify people so certainly.
All this system does is help stop counterfeit IDs. And as reluctant as I am to give the government power, as far as I'm concerned counterfeiting IDs is illegal and bad, and we should stop it.
Certainly this is not uncrackable. Nothing is. There is such a thing as risk management, though. You do it every time you decide to buckle your seat belt. It is sensible.
Finally, starting your comment by insulting the person to whom you're replying doesn't discredit their comment, but it does call into question yours.
Oh, sorry. FastTrack is the network protocol used by KaZaA (it's laden with spyware crap, but it's a no-brainer to use on Windows and supports multi-source downloads well), giFT (an open source client), Morpheus, and Grokster (don't know anything about these two).
From what I'm told, it shares the files over port 80 so wget will get files from a FastTrack peer. The really great thing about it is the multi-source download. I can get full use of my bandwidth at home while I download the 300meg+ video files from multiple users. Of course, I only download bits to which I have a legal right.
Try looking around on one of the FastTrack clients. I'll bet you can find a bootleg of it soon, maybe now.
What's ironic is that the government could embrace encryption and more effectively eliminate terrorism.
Imagine if everyone was required to have an ID card. This ID card has your name, photo and thumbprint, encrypted with a centrally held government private key. You would need the card to take a flight, get into government buildings, etc. It would be simple to make a small, self-contained device that would have the public key and could compare thumbprints or show a photograph. You would be guaranteed to be who you said you were, no name spelling alterations or alter egos possible.
Before a plane takes off, a computer program looks for people who are associated with the same criminal organization, and if too many flags go off we station extra sky marshals on that plane.
It's kind of scary to give up a basic right to anonymity (although I don't think it's guaranteed anywhere). However, I think I've actually convinced myself that in a time when a handful of people can cause so much damage, we need to know who is in a high risk location.
I know this has been brought up before, but I'd like to comment on it again... If you have an interest in privacy, you should try reading "The Truth Machine" by James Halperin for an alternative view. In my opinion, he makes a very good case that we would be better off to require cameras that are accessible by anyone in every public place than to have privacy. The 'accessible by anyone' is critical, of course.
Yes, I did intend to put in a comment regarding the fellow, whats-his-name, the ISP employee who found a security hole in one of the ISP's client's web server while building some advertising pages for the client. Good samaritan that he was, he quickly reported it to them. Evil fucking corporation that they were, they prosecuted him over it. If anyone can give me this guy's name and a link to a story about it, I would much appreciate it. I have searched online and can't find it again.
Many of the congressmen claim on their web site or in their automated email response that they will contact you back if you are a constituent of theirs and you included your physical address.
Since I didn't include my physical address on any of my emails, but I did on the fax via aclu.org, I should know in a few weeks, max, whether or not they did in fact fax my requested documents.
As reynaert pointed out, there is also an open source client (called giFT) for FastTrack, the protocol that Kazaa/Morpheus/Grokster use.
;)
;)
I'm reposting it since reynaert gave a bad link to it
I haven't tried out giFT yet, but I use Kazaa occasionally, and the number of files and users on the network is astounding (~half million!) You can also regularly find movies on FastTrack that are still in theaters, but don't tell anyone you heard it from me
To some extent I'll agree with you on that one. However, if the end result is that bad laws get struck down, then the system is good rather than bad.
Wow. Firstly, I'll say that this post doesn't look like it was made by the same person as the first. Whether that's an artifact of my mindset or yours, I'm unsure.
As for figuring out WITH CERTAINTY who is responsible, your definition of certainty will be the only thing that determines whether or not that happens. There is growing, credible evidence that the obvious was true. If you're not convinced, that's okay. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. And I don't mind mounting some more evidence before we start military action. I do, however, believe strongly enough to consider Osama Bin Laden the guilty party for this conversation. I believe this not only from the things being presented in the media; but from historical evidence as well.
I agree with you there, on all counts. "With certainty" was a foolish way to put that. I do believe that we need to examine this more carefully than we have so far before we go to war. I also believe Osama Bin Laden is the most likely culprit. Early on, it concerned me that we apparently weren't being let in on the information that the tlas used to decide he was the culprit, but much of that has been released by now.
Excellent advice regarding the reading of memoirs. I consider myself essentially uneducated with regard to current events. My opinions are based on ethical considerations and a call for rational thought, not a knowledge of current events. I hope to rectify this.
They obviously take the issues more seriously than you have, given your remarks above.
Just when I thought you were going to reply to my flames without any of your own. Ah well, I probably deserved it. And, I do believe that, in general, they take the issues more seriously than I do, considering that it is their life to make the right decisions. I do frequently question their motivations, though. I also doubt that they value the life of the enemy soldiers and civilians very highly. And, frankly, I think Bush is a total idiot. I doubt that he actually considers much of anything; I think he acts on an emotional level, and most of his emotions fall in the 'pissed off' category.
I'm unsure that I or you understand the motivations of Bin Laden. For his followers, I'm sure that your characterization is near correct. For Ladin himself, I wouldn't be surprised if worldly power didn't have something to do with it. I will say that you've put enough context in that some of your original statements make more sense to me.
I still stand by the statement that we need to review foreign policy and eliminate any policies that cause deaths, unless we have strong evidence that these policies save more lives in the long run. Whether or not the lives saved are American.
Your patronizing analogy of the obnoxious neighbor falls so short of the mark as to be useless in this discussion.
My remark was not intended to be patronizing; I was simply trying to bring the idea back to the realm of the everyday. And while I will agree that I'm awful at coming up with analogies with punch, once again I stand by my analogy. It may be that changes in our foreign policy wouldn't have changed the results of this particular attack, in my opinion we should expect to be attacked as long as we are hiding within our borders and sending arms or soldiers into other countries to kill civilians.
(and I don't see any evil in buying a gas grill, even if I don't need it, or a play-station, or cute clothes for my little girl, or anything else.)
I wouldn't fault you for any of the above examples, frankly you hit a hot-button prejudice of mine with regard to SUVs in your original post.
However, in fact I do see a small evil in buying things for which you have no use when the money could be saving people who really need it. I understand that others don't think that way. I also don't practice what I preach very well in that regard, but I feel my actions rather than my principles are in error. There are a lot of people in the world dying of hunger, disease, and bullets who could benefit from our money. Can you actually imagine these people, their environment, their emotional and physical pain? Then, also realize that you might have significantly changed someone's life for the better by buying a car that was $15K instead of $35K. Do you not believe that there is any evil there?
I have children too, and I'm trying to teach them to be better than I in these regards.
By the way, I don't think it's evil to buy something you don't "need". I do think that conspicuous consumption of things for which you have no use is to some degree evil, when carried to extremes. And I believe most all Americans take it to extremes.
You're right, I did assume that you had given little thought to the issues. I've re-read your original comment, and I still don't see how I could have gotten your true meaning from it.
ironic. That's exactly how the extremists see us. Let's try to show a little more depth.
And, once again, you've gone over my head. I don't know who the extremists are that we're talking about. If it's the Bin Laden Muslims, from your descriptions above you don't believe that they think we've given little thought on the issue, just that we're heathen infidels unworthy to live. And I agree with your characterization of them.
Let's try to show a little composure.
Agreed wholeheartedly.
Wow, thanks. That means a lot.
I spent a couple of hours on it this morning, gathering information and such.