Now, tell me what would happen if everyone ran that program?
Would mailing list posts get through automatically? Or would this thing post to the mailing list asking for confirmation? Or would each sender on the mailing list be asked to 'authenticate' their post? If answer to the first question is 'yes', then instant road for spam. If the answer to the second or third question is yes, then you'll be removed by any competent mailing list admin.
Also, how would you like to, every other time you sent an email, have to handle a braindead acknowledgement. Hell, in that case, I'd hack my outgoing queue to send a test message first, to confirm that the person doesn't have this sort of crap, and if they do, I'd not bother to contact them for any reason. If you want people to be helpful, answer a question, tell you your site is broken, or whatever else... making that inconvenient is the immediate way to drive them away.
I do not, can not, and refuse to accept that as a solution. Anyone who does use it (so far, nobody that I know), will be procmailed into the bitbucket without question.
The reason small farms are in trouble is that farmings become TOO efficient and too good at producing foodstuffs. The price of foodstuffs has been falling, in real dollars, for decades.
When the product you sell is a commodity and goes down in price by multiplicative factors.. That hurts.
This is especially evident for example, in milk subsidies. The US Gov't has millions of TONS of dried milk powder in storage, because they have subsidies to prevent the price of milk dropping below a certain level.
Obviously, the correct solution is to remove perpetual farm subsidies, and let the least productive land go fallow. Yes, its true, farmland has been decreasing for YEARS since 1900.
Of course, this'll hurt the 'small independent farmer' who doesn't have economies of scale.
FYI: Repeat after me; matter can neither be created nor destroyed in a chemical reaction. With nuclear power supplying sufficient energy for millions of years... with todays technology.. How much soil could we manufacture a year if we had to?
Note the quote:
''... without the intense use of fertilizers and pest controls''
Thats ludicrus. What is the land needed per person if you actually *do* choose to use modern farming methods?
Thats like saying. `` We need XXX acres of land per person if we assume farming by hand, with no mechanized tractors.'' which is an interesting, but pointless statistic.
There's nothing inherently wrong with pest control or fertalizer. In fact, they're the foundations of modern society. To quote a radio commercial ``Never before have so few fed so many for so little.''
Next time you go out to rent a car, you read the contract. Then ask, loudly, that you want a car that doesn't have a GPS receiver spying on every place you drive the car. If they refuse, go to another chain.:) Don't forget to request that this gets put into the contract, in writing. (Or, have a pre-written form and get the agent/manager to sign it affirming no GPS-based location spying, so if they lie and do, you can sock em.)
First, it'll point out to the OTHER people in line that such a spy-device is in their cars, and second, it'll make the *other* customers also make the same request...
And, they'll be a lot more likely to try to please you to get you to leave and shut up. Most businesses don't like their customers to say 'this is crap' to the other people shopping as you leave.
Its my computer, if I don't trust a device with bus-master trying to access my memory, I remove the device, for the same reason I don't keep dangerous chemicals in my apartment. Its unsafe.
Anyone who has physical access to your computer can fuck you over, there's no way to stop that.
Anyways, read the patent. The purpose is to detect if you're running hardware not of their choosing, or an OS not of their choosing, and to cause programs to fail if you do.
For example, put an old SB-Live sound card in, and the windows media player doesn't run.
Correct, Microsoft will do whats in *THEIR* best interests. However, their best interests are not MY best interests. Read the patent.
My kernel on my [linux] machine is the final arbiter of who can and can't write what. If it says 'no' then no, no program can do anything bad.
The kernel can also enforce code signing, disallow applications from accessing what they're not supposed to, etc etc etc.
What the kernel cannot do is keep itself from being replaced. (Well, it partially can, by disallowing applications from writing to the spots on the disk where its stored.) As I run a secure OS, normal users cannot write to that part of the disk, and thus, the computer is secure.
Again, there is no need for Palladium to have a computer you can trust, or to have a secure computer.
What Palladium does is remove that control I have over my machine. With Palladium, software can choose, by itself, not to run, or the computer can refuse to boot unless I boot into a kernel of Microsoft's chosing. That is not necessary for protection against viruses or other malware. What it does do is give Microsoft absolute control over what kernel is booted, and thus over what is and is not allowed to run on my computer.
With my current system (as I have root), the kernel is of my choosing. I have control. I have the security I wish. It runs or does not run programs for other users as I choose.
With Palladium, it is not under my control. It is Microsoft's kernel. It allows and disallows access as *they* wish. They can order it to disable Morpheus, or cut off my access to my research data. THey may, now, give me choice as to what sources to trust and not trust, but it remains their kernel, their control, and they can change their wishes at any moment.. They first expect to use this control initially for DRM, but, as it remains their kernel, they can expand this as much as they wish.
With my kernel, I ultimately control who and what is trusted, with no outsider to get in the way.
With Palladium, Microsoft has ultimate control over who and what is trusted. They may delegate some to you, but they reatain ultimate control.
They claim that allowing other people control over your computer is good for you by reversing this. IE, You can be delegated control over someone elses computer (for example, to restrict them from doing as they wish on their computer). However the same applies to you. Anyone or program who sends you a file can attach arbitrary control on that file to YOU. You may think this is a fair trade. I do not.
And in any case, ultimate control rests with Microsoft.. Their software obeys them, not you.
But, any such control scheme, unless it gets embedded into every digital device sold (SSSCA) to plug the so-called 'analog hole' (which in this case should be called the plaintext digital hole), it *will* be breakable... Once the movie is plaintext, its all over. Thus, by the statement you gave, they'll never release 1080i movies, EVER, unless the SSSCA becomes law.
And even after such draconian *CONTROL* measures are embedded into every digital device sold.. Will they still sell 1080i, or will they just sell VCR-quality video at twice the price, and with arbitrary controls of their choosing.
For example, look at Adobe ebooks... ``This book cannot be read aloud'' WHAT THE FUCK? Or at CSS on DVD's, WHAT THE FUCK does region encoding have to do with copyright protection.. Thats the problem, it has nothing to do with 'protection'. Its just trying to grab control over each digital device.
You may feel that 1984 is worth it, if you can get your 1080i movies... But not everyone feels the same.
Comments, like this one, are ripe for quotes to be taken out of context. ARE BEING USED IN TESTIMONY FOR THE MPAA. Why give them bullets to shoot us with? Especially bullets that are inapplicable. (And you gave a great quote that can be taken out of context: ``Even if DeCSS was "reverse-engineered" from this purloined key, it would not really be reverse-engineered because of the method that the key was obtained from.
Either reverse engineering is legal or it isn't. If it is, then, I don't know what the legal implications may be. (Reverse engineering being classified as illegal would be such a radical departure, I can't envision it. But if you feel it is, ignore what I have to say below which rests on the assumption that a shrink/click-wrap prohibition on reverse engineering sold goods is legal.)
Assuming reverse engineering is legal, any trade secret derived from Xing's player loses its protected status. IE, anything learned from Xing's player, including the algorithms and keys it uses are now public. Remember, trade secret protections are designed prevent ill-gotten gains from industrial espionage. Which is why they don't apply if they, for example, accidently publish the trade secret, or it gets reverse engineered, thats legitimate.
Anyhoo.. Next time, please be a little more careful in what you say, and how it may be misquoted. Actually, this applies to everyone.
And thats reasonably as they should be.. Money isn't free. Its like any other tradeoff where you trade safety for price. Why do my workplace building not have 3 meter reinforced concrete walls (to protect your house from meteors, crashing planes, and nearby truck bombs.)
Would you be willing ot pay twice as much for a car thats 30% safer?
This is just more of the same.. If the recall costs more than paying off the mistakes, why is that any worse than your workplace not putting up 3 meter walls?
FYI, there is already a price on a human life, about 1-2 million dollars. This price was arrived at by the DOT, by looking at peoples willingness to pay for safety systems.
Plutonium's actually pretty harmless, in bulk, unless you have enough of it to near criticality and you irradiate yourself.
The dangerous part with plutonium is accidently inhaling dust particles of it, having them settle into your lungs and cause lung cancer.
The bad stuff is that with an intermediate half-life of up to a few centuries. Short enough to be really nasty and radioactive, but also long enough to stay aroung for too long. Also, that and isotopes that get impregnated into your tissues. (like strontium into bones)
What is the technique to limit the number of connections per IP? I looked for a couple of hours finding no appropriate configuration directive.
I was requesting, as a *FEATURE*, some configuration directive allowing me to set such a limit. Maybe its been added since; this was a couple of years ago.
One friend wanted to impress me with his 31337ness by doing 20 concurrent transfers on my http server!
I submitted a security advisory to apache and they basically said ``Its the kernel's responsibility''.
Maybe that is the only place where it can be assuredly done.. But IMHO, apache should still have that option, if only to make it easier for us to discourage abuse like this.
Heh.. What a chance that I just got involved with a similar discussion on NANOG.. About the real costs of Spam. (So far, only one person has given me anything approaching a number. Paul Vixie himself dodged the question for how much Spam costs.)
The number, BTW, looks to be about $.00001 to $.0005 per email, and perhaps less for spam.
But, anyways.. Keep in mind that the cure may be worse than the disease.. Spam sucks, spam is annoying. But finding the *WRONG* cure for it can be worse than the existance of Spam in the first place!
Fascism in germany got its inital support because ``It made the trains run on time.'' We must be careful to not support fascists ``because they stop spam.''
Our bodies have not evolved to fly. If we were meant to fly, we would have wings.... So lets shred the airplanes.
Our bodies were never meant to go faster than 20 mph, so lets put speed governors on cars and trains (and boats).
Our bodies have not evolved to swim, otherwise we'd have more lung capacity. Thus having a swimming pool should be a capital crime.
Our bodies have not evolved to use keyboard, so why on earth are you posting on Slashdot?
Our bodies have not evolved to use cell phones.. So what? Nothing is consequenceless.... Cellphones, like planes and cars, offer convenience and productivity advantages; the question is are they worth the price.
Sure, there are negatives, but do the negatives. (What, *MAYBE* a few brain cancers after 20 years.) outweigh the advantages?
What happens when some magistrate decides to make the exact same order and passes it to Microsoft.
``Microsoft is hereby ordered to record all programs run by users of their operating systems, and also record information about the files that their OS users copy and transfer.''
How long till *this* order goes out?
There's a reason my windows install doesn't know about the existance of the internet or what my name is.
By this same argument.. It takes effort to shit if you're constipated... Thus, shit can be an artistic work and should be protected. In fact, 'American Standard' (maker of toilets) should be paying me for the destruction of my artistic work.
Sorry, but more practically, the 'sweat of the brow' argument has been discounted by the Supreme Court. (See Feist v. Rural Telephone).
``In Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service Company, the Supreme Court recently put to rest the "sweat of the brow" doctrine, holding that originality is a sine qua non of copyright law, regardless of the author's efforts in collecting and assembling facts.'' -- http://www.lgu.com/cr38.htm
IE, the very notion that it takes effort to create a typeface is irrelevant to its copyrightable status. (And, as typefaces are NOT copyrightable, this is moot in any case.)
The program (a TTF file) that creates a typeface is a protectable entity under copyright, but only because it is creative, not because of the effort put into it.
Sorry... Been there done that. The US recognizes no moral rights in any artistic work. Copyright only exists because of expediency, not for a moral reason.
Its not Digital Rights Management.. Its digital control.. Its digital control embedded into every entertainment device, storage medium, and computer in the world.
We're collaberatively having a discussion (in this thread) on religion. As such, a variety of important quotes and points of view are perfectly normal to interpose in the conversation.
George Carlin makes a statement that furthers one point.. I'd call it fair use.. It is perfectly reasonable to use another authors words (if attributed) in a debate. Hell.. This is one of the purposes of fair use.
Does this mean that all religion and cult websites also have to register themselves under this domain? There is lots of evidence of the harmful effects of religious fervor, especially on impressionable children..(See 9/11, Jenin, etc.)
To protect our children, we must require that churches, too, must register under the new domain.
But that sounds like colonialism.. And we all know how *WRONG* that is.. How a backer with deep pockets and the ability to stabalize a region is only raping it for material wealth, and no good can ever come from such a thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Now, tell me what would happen if everyone ran that program?
Would mailing list posts get through automatically? Or would this thing post to the mailing list asking for confirmation? Or would each sender on the mailing list be asked to 'authenticate' their post? If answer to the first question is 'yes', then instant road for spam. If the answer to the second or third question is yes, then you'll be removed by any competent mailing list admin.
Also, how would you like to, every other time you sent an email, have to handle a braindead acknowledgement. Hell, in that case, I'd hack my outgoing queue to send a test message first, to confirm that the person doesn't have this sort of crap, and if they do, I'd not bother to contact them for any reason. If you want people to be helpful, answer a question, tell you your site is broken, or whatever else... making that inconvenient is the immediate way to drive them away.
I do not, can not, and refuse to accept that as a solution. Anyone who does use it (so far, nobody that I know), will be procmailed into the bitbucket without question.
Go check out:
i ty
ftp://ftp.uu.net/vendor/dux/SimCity/README.SimC
Seriously, its motif based... More amusingly, look at the price list.... only $49 for a node-locked license!
I remember seeing that page over 4 years ago, and it was 4 years old then!
The reason small farms are in trouble is that farmings become TOO efficient and too good at producing foodstuffs. The price of foodstuffs has been falling, in real dollars, for decades.
When the product you sell is a commodity and goes down in price by multiplicative factors.. That hurts.
This is especially evident for example, in milk subsidies. The US Gov't has millions of TONS of dried milk powder in storage, because they have subsidies to prevent the price of milk dropping below a certain level.
Obviously, the correct solution is to remove perpetual farm subsidies, and let the least productive land go fallow. Yes, its true, farmland has been decreasing for YEARS since 1900.
Of course, this'll hurt the 'small independent farmer' who doesn't have economies of scale.
FYI: Repeat after me; matter can neither be created nor destroyed in a chemical reaction. With nuclear power supplying sufficient energy for millions of years... with todays technology.. How much soil could we manufacture a year if we had to?
Note the quote:
''... without the intense use of fertilizers and pest controls''
Thats ludicrus. What is the land needed per person if you actually *do* choose to use modern farming methods?
Thats like saying. `` We need XXX acres of land per person if we assume farming by hand, with no mechanized tractors.'' which is an interesting, but pointless statistic.
There's nothing inherently wrong with pest control or fertalizer. In fact, they're the foundations of modern society. To quote a radio commercial ``Never before have so few fed so many for so little.''
Next time you go out to rent a car, you read the contract. Then ask, loudly, that you want a car that doesn't have a GPS receiver spying on every place you drive the car. If they refuse, go to another chain. :) Don't forget to request that this gets put into the contract, in writing. (Or, have a pre-written form and get the agent/manager to sign it affirming no GPS-based location spying, so if they lie and do, you can sock em.)
First, it'll point out to the OTHER people in line that such a spy-device is in their cars, and second, it'll make the *other* customers also make the same request...
And, they'll be a lot more likely to try to please you to get you to leave and shut up. Most businesses don't like their customers to say 'this is crap' to the other people shopping as you leave.
Its my computer, if I don't trust a device with bus-master trying to access my memory, I remove the device, for the same reason I don't keep dangerous chemicals in my apartment. Its unsafe.
Anyone who has physical access to your computer can fuck you over, there's no way to stop that.
Anyways, read the patent. The purpose is to detect if you're running hardware not of their choosing, or an OS not of their choosing, and to cause programs to fail if you do.
For example, put an old SB-Live sound card in, and the windows media player doesn't run.
Correct, Microsoft will do whats in *THEIR* best interests. However, their best interests are not MY best interests. Read the patent.
Palladium is unnecessary for that.
My kernel on my [linux] machine is the final arbiter of who can and can't write what. If it says 'no' then no, no program can do anything bad.
The kernel can also enforce code signing, disallow applications from accessing what they're not supposed to, etc etc etc.
What the kernel cannot do is keep itself from being replaced. (Well, it partially can, by disallowing applications from writing to the spots on the disk where its stored.) As I run a secure OS, normal users cannot write to that part of the disk, and thus, the computer is secure.
Again, there is no need for Palladium to have a computer you can trust, or to have a secure computer.
What Palladium does is remove that control I have over my machine. With Palladium, software can choose, by itself, not to run, or the computer can refuse to boot unless I boot into a kernel of Microsoft's chosing. That is not necessary for protection against viruses or other malware. What it does do is give Microsoft absolute control over what kernel is booted, and thus over what is and is not allowed to run on my computer.
With my current system (as I have root), the kernel is of my choosing. I have control. I have the security I wish. It runs or does not run programs for other users as I choose.
With Palladium, it is not under my control. It is Microsoft's kernel. It allows and disallows access as *they* wish. They can order it to disable Morpheus, or cut off my access to my research data. THey may, now, give me choice as to what sources to trust and not trust, but it remains their kernel, their control, and they can change their wishes at any moment.. They first expect to use this control initially for DRM, but, as it remains their kernel, they can expand this as much as they wish.
With my kernel, I ultimately control who and what is trusted, with no outsider to get in the way.
With Palladium, Microsoft has ultimate control over who and what is trusted. They may delegate some to you, but they reatain ultimate control.
They claim that allowing other people control over your computer is good for you by reversing this. IE, You can be delegated control over someone elses computer (for example, to restrict them from doing as they wish on their computer). However the same applies to you. Anyone or program who sends you a file can attach arbitrary control on that file to YOU. You may think this is a fair trade. I do not.
And in any case, ultimate control rests with Microsoft.. Their software obeys them, not you.
But, any such control scheme, unless it gets embedded into every digital device sold (SSSCA) to plug the so-called 'analog hole' (which in this case should be called the plaintext digital hole), it *will* be breakable... Once the movie is plaintext, its all over. Thus, by the statement you gave, they'll never release 1080i movies, EVER, unless the SSSCA becomes law.
And even after such draconian *CONTROL* measures are embedded into every digital device sold.. Will they still sell 1080i, or will they just sell VCR-quality video at twice the price, and with arbitrary controls of their choosing.
For example, look at Adobe ebooks... ``This book cannot be read aloud'' WHAT THE FUCK? Or at CSS on DVD's, WHAT THE FUCK does region encoding have to do with copyright protection.. Thats the problem, it has nothing to do with 'protection'. Its just trying to grab control over each digital device.
You may feel that 1984 is worth it, if you can get your 1080i movies... But not everyone feels the same.
As pointed out by Seth Finkelstein in comments a few days ago (and another comment)
Comments, like this one, are ripe for quotes to be taken out of context. ARE BEING USED IN TESTIMONY FOR THE MPAA . Why give them bullets to shoot us with? Especially bullets that are inapplicable. (And you gave a great quote that can be taken out of context: ``Even if DeCSS was "reverse-engineered" from this purloined key, it would not really be reverse-engineered because of the method that the key was obtained from.
There are no Miranda rights. Anything said on slashdot is being held as an opinion of our community. What is said is being held against 2600, me, and the ideals EFF stands for. Our community isn't homogeneous, but what you say in the future may be used against me, personally, because the views you espouse will be put into our mouths, purportedly proving that we knew what we were doing was illegal, which it isn't.
Either reverse engineering is legal or it isn't. If it is, then, I don't know what the legal implications may be. (Reverse engineering being classified as illegal would be such a radical departure, I can't envision it. But if you feel it is, ignore what I have to say below which rests on the assumption that a shrink/click-wrap prohibition on reverse engineering sold goods is legal.)
Assuming reverse engineering is legal, any trade secret derived from Xing's player loses its protected status. IE, anything learned from Xing's player, including the algorithms and keys it uses are now public. Remember, trade secret protections are designed prevent ill-gotten gains from industrial espionage. Which is why they don't apply if they, for example, accidently publish the trade secret, or it gets reverse engineered, thats legitimate.
Anyhoo.. Next time, please be a little more careful in what you say, and how it may be misquoted. Actually, this applies to everyone.
Yup...
And thats reasonably as they should be.. Money isn't free. Its like any other tradeoff where you trade safety for price. Why do my workplace building not have 3 meter reinforced concrete walls (to protect your house from meteors, crashing planes, and nearby truck bombs.)
Would you be willing ot pay twice as much for a car thats 30% safer?
This is just more of the same.. If the recall costs more than paying off the mistakes, why is that any worse than your workplace not putting up 3 meter walls?
FYI, there is already a price on a human life, about 1-2 million dollars. This price was arrived at by the DOT, by looking at peoples willingness to pay for safety systems.
I am not a consumer. I am a citizen. I both consume and produce goods, intellectual and otherwise.
If I am a consumer with my rights of authorship and fair use stolen from me, then so are you.
Plutonium's actually pretty harmless, in bulk, unless you have enough of it to near criticality and you irradiate yourself.
The dangerous part with plutonium is accidently inhaling dust particles of it, having them settle into your lungs and cause lung cancer.
The bad stuff is that with an intermediate half-life of up to a few centuries. Short enough to be really nasty and radioactive, but also long enough to stay aroung for too long. Also, that and isotopes that get impregnated into your tissues. (like strontium into bones)
Stuff like strontium which gets into your bones
What is the technique to limit the number of connections per IP? I looked for a couple of hours finding no appropriate configuration directive.
I was requesting, as a *FEATURE*, some configuration directive allowing me to set such a limit. Maybe its been added since; this was a couple of years ago.
One friend wanted to impress me with his 31337ness by doing 20 concurrent transfers on my http server!
I submitted a security advisory to apache and they basically said ``Its the kernel's responsibility''.
Maybe that is the only place where it can be assuredly done.. But IMHO, apache should still have that option, if only to make it easier for us to discourage abuse like this.
Heh.. What a chance that I just got involved with a similar discussion on NANOG.. About the real costs of Spam. (So far, only one person has given me anything approaching a number. Paul Vixie himself dodged the question for how much Spam costs.)
The number, BTW, looks to be about $.00001 to $.0005 per email, and perhaps less for spam.
But, anyways.. Keep in mind that the cure may be worse than the disease.. Spam sucks, spam is annoying. But finding the *WRONG* cure for it can be worse than the existance of Spam in the first place!
Fascism in germany got its inital support because ``It made the trains run on time.'' We must be careful to not support fascists ``because they stop spam.''
My apologies.
You are right, radio energy has one immediate impact, heat, which will have some biological impact.
Our bodies have not evolved to fly. If we were meant to fly, we would have wings.... So lets shred the airplanes.
Our bodies were never meant to go faster than 20 mph, so lets put speed governors on cars and trains (and boats).
Our bodies have not evolved to swim, otherwise we'd have more lung capacity. Thus having a swimming pool should be a capital crime.
Our bodies have not evolved to use keyboard, so why on earth are you posting on Slashdot?
Our bodies have not evolved to use cell phones.. So what? Nothing is consequenceless.... Cellphones, like planes and cars, offer convenience and productivity advantages; the question is are they worth the price.
Sure, there are negatives, but do the negatives. (What, *MAYBE* a few brain cancers after 20 years.) outweigh the advantages?
What happens when some magistrate decides to make the exact same order and passes it to Microsoft.
``Microsoft is hereby ordered to record all programs run by users of their operating systems, and also record information about the files that their OS users copy and transfer.''
How long till *this* order goes out?
There's a reason my windows install doesn't know about the existance of the internet or what my name is.
By this same argument.. It takes effort to shit if you're constipated... Thus, shit can be an artistic work and should be protected. In fact, 'American Standard' (maker of toilets) should be paying me for the destruction of my artistic work.
Sorry, but more practically, the 'sweat of the brow' argument has been discounted by the Supreme Court. (See Feist v. Rural Telephone).
``In Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service Company, the Supreme Court recently put to rest the "sweat of the brow" doctrine, holding that originality is a sine qua non of copyright law, regardless of the author's efforts in collecting and assembling facts.'' -- http://www.lgu.com/cr38.htm
IE, the very notion that it takes effort to create a typeface is irrelevant to its copyrightable status. (And, as typefaces are NOT copyrightable, this is moot in any case.)
The program (a TTF file) that creates a typeface is a protectable entity under copyright, but only because it is creative, not because of the effort put into it.
Sorry... Been there done that. The US recognizes no moral rights in any artistic work. Copyright only exists because of expediency, not for a moral reason.
Its not Digital Rights Management.. Its digital control.. Its digital control embedded into every entertainment device, storage medium, and computer in the world.
We're collaberatively having a discussion (in this thread) on religion. As such, a variety of important quotes and points of view are perfectly normal to interpose in the conversation.
George Carlin makes a statement that furthers one point.. I'd call it fair use.. It is perfectly reasonable to use another authors words (if attributed) in a debate. Hell.. This is one of the purposes of fair use.
That it costs $20/day?
I run about $120/month for food.. And no, I've never eaten Raman, and haven't had Spagetti in a year.
So...
Does this mean that all religion and cult websites also have to register themselves under this domain? There is lots of evidence of the harmful effects of religious fervor, especially on impressionable children..(See 9/11, Jenin, etc.)
To protect our children, we must require that churches, too, must register under the new domain.
But that sounds like colonialism.. And we all know how *WRONG* that is.. How a backer with deep pockets and the ability to stabalize a region is only raping it for material wealth, and no good can ever come from such a thing.