Here in the United States we do not place enough emphasis on science and mathematics in our public schools. It is considered socially unacceptable to excel in these fields for many people and only some school systems are willing to support the programs to develop the skills of thes eindividuals at this level. With religious fundamentalists clammoring about how one scientific doctrine or another interferes with their right to bring up their own children, the schools are scared to teach anything that could be disputed (Evolution is the glaring example, there are several others). Scientific journalism for the masses isn't scientific most of the time, especially because it is designed for people with a 6th grade reading level. Technical scientific journals are often difficult to access because most are very expensive (props to the Proceeding of the National Academy of Science, one of the best on the planet, for being absolutely free) or hard to find. I hold a seasonal research job when not in medical school, and it has proven very difficult to get ahold of many journals that would help my (boss's) research. We need to either set up an easily accessible system of free journals for the masses, educate the general populace about science in a much more thorough manner, or both before asking the journalists to take some care in the issue. Remember, most of these media outlets (scientific or otherwise) will publish only what they find interesting and what they know will sell instead of what may be most valuable. The apathy of the general populace in the United States towards science, as well as their dismally low general education level, should thus be treated before making any moves towards a grass-roots movement like this. After all, breaking down nuclear physics (like string theory) or techniques of treating cancer (like inhibiting angiogenesis) loses something in the translation when forced to use 6th-grade terminology.
This seems like something for over-indulgent parents to give their kids, not for something exciting for adult nerds. Sadly enough, the dimensions of this house seem just large enough to compare with my freshman dorm room at college.
I'm a first-year medical student with a bit of medical "training". If you're taking legal advice from your cat, and you understand what it is saying, then are you just overworked or are you Dilbert?
We know only too well how aspirin works since newer drugs have been developed to take away the bad aspects of it while conserving the good. Unfortunately, aspirin inhibits two different enzymes (COX I and II), COX II is the key to aspirin's good effects. When a COX II inhibitor was developed and released on the market about 5 years ago, we didn't know exactly what sorts of side effects it had. You can ask your pharmacist for something called a "package insert" for more information on both the side effects and the actions of the drugs in question.
Finally, an attempt to plug the holes left open by the DMCA. It would seem that the RIAA, MPAA, and many software companies are largely to blame for their own predicament since the former two were willing to enter the electronic age on their own and only recently began initiatives to do the same whiole the third had reps using false advertising then suing customers who proved them wrong. While artists/musicians do have a right to recieve compensation for their works, the RIAA should not have a legally-protected monopoly on CDs even in the face of fair use. Many of the people who use Kazaa and similar services would likely stop if the greed of the CEOs and certain musicians allowed for a drop in price. Similarly, software companies should not be allowed to make false claims like "unbreakable codes" then litigate people who show how fradulent these claims are. If anything, the latter companies should be liable for false advertising and deceptive business practices, not allowed to prosper and benefit from a protectionist corporate cloak. How can we balance the need for protecting consumer and producer alike? I wonder if it would be possible to use binary files of some sort, like MP3s that could be transferred all over the place but would only work given another piece of software encoded by, say, an IP address. Artists and companies who work hard and play fair should get some benefit back, but we also need a counter-DMCA to punish both the pirates and the companies who blatantly exploit the technology for profit.
10. We need the money from our existing product without having to worry about competitors
9. Only three-four companies can afford the costs of having to import programmers
8. Script-kiddies figure out how to cheat so fast that the game stops being fun
7. Paying customers can sue you if someone phishes out their credit card number (did we find out the hard way?)
6. There are only so many people with the skills to handle this kind of work, with only 100 not getting their check from Bill Gates
5. We need to recoup our losses from the last IPO before we can let more people into this field
4. Such games "might promote deviant behavior" which the parents of the players could sue us for if their kid does something crazy and blames on our influence
3. Our non-engineer company chairman is still addicted to the game and is holding up our decision-making process
2. Hackers will gravitate towards any popular online gaming sites and may end up raiding your accounts due to inadequate security
1. We haven't been bought out by Microsoft yet!
Why should MMPORPGs be restricted? These things are perfect for dropping GPAs, especially for freshmen at high-pressure universities like Cal Tech and MIT where numerous freshmen who've never had an internet connection finallu get a chance to play "Quake" or "Everquest" at 1+GBPs or something ridiculous. I remember one of my friends at Vanderbilt got slapped with academic probation and complained that he had no time to get his work done in Engineering. Six-Eight hours a day of Counterstrike and Ultima Online will put a crimp in the ol' calendar. And it becomes like an electronic crack or alcohol for the users, especially if they're anti-social or unpopular to begin with. Trying to tell them they have a problem only leads to fights and arguments. Oh well, regulating these things is almost out of the question entirely but there should be careful consideration of how to deal with the "addicts" and how to best manage these systems.
I figured that in distinguishing those who have Right political leanings from those who reinforce them by trying to enforce them on others was inherent in the wording, but that was my fault. Several of my good friends are pious Christians with Republican/Conservative beliefs who I classify as plain Right since they feel no need to shove their stuff down anyone's throat. But you're right about the nutcases who grab all of the attention claiming that their actions are "God's will" yet couldn't name more than 3 or 4 passages out of the Bible. I deemed these folks the Christian Right, figuring the two should be seperated, but I see your point that in the future improved clarity is necessary. Regardless, the fanatics should not be allowed to deliver their own brand of religion into schools. They're now trying it parts of my home state just as they did in the state where I used to live (and in the latter claiming that ther church vs. state argument doesn't apply since all they wanted was to teach the "truth"...). Censorship at this level is only acceptable IMO because children are involved, but who regulates the content they can view is a difficult questions. Like a good compromise the means to resolve this issue will likely leave everyone mad regardless of religious or political stance.
Some people will define "protecting" children by different means. The Christian Right around here would deny children access to everything they don't agree with, cinluding evolutionary textbooks since they might "corrupt" their kids. Other people will take their 7-year-olds to go see Robocop or the Rocky Horror Picture Show for the hell of it. Trying to protect children requires good parenting first and foremost, not just overly protective laws. Public schools are trickiest of all since so many ready-to-litigate families have different concerns for their kids. I think the easiest solution would be to either have all of the computers monitored by a faculty member. Maybe they could also tell the kids well in advance that their activities will be monitored with justification neccessary for visiting sites deemed "questionable". Granted, that system could be abused and not all kids need protection, but for Johnny trying to e-mail the president and instead visiting a.com instead of a.gov (whitehouse.com is a notorious porn site), some measure of protection should be in place.
As an alum from the Napster days, I remember when they put the bandwidth limitations into practice. There were people on campus supposedly doing transfers in excess of 200 gig/day of movies and napster files. When the upgrades to the network were announced the profs were complaining that they couldn't get files downloaded worth a damn. They tried to restrict use during the day for the profs but that didn't quite work when people set up 24-hours servers for all kinds of things. But remember, this is a university who gave priority for computer networks to the Greek houses over regular dorms and some of its own staff at one time. I really liked that university, and respect anyone enrolled in its engineering or pre-med divisions, but it had some computer regulatory practices that didn't always make 100% sense.
Maybe they'll find that big black rock orbiting Jupiter that'll turn it into the second sun...or maybe Bush and co. will try to destory it since that would make solar power so much more effective...
This law is too easy to abuse under the current administration. Given the religious zeal of many of our nation's leaders at this point and the multiple outlandish abuses of the DMCA, one can only wonder what the next step is. Remember, some of the people in Congress on the cybertechnology committee (Santorum et. al) are very religiously-minded that might use this to give our nation's children access to only those sites they deem "appropriate". While it is wrong for people to be viewing pornography in plain sight of children, why should reasonable research suffer? And is it realistic to ask if the ruling body of the Web just register porn under its own domain or under a specific set of IP addresses that could be more readily screened out by public computers?
Maybe we should consider that the technology for this currently exists but that it is in the extremely prototype/classified military stages. Microtubules of carbon are hard enought to sustain for any length measuring centimeters, and even if you foud a way to use buckyball carbons to construct these tubes there is the problem of finding a solvent capable enough of holding them together. Also, what will serve as the counterweight on top? A big-ass space station? A small asteroid? Anything large enough to support this thing will take years to bring into orbit/adjust to our orbit. Finally, look at the proposed sites for the elevator. Ecuador is considered a prime site but look how close it is to the Sendero Luminoso terrorist groups in Peru and narcotraficos in Colombia, neither of which like the US government (funding it) too much. Perth, Australia is considered another prime site but look at its proximity to the extremists in Indonesia. This thing would prove an obvious terrorist/sabotage target, especially if other nations started trying to build their own. The idea is sound, but the technology to build it and actual construction techniques needed to work with nanotech don't make this a realistic project for at least 25 years IMO. In the meanwhile, we need to concentrate on developing newer LEO and HEO lift systems to get our tech into space while the kinks are worked out of this project.
Does anyone else think that maybe the US gov't is encouraging the big-name companies based in the US to play by a different set of rules in order to maintain market share? Note that Worldcom had tremendous overseas assets, as did Enron. Rambus had one of the largest market shares in its field and an original patent. Microsoft is still on 90(+)% of consumer computers worldwide, and AOL has not had to abide by its promises to open up the IM market under the rules established for the merger with Time-Warner. Granted, all the aforementioned companies are heavy political donators, but it seems that the US government of the last 25 years (since the Chrysler bailout in the late 70s) has encouraged a trust mentality among larger companies that allows them several get-out-of-jail-free cards as long as they stay profitable and maintain market share. I'd like to hear y'alls opinions/comments on this...
China makes friends in the Middle East to screw the US by manipulating our foreign policy. We go in and cause trouble so maintain the oil flow we need so desperately.
China wants to get to the moon because it supposedly contains He-3, a rare isotope of helium that would readily combine with hydrogen in a fusion reaction. Their goal is to gain the edge in fusion technology and make their country a lot more self-sufficient with respect to energy. Control of fusion would then allow them to make friends in the Middle East and deal a serious blow to OPEC. Never mind the international prestige gained by mastering a process that the West and USSR/Russia have been working on since the early 1950s. If the US and EU are smart, then NASA and the ESA (NASDA of Japan and maybe India's space program too?) will get serious budget infusion so we can get at least some of these resources before any one country could monopolize them.
I thought it was hilarious when the CIA (Christians in Action) kept yelling about violence on TV after growing up with Tom and Jerry, Popeye, and Roadrunner/Coyote. Starsky and Hutch wasn't exactly pro-family values either. Their cartoons and TV shows were as violent as anything today, but solid family values and a few key asswhoopins kept most of the kids in check. Remember that most of those cases were copycat crimes inspired by the original one in Oregon or Arkansas or Kentucky. Also, the schools were allowed to discipline children instead of having to find a way around the myriad of potential lawsuits. Question for the board: do y'all think that the new terrorism laws could be used to try to prosecute the next kids who try something stupid like this?
There are lots of little secrets still coming out concerning World War II that should have been declassified years ago. I know about this incident only because of a background in history, but what about other secrets? Such as why Joe Kennedy Jr. (brother of JFK) was killed while trying to test a B-24 loaded with explosives to serve as a primitive cruise missile? What about the target of this primitive Columbia, the secret V-3 weapon ("high-pressure pump", a super-cannon with 150+ mile range that Saddam tried to outdo in 1991 w/ help from Gerald Bull under the "Babylon gun" project)? How was the fact taht the Germans built a stealth aircraft in 1945 left out of public documents? Or that they had a long-range bomber built and running capable of hitting NYC with a "dirty bomb" like the ones we fear today? For some reason much of WWII's secrets are only now being released, so it should be interesting to see what happens with this and similar stories in the near future.
Terraforming by CO2 looks like it is no longer immediately feasible. However, since most of the minerals are below the surface anyway, it should be possible to create domed structures using the terrain of mars currently in existence to build habitats. Greenhouses could easily be built on the surface to produce food or grown underground by artificial light. Extracting water from the caps could be done and piped into colonies elsewhere. We hoped it would be easy to drop algae or some other organism on mars, release the CO2, and let nature take its course to heat up the planet. Now we just have to work a little harder. I'd still like to vacation on mars before I die, regardless of whether a spacesuit would be necessary.
The military thinks that this is not a violation of privacy? Are they the most gullible of their own propaganda targets or driven by some other means? We need to remain vigilent all right, but more against the potential tyrants on our own shores who threaten privacy and personal liberties. Those who have the ability to influence our government to deprive us of liberty are the most dangerous of all, and security at the price of freedom merely costs us both.
The RIAA is acting as abusively as trusts did early in the 19th century and our current president is certainly no Teddy Roosevelt. They have proposed a nationwide charge of all ISPs to "compensate" them for "lost profit", they jack up the price on blank CDs to compensate them on "lost profit", and they overcharge for regular CDs at the expense of artists then have the nerve to try to criminalize any and all competition to release through their outlets to recompensate for "lost profit". The abuses by the RIAA are bordering on violation of freedom of expression and freedom of speech, never mind the already flagrant violations of privacy. Has anyone considered a lawsuit against the RIAA for abuse of monopoly power? I propose that an entirely free service supported through advertising be set up where artists submit samples/songs for free downloads. No hitch, no subscriptions, no catches, just free music submitted with the intention that it be distributed freely. If there are already multiple out there, consolidate them under one or two sites to increase their exposure to the general public.
It is sad that the first words from the Bush administration in the last few months other than "bomb Iraq" now have to be part of a tragedy like this. These men and women should be honored, hopefully by giving their names to new shuttles that can be built soon as to replace our aging fleet. Bush supposedly is prepared to discuss new space initiatives soon, hopefully he'll include one that honors the victims of today's tragedy by making sure their deaths were not in vain.
Definitions of Illegal Art (incomplete list)
on
Review: Illegal Art
·
· Score: 1
*Music: Anything not owned by the RIAA
*Film: Anything not owned by the MPAA
*Paintings: Anything readily comprehended by non- artists
*Sculpture: Anything resembling non-geometric made before WWII
Slashdot Mirror
Here in the United States we do not place enough emphasis on science and mathematics in our public schools. It is considered socially unacceptable to excel in these fields for many people and only some school systems are willing to support the programs to develop the skills of thes eindividuals at this level. With religious fundamentalists clammoring about how one scientific doctrine or another interferes with their right to bring up their own children, the schools are scared to teach anything that could be disputed (Evolution is the glaring example, there are several others). Scientific journalism for the masses isn't scientific most of the time, especially because it is designed for people with a 6th grade reading level. Technical scientific journals are often difficult to access because most are very expensive (props to the Proceeding of the National Academy of Science, one of the best on the planet, for being absolutely free) or hard to find. I hold a seasonal research job when not in medical school, and it has proven very difficult to get ahold of many journals that would help my (boss's) research. We need to either set up an easily accessible system of free journals for the masses, educate the general populace about science in a much more thorough manner, or both before asking the journalists to take some care in the issue. Remember, most of these media outlets (scientific or otherwise) will publish only what they find interesting and what they know will sell instead of what may be most valuable. The apathy of the general populace in the United States towards science, as well as their dismally low general education level, should thus be treated before making any moves towards a grass-roots movement like this. After all, breaking down nuclear physics (like string theory) or techniques of treating cancer (like inhibiting angiogenesis) loses something in the translation when forced to use 6th-grade terminology.
This seems like something for over-indulgent parents to give their kids, not for something exciting for adult nerds. Sadly enough, the dimensions of this house seem just large enough to compare with my freshman dorm room at college.
I'm a first-year medical student with a bit of medical "training". If you're taking legal advice from your cat, and you understand what it is saying, then are you just overworked or are you Dilbert?
We know only too well how aspirin works since newer drugs have been developed to take away the bad aspects of it while conserving the good. Unfortunately, aspirin inhibits two different enzymes (COX I and II), COX II is the key to aspirin's good effects. When a COX II inhibitor was developed and released on the market about 5 years ago, we didn't know exactly what sorts of side effects it had. You can ask your pharmacist for something called a "package insert" for more information on both the side effects and the actions of the drugs in question.
Finally, an attempt to plug the holes left open by the DMCA. It would seem that the RIAA, MPAA, and many software companies are largely to blame for their own predicament since the former two were willing to enter the electronic age on their own and only recently began initiatives to do the same whiole the third had reps using false advertising then suing customers who proved them wrong. While artists/musicians do have a right to recieve compensation for their works, the RIAA should not have a legally-protected monopoly on CDs even in the face of fair use. Many of the people who use Kazaa and similar services would likely stop if the greed of the CEOs and certain musicians allowed for a drop in price. Similarly, software companies should not be allowed to make false claims like "unbreakable codes" then litigate people who show how fradulent these claims are. If anything, the latter companies should be liable for false advertising and deceptive business practices, not allowed to prosper and benefit from a protectionist corporate cloak. How can we balance the need for protecting consumer and producer alike? I wonder if it would be possible to use binary files of some sort, like MP3s that could be transferred all over the place but would only work given another piece of software encoded by, say, an IP address. Artists and companies who work hard and play fair should get some benefit back, but we also need a counter-DMCA to punish both the pirates and the companies who blatantly exploit the technology for profit.
Maybe con-gress isn't the opposite of pro-gress all of the time after all...
10. We need the money from our existing product without having to worry about competitors 9. Only three-four companies can afford the costs of having to import programmers 8. Script-kiddies figure out how to cheat so fast that the game stops being fun 7. Paying customers can sue you if someone phishes out their credit card number (did we find out the hard way?) 6. There are only so many people with the skills to handle this kind of work, with only 100 not getting their check from Bill Gates 5. We need to recoup our losses from the last IPO before we can let more people into this field 4. Such games "might promote deviant behavior" which the parents of the players could sue us for if their kid does something crazy and blames on our influence 3. Our non-engineer company chairman is still addicted to the game and is holding up our decision-making process 2. Hackers will gravitate towards any popular online gaming sites and may end up raiding your accounts due to inadequate security 1. We haven't been bought out by Microsoft yet!
Why should MMPORPGs be restricted? These things are perfect for dropping GPAs, especially for freshmen at high-pressure universities like Cal Tech and MIT where numerous freshmen who've never had an internet connection finallu get a chance to play "Quake" or "Everquest" at 1+GBPs or something ridiculous. I remember one of my friends at Vanderbilt got slapped with academic probation and complained that he had no time to get his work done in Engineering. Six-Eight hours a day of Counterstrike and Ultima Online will put a crimp in the ol' calendar. And it becomes like an electronic crack or alcohol for the users, especially if they're anti-social or unpopular to begin with. Trying to tell them they have a problem only leads to fights and arguments. Oh well, regulating these things is almost out of the question entirely but there should be careful consideration of how to deal with the "addicts" and how to best manage these systems.
I figured that in distinguishing those who have Right political leanings from those who reinforce them by trying to enforce them on others was inherent in the wording, but that was my fault. Several of my good friends are pious Christians with Republican/Conservative beliefs who I classify as plain Right since they feel no need to shove their stuff down anyone's throat. But you're right about the nutcases who grab all of the attention claiming that their actions are "God's will" yet couldn't name more than 3 or 4 passages out of the Bible. I deemed these folks the Christian Right, figuring the two should be seperated, but I see your point that in the future improved clarity is necessary. Regardless, the fanatics should not be allowed to deliver their own brand of religion into schools. They're now trying it parts of my home state just as they did in the state where I used to live (and in the latter claiming that ther church vs. state argument doesn't apply since all they wanted was to teach the "truth"...). Censorship at this level is only acceptable IMO because children are involved, but who regulates the content they can view is a difficult questions. Like a good compromise the means to resolve this issue will likely leave everyone mad regardless of religious or political stance.
Some people will define "protecting" children by different means. The Christian Right around here would deny children access to everything they don't agree with, cinluding evolutionary textbooks since they might "corrupt" their kids. Other people will take their 7-year-olds to go see Robocop or the Rocky Horror Picture Show for the hell of it. Trying to protect children requires good parenting first and foremost, not just overly protective laws. Public schools are trickiest of all since so many ready-to-litigate families have different concerns for their kids. I think the easiest solution would be to either have all of the computers monitored by a faculty member. Maybe they could also tell the kids well in advance that their activities will be monitored with justification neccessary for visiting sites deemed "questionable". Granted, that system could be abused and not all kids need protection, but for Johnny trying to e-mail the president and instead visiting a .com instead of a .gov (whitehouse.com is a notorious porn site), some measure of protection should be in place.
The action taken by France in front of the UN concerning Iraq.
As an alum from the Napster days, I remember when they put the bandwidth limitations into practice. There were people on campus supposedly doing transfers in excess of 200 gig/day of movies and napster files. When the upgrades to the network were announced the profs were complaining that they couldn't get files downloaded worth a damn. They tried to restrict use during the day for the profs but that didn't quite work when people set up 24-hours servers for all kinds of things. But remember, this is a university who gave priority for computer networks to the Greek houses over regular dorms and some of its own staff at one time. I really liked that university, and respect anyone enrolled in its engineering or pre-med divisions, but it had some computer regulatory practices that didn't always make 100% sense.
Maybe they'll find that big black rock orbiting Jupiter that'll turn it into the second sun...or maybe Bush and co. will try to destory it since that would make solar power so much more effective...
This law is too easy to abuse under the current administration. Given the religious zeal of many of our nation's leaders at this point and the multiple outlandish abuses of the DMCA, one can only wonder what the next step is. Remember, some of the people in Congress on the cybertechnology committee (Santorum et. al) are very religiously-minded that might use this to give our nation's children access to only those sites they deem "appropriate". While it is wrong for people to be viewing pornography in plain sight of children, why should reasonable research suffer? And is it realistic to ask if the ruling body of the Web just register porn under its own domain or under a specific set of IP addresses that could be more readily screened out by public computers?
Maybe we should consider that the technology for this currently exists but that it is in the extremely prototype/classified military stages. Microtubules of carbon are hard enought to sustain for any length measuring centimeters, and even if you foud a way to use buckyball carbons to construct these tubes there is the problem of finding a solvent capable enough of holding them together. Also, what will serve as the counterweight on top? A big-ass space station? A small asteroid? Anything large enough to support this thing will take years to bring into orbit/adjust to our orbit. Finally, look at the proposed sites for the elevator. Ecuador is considered a prime site but look how close it is to the Sendero Luminoso terrorist groups in Peru and narcotraficos in Colombia, neither of which like the US government (funding it) too much. Perth, Australia is considered another prime site but look at its proximity to the extremists in Indonesia. This thing would prove an obvious terrorist/sabotage target, especially if other nations started trying to build their own. The idea is sound, but the technology to build it and actual construction techniques needed to work with nanotech don't make this a realistic project for at least 25 years IMO. In the meanwhile, we need to concentrate on developing newer LEO and HEO lift systems to get our tech into space while the kinks are worked out of this project.
Does anyone else think that maybe the US gov't is encouraging the big-name companies based in the US to play by a different set of rules in order to maintain market share? Note that Worldcom had tremendous overseas assets, as did Enron. Rambus had one of the largest market shares in its field and an original patent. Microsoft is still on 90(+)% of consumer computers worldwide, and AOL has not had to abide by its promises to open up the IM market under the rules established for the merger with Time-Warner. Granted, all the aforementioned companies are heavy political donators, but it seems that the US government of the last 25 years (since the Chrysler bailout in the late 70s) has encouraged a trust mentality among larger companies that allows them several get-out-of-jail-free cards as long as they stay profitable and maintain market share. I'd like to hear y'alls opinions/comments on this...
China makes friends in the Middle East to screw the US by manipulating our foreign policy. We go in and cause trouble so maintain the oil flow we need so desperately.
China wants to get to the moon because it supposedly contains He-3, a rare isotope of helium that would readily combine with hydrogen in a fusion reaction. Their goal is to gain the edge in fusion technology and make their country a lot more self-sufficient with respect to energy. Control of fusion would then allow them to make friends in the Middle East and deal a serious blow to OPEC. Never mind the international prestige gained by mastering a process that the West and USSR/Russia have been working on since the early 1950s. If the US and EU are smart, then NASA and the ESA (NASDA of Japan and maybe India's space program too?) will get serious budget infusion so we can get at least some of these resources before any one country could monopolize them.
I thought it was hilarious when the CIA (Christians in Action) kept yelling about violence on TV after growing up with Tom and Jerry, Popeye, and Roadrunner/Coyote. Starsky and Hutch wasn't exactly pro-family values either. Their cartoons and TV shows were as violent as anything today, but solid family values and a few key asswhoopins kept most of the kids in check. Remember that most of those cases were copycat crimes inspired by the original one in Oregon or Arkansas or Kentucky. Also, the schools were allowed to discipline children instead of having to find a way around the myriad of potential lawsuits. Question for the board: do y'all think that the new terrorism laws could be used to try to prosecute the next kids who try something stupid like this?
There are lots of little secrets still coming out concerning World War II that should have been declassified years ago. I know about this incident only because of a background in history, but what about other secrets? Such as why Joe Kennedy Jr. (brother of JFK) was killed while trying to test a B-24 loaded with explosives to serve as a primitive cruise missile? What about the target of this primitive Columbia, the secret V-3 weapon ("high-pressure pump", a super-cannon with 150+ mile range that Saddam tried to outdo in 1991 w/ help from Gerald Bull under the "Babylon gun" project)? How was the fact taht the Germans built a stealth aircraft in 1945 left out of public documents? Or that they had a long-range bomber built and running capable of hitting NYC with a "dirty bomb" like the ones we fear today? For some reason much of WWII's secrets are only now being released, so it should be interesting to see what happens with this and similar stories in the near future.
Terraforming by CO2 looks like it is no longer immediately feasible. However, since most of the minerals are below the surface anyway, it should be possible to create domed structures using the terrain of mars currently in existence to build habitats. Greenhouses could easily be built on the surface to produce food or grown underground by artificial light. Extracting water from the caps could be done and piped into colonies elsewhere. We hoped it would be easy to drop algae or some other organism on mars, release the CO2, and let nature take its course to heat up the planet. Now we just have to work a little harder. I'd still like to vacation on mars before I die, regardless of whether a spacesuit would be necessary.
The military thinks that this is not a violation of privacy? Are they the most gullible of their own propaganda targets or driven by some other means? We need to remain vigilent all right, but more against the potential tyrants on our own shores who threaten privacy and personal liberties. Those who have the ability to influence our government to deprive us of liberty are the most dangerous of all, and security at the price of freedom merely costs us both.
The RIAA is acting as abusively as trusts did early in the 19th century and our current president is certainly no Teddy Roosevelt. They have proposed a nationwide charge of all ISPs to "compensate" them for "lost profit", they jack up the price on blank CDs to compensate them on "lost profit", and they overcharge for regular CDs at the expense of artists then have the nerve to try to criminalize any and all competition to release through their outlets to recompensate for "lost profit". The abuses by the RIAA are bordering on violation of freedom of expression and freedom of speech, never mind the already flagrant violations of privacy. Has anyone considered a lawsuit against the RIAA for abuse of monopoly power? I propose that an entirely free service supported through advertising be set up where artists submit samples/songs for free downloads. No hitch, no subscriptions, no catches, just free music submitted with the intention that it be distributed freely. If there are already multiple out there, consolidate them under one or two sites to increase their exposure to the general public.
It is sad that the first words from the Bush administration in the last few months other than "bomb Iraq" now have to be part of a tragedy like this. These men and women should be honored, hopefully by giving their names to new shuttles that can be built soon as to replace our aging fleet. Bush supposedly is prepared to discuss new space initiatives soon, hopefully he'll include one that honors the victims of today's tragedy by making sure their deaths were not in vain.
*Music: Anything not owned by the RIAA *Film: Anything not owned by the MPAA *Paintings: Anything readily comprehended by non- artists *Sculpture: Anything resembling non-geometric made before WWII