One of the answers to this problem of a finite number of subscribers is to REMOVE subscription cost. I don't know why there has only been one company that I'm aware of that has created an MMO that requires only the cost of buying the game. That is Guild Wars. On the other hand, I do know why they won't remove the fee, greed. Theres a lot of money to be made in MMO subcription based gaming.
Personally I think the only reason why Guild Wars is fee free is because the company ArenaNet and the publishing group NCSoft, were founded by people whose interest's wasn't really in money but in the art of making a game. ArenaNet was founded by some of the top people that developed and programmed Starcraft.
The market will either collapse to something managable or it will be forced to change to fewer games that are non-fee based, and once non-fee based games start arriving, people will shy away from games that run on fees because will have "seen the light" so to speak.
I do believe the MMO genre is a new way for a company to create a sustained flow of money. I see that a lot of companies are going this route probably due to the fact that the cost to start production on a new game is so high, and will continue to rise with Hi-Def around the corner. I believe this is why so many companies have jumped on the MMO band wagon. All a company needs to do is create a decent MMO, get a fairly decent customer base and working subscription cost, and they have a constant flow of money for awhile.
The down side however, is the MMO market is going to get oversaturated, if it isn't already. Every other game I hear about these days seems to be an MMO, and I can't help but wonder "where are the customers, the subscribers, coming from?" While I can see some people footing the bill for multiple MMO's, the nature of many MMOs is the "time-sink" which makes it so you have to put most of your time into one game if you want to get far, making it unlikely that many people will be playing multiple MMOs at once. This is what sets MMOs apart from Single player games (regardless of whether it has a multiplayer option or not). Single player games are one shot titles that are played, beaten, and then put down. Where as the MMO is a game that typically isn't one-shot, even at the "end-game" there is still more to do, though comparabily less from the beginning. And with added content every few months to an MMO, its a constant game, not so much a "one-shot" title.
As it stands, I believe the number of MMOs released will continue to rise but the numbers will dwindle back to something reasonable when companies realize there can only be so many active MMOs out. And unless a company is dam sure they'll have a game that turns heads and pulls people in, it'll be unlikely that they will release another MMO that requires a subscription cost, unless they want to come out at a loss. The solution here is to pull more gamers from the general population into the MMO craze, this should allow for more games to be realeased and maintained.
The only way I see the market for MMO games surviving is if they change the system. Honestly, I believe the current style MMO (with large servers and people) isn't really what people want, it might be what they think they want, but what I think people are really interested in is just a single-player game with a social aspect added in every now and then; and a stream of occasional new content. I think the best answer to MMOs might be smaller worlds/servers. Something like Neverwinter Nights but with a medium number of players(~500-1000 players) also playing along in a campaign. While I don't think its required, games might turn out better if developers know what they want in an MMO, do they want story/PvE play or more PvP action, right now developers/publishers seem to want both, and the mix seems to kill a game because no one can pull off a balanced mix very well.
Another way I can see large-scale MMOs surviving is if they just remove the bloody subscription cost on games altogether. See Guild Wars (ArenaNet/NCSoft). They have the right idea and have proven that it is possible to create an MMO that doesn't require a monthly fee to keep up the servers. And it makes sense that they pulled it off too, especially since the founders of ArenaNet were people that developed Starcraft. They knew you could create servers that run area-instances in a game. And they pull this off without a monthly fee. Blizz pulled it off with B.net, you didn't have to pay a fee to constantly play on the servers. Also, the fact that UO is still running, even with the small number of people still subscribed to OSI is proof that you don't need a lot of money to keep a server running. Ok this is turning into a rant, but my point has been given.
I skimmed the article but didn't see any mention as to where the money goes.
After 10 years or more. Could there still be copyright fees or royalties attached to some of those games? So if I spend $50+ buying every game Squaresoft made for the SNES, will a chunk of that money go to them?
It might be interesting to see how some publishers from the past (asssuming they are still around) would respond from the new influx of money from royalties on older games.
Just a thought.
The only real downside about the ROMs for the Wii, is that it won't be possible to buy Japanese released games from the past and apply translation patches like you can with current PC game ROMs.
There's a whole slew of incidents where "the mark scheme" is simply disallowing of the truth, and those who memorised half truths get higher grades. Another example, GCSE (last compulsory examination in British schooling) IT test, there was a multiple choice test. One question showed two devices. (1)A keyboard and mouse, and (2) A television.
The question: Which one connects to a personal computer (cross correct box)?
( ) Item 1
( ) Item 2
( ) Both items
So here I sit. S Video out was popular enough to count, surely? Either way the correct answer is both items, hell I've got a box connected to a TV right now. The "correct" answer was Item 1. The person who has a mortal fear of computers got an A* and I believe I got a terrible mark along the lines of D, along with most geeks.
Oh how I know your pain. I found very similar issues when I took classes I excelled in a lot; particularly programming and any IT class. The test for most of the students was a test of what they knew, but what it ended up turning into for me was trying to make sure I didn't think too hard on questions. Even my teacher, bless her soul, who knew I was way above the level of most of the people in the class, told me not to think about the questions too hard otherwise I was guarenteed to get them wrong. So I did what I knew the answer key wanted and often avoided bringing up the "amgiousness" of a question in class (it just slows the process down and makes some people think you are trying to be a smartass). Most of questions are simplified for the people that arn't on the level of "geekness."
I have also had the unfortunate incidant of running into the same type of questions in college classes as well--where the question can be ambigious if you think about it. Of course, in both high school and college, getting the answer reversed so you didn't lose a mark for your answer was almost impossible. Professors(mostly) often tried to weasel their way through saying "you should have known that (A) was the correct answer," yet (C) may very well have been just as correct too. I seem to recall this happening a lot in my Social Psych class, and I wasn't the only victim.
In truth, I often do wonder if the things people say are true, that "Society doesn't want people thinking," or that "the people on top don't want the people down below thinking." To me it has felt somewhat like a minefield sometimes, at least where my knowledge on things is vastly greater than the expectations of the course director, hence why I never really want to take a class I'm sure I'll know more than half the material, like taking a class on Java or C++, when I'm already highly proficient in it. Because even if I know the material, you often have to navigate that minefield and reduce your knowledge to the level of others in order to be able to pass the class with high mark. Eventually though, the minefield passes and you are given free room to think, like when you do your Masters or Docorate, at least thats what I expect. I've never felt like I've been in minefields constantly though, which is a good thing, but I can only imagine how hard it must be for those that really are vastly more knowledgable and/or are great thinkers. (I always have felt that in a good class, you can think you're way through a test on logic and reason and at least get a passing grade, maybe not an A, but a passing one:).)
One thing that gets to you if you go there, is how isolated and non-descript the area is. We don't bury waste in beautiful places. Its a 40 minute ride out from Carlsbad, to no-where, (at least to a city guy like me).
I think one thing a lot of people forget about the land over time is that it changes. Who is to say that a desert now won't have forests growing on it 10,000 years in the future, due to a change in climate? I don't think we can rely on how the land appears to us now to be some kind of deterrent in the future.
The article points out that you can be placed in jail for releasing a copy of a movie, music, or software and knew it had not been commercially released.
In other words this bill only applies to things that arn't released on DVD yet, for instance. Or a game thats released before its placed on the shelf (ie: DOOM 3).
This still doesn't cover the point that people are sharing already copyrighted and released material (movies/games/music a couple years old).
There was an article on Tor back in December. Seems like a nice simple solution to these kinds of things and works on many different levels besides just web browsing. Just so long as you can get a program to work with SOCKs
In a pool or in water for that matter, you have boyancy. While this works for astronauts because they are heavy enough to not float to the surface, I have a funny feeling these robots would float to the top. On top of that, water wouldn't do these things good.
On a side note, since the idea of testing these things in a pool was brought up. If they were heavy enough to float around in water, would it be possible to test these in that liquid that one company invented that doesn't stick to anything or is the density vastly different from water that it might not work?
This was about the same time that Area 51 buffs reported a dramatic decrease in activity at and around the base
This is false. The people reporting that Groom Lake had closed up screwed up. It later turned out that these people were driving to the Nelis AFB, which isn't that much farther from Groom Lake, test range instead of the Groom Lake facility. You can still drive out to Groom Lake area and see the white jeeps parked up on the hills.
I once heard that you can actually see these pin-holes once they've grown to a size that's not yet large enough to cause permenant errors. Hold the disk up to a bright light and see if you can see them. This may give you time to back up one that's "on the way out" before you lose it completely.
I'm not sure if this is the same thing, but I have some CDs I burned about 2 or 3 years ago. I took them out about a month ago and noticed I could see the monitor screen through the CD. It was so bad I could read lettering and everything through the CD itself and when I burned them I vaguely remember not being able to do that, so something tells me the data probably isn't on those CDs any longer.
Comparing to what i've seen of C++ and it's AP Exam, I _think_ the ease came mostly from the ease of Java itself, and the APPENDICES!
I'd have to agree with you on that. I was able to fly through the first two free response questions in about 15 minutes thanks to Java, don't think I could have done it with C++.
Most of my time on the free response was sucked up flipping through that Appendix and looking to find the stuff I needed to answer the case study question. My only real complaint on the whole test was how one of the questions was worded on the free response, the "create the RandomLocation function" question I think it was. Don't know if I got full credit on that one...
Multiple choice was pretty easy. I think I skipped only one question and that was a question that wanted you to give the way an array of strings looked after having been run through a sorting algorithm's outer for loop twice; way too much work to figure out with how much time I had left. On top of that, the multiple choice reminded me how much I hated function recrusion. I've never been able to understand how it all worked out and when they have two functions calling each other back and forth it gets pretty confusing. Luckily function recrusion isn't very effcient so I won't be using it often.
I only glanced across the front article and noticed that it was focusing pretty much on some claims of Sony, particularly the fact that the PS3 is supposably going to be able to do 1TFLOP. This is thanks to the Cell design, but what does this leave for XBox2 and whatever Nintendo has up their sleaves? I haven't heard a thing from either companies as to whether they'll have multiple processors or not. So...
Are Nintendo and Microsoft bound to lag behind if their next generation consoles don't run multiple processors and can't push near-supercomputer speeds? In short are the two going to have to innovate like Sony or be pushed out of the competition?
Something that should probably be noted is that the police are probably the only people that should of had access to this video because it's their cameras and technically not a "public camera." Had someone been standing their video taping the event on their own personal camera then I can imagine there might be more legitimacy in an argument on privacy.
One of the things that has been mentioned here about the laptop this guy is going to be buying is that the laptop is going to have a US keyboard and not a UK keyboard.
I'm going to be buying a laptop here in the US soon as well but would prefer having a different keyboard on it. Do companies like Dell, IBM, and Apple have a way for you to get the keyboards swapped out? Exactly how much would this cost?
The real barrier is going to be whether or not it'd be dangerous if it breaks or if it's cut.
I remember reading about this concern somewhere. The idea was that the carbon nanotubes would be stretched almost as thin as paper. Should the ribbon break all that would happen is the ribbion would float back to Earth like paper and no one would get hurt.
This will be good against countries that have no space program. China, however, has already shown they have a space program that works. They've placed a man in space and were able to get him back to Earth. I think if China feels threatened by the measures that the U.S. is using here they too will work harder to place weapons into space.
Honestly, these weapons will only be good against countries that have no space program. Without one how will they be able to reach space to even stand a chance of taking these weapons out? On the other hand, new weapons that can reach space (ie. ground based lasers, missles) and destroy these targets might come into existance and will be what most nations will use if they can't afford to send people into space.
Space-based weapons will be better in terms of how hard it will be for enemies to take them out.
Most countries have weapons to counter tanks or air planes but how many countries are going to have technology to counter something miles about their heads in orbit. Considering most "wars" are waged on poor countries with usually no space program, they'll never be able to touch them.
To top it off, don't we already have a laser in space? I distinctly remember reading a Popular Science magazine a couple years back that said they finally invented the piece they needed to constuct or finish the Star Wars SDI Laser. Was the funding cut to this project as well?
Something that boggles my mind is that suddenly politicians are just now noticing these issues when there has already been an issue with laws being slipped in under the publics' noses in the past.
Where do we draw the line in too much? I mean the government feels now that without the Patriot Act you have no life or freedom, but this isn't the case.
The Patriot Act IMO is too undefined. It talks about terrorism and what powers the justice system has but it doesn't really ever define terrorism. In the long run it's a lot like statistics, you can make the numbers read however you want. The Patriot Act is the same way, the government just has to justify somehow that something is "involved with terrorism" and then its fine to apply the law. Does anyone remeber the ads that said marijuana supported terrorism? How about that recent drug bust that used the powers of the Patriot Act? I hardly doubt 10 years ago people would say a drug dealer was on par with terrorist orgnizations like al qaeda. I believe its already been mentioned that pirating movies and software is an act of terrorism. I mean come on!
It wouldn't at all suprise me if eventually, if we don't stop this, the government gets "paranoid" of the people and believes everyones a terrorist, and who knows what laws might be in affect by then. People just need to wake up and realize that no amount of laws and removal of freedoms is going to make you completly safe in this world.
With that in mind, the presidental elections are coming, do those of us that support having the act removed have any choice of canidates that want the act removed? Probably the better question is: Have any canidates voiced that they too support the removal of the act?
If you'd like access to other FIOA material that has been recovered before check out here, The Black Vault . The founder has gone through much work and collected quite a bit of material on UFO's and lots of other stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
As I mentioned in a post I made.
One of the answers to this problem of a finite number of subscribers is to REMOVE subscription cost. I don't know why there has only been one company that I'm aware of that has created an MMO that requires only the cost of buying the game. That is Guild Wars. On the other hand, I do know why they won't remove the fee, greed. Theres a lot of money to be made in MMO subcription based gaming.
Personally I think the only reason why Guild Wars is fee free is because the company ArenaNet and the publishing group NCSoft, were founded by people whose interest's wasn't really in money but in the art of making a game. ArenaNet was founded by some of the top people that developed and programmed Starcraft.
The market will either collapse to something managable or it will be forced to change to fewer games that are non-fee based, and once non-fee based games start arriving, people will shy away from games that run on fees because will have "seen the light" so to speak.
I do believe the MMO genre is a new way for a company to create a sustained flow of money. I see that a lot of companies are going this route probably due to the fact that the cost to start production on a new game is so high, and will continue to rise with Hi-Def around the corner. I believe this is why so many companies have jumped on the MMO band wagon. All a company needs to do is create a decent MMO, get a fairly decent customer base and working subscription cost, and they have a constant flow of money for awhile.
The down side however, is the MMO market is going to get oversaturated, if it isn't already. Every other game I hear about these days seems to be an MMO, and I can't help but wonder "where are the customers, the subscribers, coming from?" While I can see some people footing the bill for multiple MMO's, the nature of many MMOs is the "time-sink" which makes it so you have to put most of your time into one game if you want to get far, making it unlikely that many people will be playing multiple MMOs at once. This is what sets MMOs apart from Single player games (regardless of whether it has a multiplayer option or not). Single player games are one shot titles that are played, beaten, and then put down. Where as the MMO is a game that typically isn't one-shot, even at the "end-game" there is still more to do, though comparabily less from the beginning. And with added content every few months to an MMO, its a constant game, not so much a "one-shot" title.
As it stands, I believe the number of MMOs released will continue to rise but the numbers will dwindle back to something reasonable when companies realize there can only be so many active MMOs out. And unless a company is dam sure they'll have a game that turns heads and pulls people in, it'll be unlikely that they will release another MMO that requires a subscription cost, unless they want to come out at a loss. The solution here is to pull more gamers from the general population into the MMO craze, this should allow for more games to be realeased and maintained.
The only way I see the market for MMO games surviving is if they change the system. Honestly, I believe the current style MMO (with large servers and people) isn't really what people want, it might be what they think they want, but what I think people are really interested in is just a single-player game with a social aspect added in every now and then; and a stream of occasional new content. I think the best answer to MMOs might be smaller worlds/servers. Something like Neverwinter Nights but with a medium number of players(~500-1000 players) also playing along in a campaign. While I don't think its required, games might turn out better if developers know what they want in an MMO, do they want story/PvE play or more PvP action, right now developers/publishers seem to want both, and the mix seems to kill a game because no one can pull off a balanced mix very well.
Another way I can see large-scale MMOs surviving is if they just remove the bloody subscription cost on games altogether. See Guild Wars (ArenaNet/NCSoft). They have the right idea and have proven that it is possible to create an MMO that doesn't require a monthly fee to keep up the servers. And it makes sense that they pulled it off too, especially since the founders of ArenaNet were people that developed Starcraft. They knew you could create servers that run area-instances in a game. And they pull this off without a monthly fee. Blizz pulled it off with B.net, you didn't have to pay a fee to constantly play on the servers. Also, the fact that UO is still running, even with the small number of people still subscribed to OSI is proof that you don't need a lot of money to keep a server running. Ok this is turning into a rant, but my point has been given.
I skimmed the article but didn't see any mention as to where the money goes.
After 10 years or more. Could there still be copyright fees or royalties attached to some of those games? So if I spend $50+ buying every game Squaresoft made for the SNES, will a chunk of that money go to them?
It might be interesting to see how some publishers from the past (asssuming they are still around) would respond from the new influx of money from royalties on older games.
Just a thought.
The only real downside about the ROMs for the Wii, is that it won't be possible to buy Japanese released games from the past and apply translation patches like you can with current PC game ROMs.
Oh how I know your pain. I found very similar issues when I took classes I excelled in a lot; particularly programming and any IT class. The test for most of the students was a test of what they knew, but what it ended up turning into for me was trying to make sure I didn't think too hard on questions. Even my teacher, bless her soul, who knew I was way above the level of most of the people in the class, told me not to think about the questions too hard otherwise I was guarenteed to get them wrong. So I did what I knew the answer key wanted and often avoided bringing up the "amgiousness" of a question in class (it just slows the process down and makes some people think you are trying to be a smartass). Most of questions are simplified for the people that arn't on the level of "geekness."
I have also had the unfortunate incidant of running into the same type of questions in college classes as well--where the question can be ambigious if you think about it. Of course, in both high school and college, getting the answer reversed so you didn't lose a mark for your answer was almost impossible. Professors(mostly) often tried to weasel their way through saying "you should have known that (A) was the correct answer," yet (C) may very well have been just as correct too. I seem to recall this happening a lot in my Social Psych class, and I wasn't the only victim.
In truth, I often do wonder if the things people say are true, that "Society doesn't want people thinking," or that "the people on top don't want the people down below thinking." To me it has felt somewhat like a minefield sometimes, at least where my knowledge on things is vastly greater than the expectations of the course director, hence why I never really want to take a class I'm sure I'll know more than half the material, like taking a class on Java or C++, when I'm already highly proficient in it. Because even if I know the material, you often have to navigate that minefield and reduce your knowledge to the level of others in order to be able to pass the class with high mark. Eventually though, the minefield passes and you are given free room to think, like when you do your Masters or Docorate, at least thats what I expect. I've never felt like I've been in minefields constantly though, which is a good thing, but I can only imagine how hard it must be for those that really are vastly more knowledgable and/or are great thinkers. (I always have felt that in a good class, you can think you're way through a test on logic and reason and at least get a passing grade, maybe not an A, but a passing one
One thing that gets to you if you go there, is how isolated and non-descript the area is. We don't bury waste in beautiful places. Its a 40 minute ride out from Carlsbad, to no-where, (at least to a city guy like me).
I think one thing a lot of people forget about the land over time is that it changes. Who is to say that a desert now won't have forests growing on it 10,000 years in the future, due to a change in climate? I don't think we can rely on how the land appears to us now to be some kind of deterrent in the future.
The article points out that you can be placed in jail for releasing a copy of a movie, music, or software and knew it had not been commercially released.
In other words this bill only applies to things that arn't released on DVD yet, for instance. Or a game thats released before its placed on the shelf (ie: DOOM 3).
This still doesn't cover the point that people are sharing already copyrighted and released material (movies/games/music a couple years old).
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
There was an article on Tor back in December. Seems like a nice simple solution to these kinds of things and works on many different levels besides just web browsing. Just so long as you can get a program to work with SOCKs
Anyone else think of Ghost in the Shell when they saw the guy in the rain coat cloaked?
I still don't understand how this works.
In a pool or in water for that matter, you have boyancy. While this works for astronauts because they are heavy enough to not float to the surface, I have a funny feeling these robots would float to the top. On top of that, water wouldn't do these things good.
On a side note, since the idea of testing these things in a pool was brought up. If they were heavy enough to float around in water, would it be possible to test these in that liquid that one company invented that doesn't stick to anything or is the density vastly different from water that it might not work?
This was about the same time that Area 51 buffs reported a dramatic decrease in activity at and around the base
This is false. The people reporting that Groom Lake had closed up screwed up. It later turned out that these people were driving to the Nelis AFB, which isn't that much farther from Groom Lake, test range instead of the Groom Lake facility. You can still drive out to Groom Lake area and see the white jeeps parked up on the hills.
I once heard that you can actually see these pin-holes once they've grown to a size that's not yet large enough to cause permenant errors. Hold the disk up to a bright light and see if you can see them. This may give you time to back up one that's "on the way out" before you lose it completely.
I'm not sure if this is the same thing, but I have some CDs I burned about 2 or 3 years ago. I took them out about a month ago and noticed I could see the monitor screen through the CD. It was so bad I could read lettering and everything through the CD itself and when I burned them I vaguely remember not being able to do that, so something tells me the data probably isn't on those CDs any longer.
Comparing to what i've seen of C++ and it's AP Exam, I _think_ the ease came mostly from the ease of Java itself, and the APPENDICES!
I'd have to agree with you on that. I was able to fly through the first two free response questions in about 15 minutes thanks to Java, don't think I could have done it with C++.
Most of my time on the free response was sucked up flipping through that Appendix and looking to find the stuff I needed to answer the case study question. My only real complaint on the whole test was how one of the questions was worded on the free response, the "create the RandomLocation function" question I think it was. Don't know if I got full credit on that one...
Multiple choice was pretty easy. I think I skipped only one question and that was a question that wanted you to give the way an array of strings looked after having been run through a sorting algorithm's outer for loop twice; way too much work to figure out with how much time I had left. On top of that, the multiple choice reminded me how much I hated function recrusion. I've never been able to understand how it all worked out and when they have two functions calling each other back and forth it gets pretty confusing. Luckily function recrusion isn't very effcient so I won't be using it often.
Don't know if this has been pointed out yet, but Fetchbook.info is good for checking prices on books.
I only glanced across the front article and noticed that it was focusing pretty much on some claims of Sony, particularly the fact that the PS3 is supposably going to be able to do 1TFLOP. This is thanks to the Cell design, but what does this leave for XBox2 and whatever Nintendo has up their sleaves? I haven't heard a thing from either companies as to whether they'll have multiple processors or not. So...
Are Nintendo and Microsoft bound to lag behind if their next generation consoles don't run multiple processors and can't push near-supercomputer speeds? In short are the two going to have to innovate like Sony or be pushed out of the competition?
Something that should probably be noted is that the police are probably the only people that should of had access to this video because it's their cameras and technically not a "public camera." Had someone been standing their video taping the event on their own personal camera then I can imagine there might be more legitimacy in an argument on privacy.
While we're on the subject of laptops.
One of the things that has been mentioned here about the laptop this guy is going to be buying is that the laptop is going to have a US keyboard and not a UK keyboard.
I'm going to be buying a laptop here in the US soon as well but would prefer having a different keyboard on it. Do companies like Dell, IBM, and Apple have a way for you to get the keyboards swapped out? Exactly how much would this cost?
I think you forgot about Toshiba as well. While I don't think they will be producing it, they did help develop the Cell as well.
The real barrier is going to be whether or not it'd be dangerous if it breaks or if it's cut.
I remember reading about this concern somewhere. The idea was that the carbon nanotubes would be stretched almost as thin as paper. Should the ribbon break all that would happen is the ribbion would float back to Earth like paper and no one would get hurt.
This will be good against countries that have no space program. China, however, has already shown they have a space program that works. They've placed a man in space and were able to get him back to Earth. I think if China feels threatened by the measures that the U.S. is using here they too will work harder to place weapons into space.
Honestly, these weapons will only be good against countries that have no space program. Without one how will they be able to reach space to even stand a chance of taking these weapons out? On the other hand, new weapons that can reach space (ie. ground based lasers, missles) and destroy these targets might come into existance and will be what most nations will use if they can't afford to send people into space.
Space-based weapons will be better in terms of how hard it will be for enemies to take them out.
Most countries have weapons to counter tanks or air planes but how many countries are going to have technology to counter something miles about their heads in orbit. Considering most "wars" are waged on poor countries with usually no space program, they'll never be able to touch them.
To top it off, don't we already have a laser in space? I distinctly remember reading a Popular Science magazine a couple years back that said they finally invented the piece they needed to constuct or finish the Star Wars SDI Laser. Was the funding cut to this project as well?
Something that boggles my mind is that suddenly politicians are just now noticing these issues when there has already been an issue with laws being slipped in under the publics' noses in the past.
The question I have is why on earth would you censor a report like this? What material in this report would harm national security?
I guess this is just further proof that the people on top are idiots.
Where do we draw the line in too much? I mean the government feels now that without the Patriot Act you have no life or freedom, but this isn't the case.
The Patriot Act IMO is too undefined. It talks about terrorism and what powers the justice system has but it doesn't really ever define terrorism. In the long run it's a lot like statistics, you can make the numbers read however you want. The Patriot Act is the same way, the government just has to justify somehow that something is "involved with terrorism" and then its fine to apply the law. Does anyone remeber the ads that said marijuana supported terrorism? How about that recent drug bust that used the powers of the Patriot Act? I hardly doubt 10 years ago people would say a drug dealer was on par with terrorist orgnizations like al qaeda. I believe its already been mentioned that pirating movies and software is an act of terrorism. I mean come on!
It wouldn't at all suprise me if eventually, if we don't stop this, the government gets "paranoid" of the people and believes everyones a terrorist, and who knows what laws might be in affect by then. People just need to wake up and realize that no amount of laws and removal of freedoms is going to make you completly safe in this world.
With that in mind, the presidental elections are coming, do those of us that support having the act removed have any choice of canidates that want the act removed? Probably the better question is: Have any canidates voiced that they too support the removal of the act?
Maybe "Chlamydia" would be a more appropriate name..
:)
Oh so I'm not the only one that heard "Chlamydia" when I read "Claria"
That's good to know.
If you'd like access to other FIOA material that has been recovered before check out here, The Black Vault . The founder has gone through much work and collected quite a bit of material on UFO's and lots of other stuff.