I think we might have to get used to the fact that net access is going to become like a standard utility. It's just becoming so much a part of the regular infrastructure of our system that it must be regulated into at least an oligarcy where it can be most efficiently maintained and upgraded. I don't think (although I'm no economist) that treating it like, say, the national highway system where state contractors bid to maintain or refurbish a particular stretch of road will work only because it's not exactly gravel and cement we're talking about here. Although incorporating it into gov't funding might not be a bad idea, especially where access for schools is concerned. Or maybe the whole privatization idea is best. The most glaring problem with this situation is that of privacy/anonymity, and for a moment lets forget any advancements in encryption because somehow I don't think we're ever really going to be able to hide what they're doing. Anyway, I just don't think we're going to be able to stop the overall, national (and undoubtedly global) net structure from becoming something governed by some form of corporate/gov't relationship. Let's just work with the other people within those domains to make sure that it gets built with liberty in mind.
...I mean the reason we never thought to make smaller nuclear reactors was b/c of the failsafe issue. With Helium-3 there is no contamination issue. Maybe a Helium-3 cell that generates electricity. Could 3He be used in combustion? With 100 million tonnes of it on the moon, that would be a very clean, long-term solution.
this sounds like a good argument against democracy... it's like one side has to play chess just between themselves before they can decide on the best move... i vote for Plato's philosopher king. I'm sure Kasparov will win, and in far less time per move.
Slashdot Mirror
I think we might have to get used to the fact that net access is going to become like a standard utility. It's just becoming so much a part of the regular infrastructure of our system that it must be regulated into at least an oligarcy where it can be most efficiently maintained and upgraded. I don't think (although I'm no economist) that treating it like, say, the national highway system where state contractors bid to maintain or refurbish a particular stretch of road will work only because it's not exactly gravel and cement we're talking about here. Although incorporating it into gov't funding might not be a bad idea, especially where access for schools is concerned. Or maybe the whole privatization idea is best. The most glaring problem with this situation is that of privacy/anonymity, and for a moment lets forget any advancements in encryption because somehow I don't think we're ever really going to be able to hide what they're doing. Anyway, I just don't think we're going to be able to stop the overall, national (and undoubtedly global) net structure from becoming something governed by some form of corporate/gov't relationship. Let's just work with the other people within those domains to make sure that it gets built with liberty in mind.
...I mean the reason we never thought to make smaller nuclear reactors was b/c of the failsafe issue. With Helium-3 there is no contamination issue. Maybe a Helium-3 cell that generates electricity. Could 3He be used in combustion? With 100 million tonnes of it on the moon, that would be a very clean, long-term solution.
this sounds like a good argument against democracy... it's like one side has to play chess just between themselves before they can decide on the best move... i vote for Plato's philosopher king. I'm sure Kasparov will win, and in far less time per move.