I don't know about that. If you ever get a chance to come into the Salt Lake City, Utah International Airport by air, you can see one of the largest open-pit mining operations in the world. I guanentee that you will be able to see this from the moon as a major crater on the earth.
That said, I would prefer having a mine like that on the moon than having to breath the smelter fumes coming from the processing plant.
I know that this is a reply to an old post, but here it is:
This idea was first proposed by Robert A. Heinlein in the book "The Man who Sold The Moon". In it he suggests that a popular soft drink company puts a logo on the moon for a certain amount of money (and the fictional company was called 6+, but that is another story.)
It was even more interesting when they suggested that the USSR (remember this was written in the 1960's) might instead put up a big red hammer and sickel emblem on the moon instead.
Unfortunately, the Lunar Environmentalists will stop anything like that from happening. That is another story however.
This was used in the past to stop the Mormons in Utah, claiming that the support of polygamy was an illegal act and therefore all of the property of the Mormon church was confiscated by the US Army. At gunpoint.
If you used the church to spread the message of peyote, that would also be considered an illegal activity.
That was the point of the Religious Liberties Act, that attempted to push the legal recognition into something that would make the test of whether it was a religion as to if it was a compelling interest of the state to ban certain activities, such as ritualistic child sacrifice, legalized prostitution, or dodging a military draft (aka Mohammad Ali).
It does help if you can prove an outstanding history of a certain belief (such as the American Indian tribal worship with the use of peyote, or the Quakers non-violence stance where they refuse to wield guns, even if drafted into the Army).
Alternatively, it is common for the tax-except status to be pulled from a church that violates the non-profit status, or promotes political activities.
There are a couple of problems with this line of reasoning. First of all, it presumes that you know all of the technical issues to do telepresence (aka Heinlein's "Waldos"). You still have to get the robots/monitoring equipment into place and the sort of equipment you are talking about takes quite a bit of infrastructure in order to get it going. I believe that this is used in parts of the Nuclear Power industry quite a bit, because the risks far and away stronger than the cost of the equipment. Check out the web site for INEEL for some additional information regarding the use of robots as you are suggesting, but in another context.
The other problem is the concept that people just can't live in space. What is going to need to happen for space flight to be exciting again like it was in the early 1960's is to have people up there sticking their nose in places that nobody has ever been to before. A color television just doesn't do the same justice as a human eye, noticing subtle stuff that you would just miss on a monitor. The geology that Harrison Schmitt of Apollo XVII did on the moon just couldn't be duplicated by sending a Viking-style probe to the moon, grabbing a couple of rocks, and coming back to the earth. Much of what we know about lunar geology is due to the efforts of the last three Apollo missions.
It is also unavoidable that people MUST eventually get into space. To doom humanity to this little chunk of rock in an obscure backwater arm of a rather ordinary galaxy is, in my opinion, a great waste of the amazing potential of mankind.
Finally, there is the often quoted phrase "LEO (low-earth orbit) is more than halfway to the rest of the Solar System." If you get a strong human presence in a low orbit environment, it will be essentially trivial to travel anywhere else in the solar system, including Mars, the Asteroids, etc.
Mind you, I am not saying that there wouldn't be tasks that couldn't be done via remote-control. There will be stuff like this, and where appropriate it should be done. Just don't openly dismiss the fact that this is the only option that should be considered.
The one exception to what you are describing is what could be collectively called "Reference Works".
This would include things like the CRC Handbooks, Telephone directories, Specifications (like RFC's), alumni lists, maps, gazeteers, etc. (I can go on and on here... but I hope this gets the point across).
This is one area where an "open source" book of a more traditional sort would be of exceptional value. The DMOZ web site is a good example of what could be done as a collaborative effort, and I think there would be some good that came out of some efforts like this.
I would have to agree though, that an open source version of J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord Of The Rings" would be a stupid application of the principle, or for a better example, Abraham Lincoln's "Gettysburg Address" (which is in the public domain right now). Sure, you can "modify" the speech, apply poetic license to it, or even rework it for your own use (many US Presidents already have). But to release the "Gettysburg Address v. 2.0" would be just stupid.
That said, even in this case it would be useful to have a public document (like the Gutenberg Project) where you can review the document for historical accuracy, and through a peer reviewed process update grammar and spelling errors that have been propogated over time. But I digress at this point.
Dang... I don't have a link to find at the moment, but there were some initial attempts to do exactly as you have proposed.
There were some experimental tests done in Hawaii (due to a huge thermal differential between the surface water and the deep sea ocean... which is about 1 degree celcius) The problems came mainly from the fact that the deep sea water is **VERY** high in nutrients, and after it was warmed up, tended to produce a bio plume of critters trying to take advantage of the nutrients. Things kept getting into the intake pipes (like coral growing inside of the temperature exchange chambers) so the plant would have to be completely rebuilt every few years if it were made into a production energy facility.
There were some positive side benefits (like revitalizing a dying coral reef) but by itself it proved to be a much more expensive way to produce energy than most other alternatives, like a solar or wind farm.
Larry Niven in his "Tales of Known Space" series wrote about a floating criminal gang that would monitor the news for riots and other massive public gatherings.
The cool part was that they would use "stepping disks" (very much like Star Trek transporters) to enter into the crowd, steal a couple of items, and then get out before the police could get things under control. There were government attempts to control this behavior, but these were "professional" thieves that hacked the global transporter system. (Larry Niven even described some problems with transporter machines being found in every livingroom... I digress here though.)
I agree that Slashdot is quite a bit like this floating party that zaps information providers.
There are times, however, when this kind of behavior is useful. The DeCSS mess was one of those cases where I knew it would be important to spread the word on Slashdot and make sure that copies got to everybody and their cyberpet.
Sure... the GPL doesn't discourage such blatent behavior... but the US Copyright code does.
I wouldn't recommend you to try that stunt, because it would open all kinds of other legal problems as well.
We are in trouble here... 1st Ammendment attack
on
SSSCA Hearing
·
· Score: 2
As it appears as though the first ammendment to the US Constitution is completely useless now, there are even further attacks on the freedom of speech, such as this bill.
Keep in mind that the argument of (Code == Speech) has not been established by the courts, although as a professional software developer I would argue strongly that it is. I resent the fact that there are certain algorithms that I can't implement, simply because of some stupid regulation or other political objective.
I admit that there could be illegal forms of software, but in my opinion it should be somthing like the proverbial yelling "Fire!" in a crowded room. Writing and using software to perform a DNS attack, or secretly installing something like Back Orifice without the users permission would certainly come close. However, even in these cases I can think of legitamate uses for the software, even though it would be more like a set of lock picking tools. It would be the way it is used that is illegal rather than posession of the tool itself.
Furthermore, I feel that abuse against an individual which stops them from performing immediate typical actions (like the DNS attack I mentioned or grabbing data from a system by deliberately subverting security measures) should be illegal. These nebulous laws that protect an industry are questionable at best. The DeCSS controversy is also a good case in point to show that more traditional forms of expression (such as publication in a newspaper or a public reading of the sourcecode for DeCSS) can also be restricted with these very same laws. (Actually, it would be cool if we could get a congressman to read DeCSS from the floor of the US House of Representatives, but I degress here). The proposed SSSCA hearing would even make that kind of speech illegal. Think about it.
I also think that the time for something like the Open Cores project is going to be critical in the future, where not only is the software going to need to be free and open, but the hardware designs as well. This way we are no longer held to the mercy of a company like Intel that could force new standards like what is being proposed.
I would be rich... (this abused phrase notwithstanding).
Seriously, there are so many futuristic NASA research projects (most of them in the $10,000 to $100,000 range). They cover everything from anti-gravity to blowing bubbles (liquid soap bubbles).
I personally think this is what NASA does best, and the results from these research grants are quite interesting. It is also very unlikely that NASA will ever do anything with most of these research projects.
{Rant Mode On}
Just for an example, there hasn't been a new propulsion technology for manned spaceflight since the 1970's (mainly due to politics... including internal NASA stuff too), and even the robotic probe missions are using what most geeks (and/. readers) would consider archaic. I mean, 16 bit processors are finally being used for many missions and 8 bit processors are still common.
I would consider myself to be a major NASA supporter, and I do vote for congressmen that are supportive of the space industry. I would also say, however, that I think the days of NASA are numbered and I wouldn't mind the complete dismantling of the entire agency. They are too stuck in the past (reliving the glory days of Apollo), and are actually doing more harm than good now for giving me or my children the opportunity to work and live in space.
As a percentage of the US Federal budget, NASA is now totally inconsequential. During the 1960's NASA was second only to the Department of Defense. Now, NASA doesn't even show up except on a list of miscellaneous agencies, and even the Department of Defense now comes in third of fourth (it is grouped with the Department of Veteran Affairs and the State Department to show it as a bigger piece of the federal budget in the 2001 tax booklet from the IRS).
I'm not advocating a renewal of NASA funding to 1960's funding levels (which was about 10% of the Federal Budget), but I am suggesting that it certainly is no longer a national priority, as defined by the United States Congress and the President of the United States.
Unfortunately, with much of the space infrastructure in Texas and strong Republican states (like Alabama, Utah, or swing states like Florida and California), I highly doubt that it could be cut with the current administration either.
{Rant Mode Off}
For every person who wants to expand the role of the US Federal Government, I would say:
"Read the US Constitution"
The Tenth Article of Ammendment of the US Constitution clearly states:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
This clause above all others should say that states clearly have the right to enact legislation, even stuff that may even be unconstitutional on the federal level (because of limited powers of the federal government).
People in the EU please note this as well (before all of your national sovernty is gobbled up by the EU federal government). Each US state is an independent soverign entity, and can even pass treaties with foreign governments (subject to congressional approval... another story there).
On a more philosophical viewpoint, it is very healthy for 50 states to have 50 sets of laws (it is too late to stop that anyway.) If you think that living in Idaho is just like living in Mississippi, I would challenge you to actually go and visit both places.
The main point is that each state should be a testing ground for new political ideas, and if they are successful (like some of the anti-cell phone laws... just as an example) they will be adopted by other states.
If some bad laws are passed (again using the anti-cell phone laws as an example) there are some nice things about it.
You can leave the state because you don't like the laws (for example, move to Nevada because they don't have a state income tax). It is much easier to move from California to Nevada than it is to move from California to Saudi Arabia. (And so far, you don't even have to notify the government that you moved either... although the IRS will still try to find out anyway)
It is far easier to get ahold of a state legislator to try and get something changed that you don't like (like the DCMA--- or UTICA on the state level)
It is far less likely that all 50 state legislatures are going to pass something in the heat of passion, just because it seems cool at the moment (like giving several billion dollars to victims of the World Trade Center destruction... not that I'm saying it is bad, but it really wasn't thought through that much)
If state government get really opressive, you at least have the hope that the federal government will step in and restore basic liberties. If the federal government is the one doing the opressing, you don't have any room to appeal.
There are also regional differences where some laws just don't really apply (like a snow shoveling law being applied in Phoenix...)
What I'm trying to get across here is that there is a genuine role for state governments to play in the regulation of commercial enterprises, and they may even have some roles to play in the regulation of the internet.
And the other thing... the message that I'm replying to mentioned that it was just worrying about each of the 50 states. With the internet, you also need to worry about the other 200 + countries that your e-mail message could end up in as well. Just try to be the sender (or even the recipient) of porn in Saudi Arabia.
This site does a fair bit of what you are suggesting, including e-mail forwarding, spam tracing, generated keys, the database stuff, and more. I would like to get some of the stuff he is doing via GPL'd software (some of it is, BTW), but he does a pretty good job, and even seems to annoy the flagrant spammers a bit.
There is free spam reporting, including an anonymizer to inform the offending ISP that they are being used by spammers. They can reply to the blind e-mail forwarder, but they won't get your address directly.
If you want to build a better mousetrap, (or spam trap, as it may be), this is a good resource to use as a benchmark (or talk you out of your project... but don't let that stop you.)
What do you mean by saying that the government is doing nothing?
For traffic accidents:
There are seatbelt laws, vehicle safety standards, lighting standards, collision tests, traffic laws (that comprise whole chapters in most state legal codes), civil engineering to design highways that reduce accidents, and much more.
In fact, the red tape you need to go through to build a production motor vehicle is incredible... I would like to see you just try and get a few buddies to build a car, and try to give it away (with a helpful donation from somebody like Wm. Gates III or equivalent). Half of your development team would have to be doing nothing but dealing with government regulations and filling out paperwork.
Regarding drinking:
Ever heard of the 18th Ammendment to the US Constitution? Read it sometime. I would say that is a rather drastic approach to dealing with drinking, and there are substantial laws to deal with it, including one case where somebody who just killed somebody in an accident will now spend the rest of his life in jail because he was drunk while driving. What more do you want, the death peanalty for driving drunk? I'll admit though that I get surprised when I hear about people that have been arrested 30+ times for a DUI and somehow still keep their license (being a friend of the mayor, bribing judges, finding a loophole in the law, the arresting officer doesn't show up to the trial, etc.)
In some ways I regret that the 18th Ammendment was repealed, but even with that off the books now, there are still many regulatory laws controlling how alcoholic is produced and consumed... even if it is just going to be used in a fuel take on a car (complicating the issues I mentioned above).
Smoking:
Why do you think the tobacco companies setteled out of court with the law suits from most of the US states? Almost every state in the US now has some sort of "indoor clean air act" that prohibits smoking in public areas. Despite warnings from the US Surgeon General, countless piles of money spent on public service ads (including television, radio, newspaper, and magazine ads, not to mention billboards, posters, and anti-smoking programs for schools), a heavy public relations effort (including entire episodes of television news magazines like 60 Minutes or Dateline), millions of people still smoke.
********************
OK, I'll presume for a moment that you meant the United States Government. (I was presuming that you were an American... which isn't always good on/. to assume.) What more do you want?
There is a difference between passing laws and actually getting them enforced. And in all of the cases I'll admit that we as citizens of this country can do more to help improve what we are doing in these areas.
But to say that the government is doing nothing is really stretching the imagination.
Re:George Washington's Vision
on
More WTC News
·
· Score: 1
For some additional information, the following is the Library of Congress catalog number (according to the Library of Congress web site):
E312.17.A37 1942
Re:George Washington's Vision
on
More WTC News
·
· Score: 2
This information came from some web pages, but I've heard this quoted from a couple of other people earlier.
I did some more digging, and found the following information that should be of use to identify the source of this quote:
Originally published by Wesley Bradshaw,
taken from a reprint of the National Tribune, Vol. 4, No. 12, Dec 1880,
National Tribune Inc., P.O. Box 1803, Washington, DC 20013-1803
Voice (202) 829-3225, FAX (202) 829-5657
BTW, the "National Tribune" is now known as "Stars and Stripes", a rather well known newspaper for US military service personnel. It was later reprinted on December 21, 1950 in the "Stars and Stripes" magazine.
Apparently this was originally pbulished in 1859, and there have been some other references to this quote as well. It has been said that the references to this from the 18th Century are scarce (as the following quote from the preface to George Washington's quote should indicate). Some additional research indicated that the soldier in question, Anthony Sherman, didn't even enlist in the Continental Army until 1778, but from my experience in dealing with 18th Century American records (and I do have some personal experience) it isn't as easy as typing a name into a computer database search engine.
This quote is found in several places on the internet. Typing in "Washington Vision" as search terms will get many of these to come up.
The last time I ever saw Anthony Sherman was on the fourth of July, 1859, in Independence Square. He was then ninety-nine years old, and becoming very feeble But though so old, his dimming eyes rekindled as he gazed upon Independence Hall, which he came to visit once more.
"Let us go into the hall," he said. "I want to tell you of an incident of Washington's life, one which no one alive knows of except myself; and, if you live you will before long, see it verified.
"From the opening of the Revolution we experienced all phases of fortune, now good and now ill, one time victorious and another conquered. The darkest period we had, I think, was when Washington after several reverses, retreated to Valley Forge, where he resolved to pass the winter of 1777. Ah! I have often seen the tears coursing down our dear commander's care-worn cheeks, as he would be conversing with a confidential officer about the condition of his poor soldiers. You have doubtless heard the story of Washington's going into the thicket to pray. Well, it was not only true, but he used often to pray in secret for aid and comfort from God, the interposition of whose Divine Providence brought us safely through the darkest days of tribulation.
George Washington's Vision
on
More WTC News
·
· Score: 2
For those that are not familiar with some of the arcania of American history and folklore, the following is a story that is supposedly written in the words of George Washington, about an experience that he had while he was commanding the Continental Army at Valley Forge, during the winter of 1776.
For those really not familiar with US history, during this time period the British army had won just about every major military battle up to this point, General Benedict Arnold had just defected with many soldiers to the British, and most of the rest of his army was just about to leave because their enlistment was just about expired. To be honest, this was a critical period in US history becuase the very existance of the United States of America was truly in jeapordy, and even George Washington was considering to throw in the towel.
The following is in his words:
"This afternoon, as I was sitting at this table engaged in preparing a dispatch, something seemed to disturb me. Looking up, I beheld standing opposite me a singularly beautiful female. So astonished was I, for I had given strict orders not to be disturbed, that it was some moments before I found language to inquire the cause of her presence. A second, a third and even a fourth time did I repeat my question, but received no answer from my mysterious visitor except a slight raising of her eyes.
"By this time I felt strange sensations spreading through me. I would have risen but the riveted gaze of the being before me rendered volition impossible. I assayed once more to address her, but my tongue had become useless, as though it had become paralyzed.
"A new influence, mysterious, potent, irresistible, took possession of me. All I could do was to gaze steadily, vacantly at my unknown visitor. Gradually the surrounding atmosphere seemed as if it had become filled with sensations, and luminous. Everything about me seemed to rarefy, the mysterious visitor herself becoming more airy and yet more distinct to my sight than before. I now began to feel as one dying, or rather to experience the sensations which I have sometimes imagined accompany dissolution. I did not think, I did not reason, I did not move; all were alike impossible. I was only conscious of gazing fixedly, vacantly at my companion.
"Presently I heard a voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn,' while at the same time my visitor extended her arm eastwardly, I now beheld a heavy white vapor at some distance rising fold upon fold. This gradually dissipated, and I looked upon a stranger scene. Before me lay spread out in one vast plain all the countries of the world - Europe, Asia, Africa and America. I saw rolling and tossing between Europe and America the billows of the Atlantic, and between Asia and America lay the Pacific.
"`Son of the Republic,' said the same mysterious voice as before, `look and learn.' At that moment I beheld a dark, shadowy being, like an angel, standing or rather floating in mid-air, between Europe and America. Dipping water out of the ocean in the hollow of each hand, he sprinkled some upon America with his right hand, while with his left hand he cast some on Europe. Immediately a cloud raised from these countries, and joined in mid-ocean. For a while it remained stationary, and then moved slowly westward, until it enveloped America in its murky folds. Sharp flashes of lightning gleamed through it at intervals, and I heard the smothered groans and cries of the American people.
"A second time the angel dipped water from the ocean, and sprinkled it out as before. The dark cloud was then drawn back to the ocean, in whose heaving billows in sank from view. A third time I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn,' I cast my eyes upon America and beheld villages and towns and cities springing up one after another until the whole land from the Atlantic to the Pacific was dotted with them.
"Again, I heard the mysterious voice say, `Son of the Republic, the end of the century cometh, look and learn.' At this the dark shadowy angel turned his face southward, and from Africa I saw an ill omened specter approach our land. It flitted slowly over every town and city of the latter. The inhabitants presently set themselves in battle array against each other. As I continued looking I saw a bright angel, on whose brow rested a crown of light, on which was traced the word `Union,' bearing the American flag which he placed between the divided nation, and said, `Remember ye are brethren.' Instantly, the inhabitants, casting from them their weapons became friends once more, and united around the National Standard.
"And again I heard the mysterious voice saying `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' At this the dark, shadowy angel placed a trumpet to his mouth, and blew three distinct blasts; and taking water from the ocean, he sprinkled it upon Europe, Asia and Africa. Then my eyes beheld a fearful scene: From each of these countries arose thick, black clouds that were soon joined into one. Throughout this mass there gleamed a dark red light by which I saw hordes of armed men, who, moving with the cloud, marched by land and sailed by sea to America. Our country was enveloped in this volume of cloud, and I saw these vast armies devastate the whole county and burn the villages, towns and cities that I beheld springing up. As my ears listened to the thundering of the cannon, clashing of sword, and the shouts and cries of millions in mortal combat, I heard again the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' When the voice had ceased, the dark shadowy angel placed his trumpet once more to his mouth, and blew a long and fearful blast.
"Instantly a light as of a thousand suns shone down from above me, and pierced and broke into fragments the dark cloud which enveloped America. At the same moment the angel upon whose head still shone the word Union, and who bore our national flag in one hand and a sword in the other, descended from the heavens attended by legions of white spirits. These immediately joined the inhabitants of America, who I perceived were will nigh overcome, but who immediately taking courage again, closed up their broken ranks and renewed the battle.
"Again, amid the fearful noise of the conflict, I heard the mysterious voice saying, `Son of the Republic, look and learn.' As the voice ceased, the shadowy angel for the last time dipped water from the ocean and sprinkled it upon America. Instantly the dark cloud rolled back, together with the armies it had brought, leaving the inhabitants of the land victorious!
"Then once more I beheld the villages, towns and cities springing up where I had seen them before, while the bright angel, planting the azure standard he had brought in the midst of them, cried with a loud voice: `While the stars remain, and the heavens send down dew upon the earth, so long shall the Union last.' And taking from his brow the crown on which blazoned the word `Union,' he placed it upon the Standard while the people, kneeling down, said, `Amen.'
"The scene instantly began to fade and dissolve, and I at last saw nothing but the rising, curling vapor I at first beheld. This also disappearing, I found myself once more gazing upon the mysterious visitor, who, in the same voice I had heard before, said, `Son of the Republic, what you have seen is thus interpreted: Three great perils will come upon the Republic. The most fearful is the third, but in this greatest conflict the whole world united shall not prevail against her. Let every child of the Republic learn to live for his God, his land and the Union'. With these words the vision vanished, and I started from my seat and felt that I had seen a vision wherein had been shown to me the birth, progress, and destiny of the United States.
In response to this, the United States Senate was discussing this very problem (which is appropriate because they are the body that will actually declare a state of war against somebody.... not the President).
They were pointing out that fifth ammendment protection rights and other technical short commings (like wiretapping laws and proper search and seisure laws) that would normally get a case thrown out of court simply don't apply in this situation. All you need to do is convince a bunch of senators that counrry so and so is responsible for the attacks, and you will see bombs and armies flying over there. I even heard a senator (on CSPAN2) specifically mention that the Miranda warnings weren't even necessary in this case.
This is kinda scary in that respect. BTW, in regards to international law, I think you need to read Machevelli's "The Prince" before you make any real judgements. The current mood is to actually punish the country that sponsored or at least harbored and encouraged these terrorists. This doesn't bode too well for Iraq, Afganistan, or even Iran or Palistine. The last think you want people in America to see right now is a bunch of people parading around and yelling praises to the fact that everything happened.
OK, I'll admit that you don't NEED to read The Hobbit in order to understand LOTR, but it does provide background material regarding Dwarves, Hobbits, the men of Laketown, and how Hobbits ended up with the one ring of power. Frodo also comes across the petrified Trolls, and there are some other references to events and places from The Hobbit.
I also think that if you aren't ready for some "meaty" reading material that The Hobbit is also a good starting point. I would recommend The Hobbit for an introduction to Middle Earth for children who are still beginning readers that may get lost with LOTR. I also know friends who turned in a book report for LOTR in elemtary school, getting it rejected because the teacher thought that the student couldn't have possibly read the book because it was too difficult for her to read it.
BTW, knowing how to operate Unix OS shells is certainly useful to running Linux, and it also helps to know the history of Unix if you are going to try and make some changes to the Linux kernel. I would like to see somebody make a substantial kernel changes without knowing at least in thumbnail another Unix system. If you are refering to a "novice" computer user... you may be more correct, but it would still help to know general Unix commands (which are quite a bit different from non-Unix based OS's like VMS, CP/M & dirivatives (including MS-DOS), Amiga OS, etc.)
Keep in mind that The Hobbit was written more as a children's novel. It also provides a really good introduction to Middle Earth and its inhabitants. Not only that, but there are references in LOTR to The Hobbit that are important, and Tolkien wrote LOTR with the idea that the reader would already be familiar with The Hobbit.
Also, after reading about Bilbo Baggins, you will want to know what happens to him and the ring... you will get hooked into reading LOTR.
I would agree that there are many injustices in America, and basic freedoms being taken away. All that said, where exactly is a place to go that you could enjoy more freedoms?
I'll admit that Russia is beginning to look very attractive, but they still need to get their act together, and learn what ideas they need to reject from western democracies (like the DCMA... BTW) but still allow their citizens to enjoy basic freedoms.
China? Yeah, right.
Australia? A resonable choice, but it is becoming more like the US in all the wrong ways.
New Zealand? I don't know if they would appreciate it if a couple of million Americans suddenly showed up in their country (assuming a mass exodus). Still, it has some appeal to Americans wanting to get out of the country.
Anywhere in Europe? America is made of people who wanted to get away from Europe. I think both America and Europe are better for everybody leaving. (no pun intended)
Africa? Again... yeah, right.
India? WTF?????
Latin America? Heck, the United States needs to point guns just to keep people out. Brazil isn't too bad (I've lived there) but the governments in this region are still too unstable, and rather prone to military takeovers.
Canada? From the viewpoint of Americans, this is simply a country that should be called US-#2. I know canadians and that isn't exactly true, but at the same time, their laws tend to follow the US at least for things that affect the average person. Again, this is a good choice if you simply have to get away, but extradition is much easier from Canada than many other countries.
Middle East? And you want to go there for more freedoms? Yeah, right. Israel isn't too bad for the ordinary citizens, as long as you understand that everybody else in that region wants to kill you as an ordinary citizen. It is also hard to become an Israeli citizen if you are not a Jew.
Moon? Mars? Antarctica? At least there isn't a government at these three locations, but there are some rather important technological problems that need to be solved, and probabally a whole lot of money before you can even think of living in these places. The environmentalists would probabally have a hard time with a large, permanent settlement in Antarctica, which could only be successful anyway if they did mineral extraction (oil, natural gas, mining, etc.) The oil from Antarctica would be extreamly expensive.
Anyway... I'm just saying that America may have its problems, but so does the rest of the world. Instead, at least for now, you need to work with what you got and at least use the basic freedoms that you still have. That and be grateful that at least America will let you leave if you want for now. Indeed, leaving America isn't a problem, the problem is trying to get back in. Even as a US citizen.
Except for exotic laws like was mentioned regarding the IRS, there are some more common-sense policies regarding if something is a religion or simply something contrived to get away with something.
Number of Adherants - Face it, numbers count, and if you can provide a pile of registered voters, most politicians will stay out of your way. Mormonism and Scientology have both improved their polticial standing by increasing their numbers. Of course on a related note, money talks as well, but numbers bring money. In the case of Scientology, they have more clout than their numbers would indicate because their members tend to be wealthier.
Standard Beliefs - If there are some clearly defined rules and "scriptures" to the religion. Clearly the Bible falls in the category, as well as the Book of Mormon, the Koran, books by L. Ron Hubbard, etc. I even heard of one person who got away with bringing the Lord of the Rings books into US Army basic training because he claimed that he was a "Tolkeinist", and worshiped the beings in those books. Oh, and because these "rules" or "commandments" are written down, it makes it harder for you to change your beliefs to fit the moment.
Formal Organization - Again, this is something to do with the IRS, but you can apply for becoming a non-profit charitable organization (which doesn't even require professing a belief in god... some atheistic "social" organizations have been set up this way). Set up the by-laws of your group and prove to the IRS that you intend to spend every dime that comes into your organization. There are a few other regulations, but it isn't all that difficult.
Tradition - It helps if you can prove that your organization was started before mankind kept records. Druids, Wicca, and Judiaism all seem to fit this rather well. Christianity is a somewhat recent upstart religion at just 2000 years. Of course claims to be a "modern" continuation of older rites are done by a number of religions as well.
Break-off splinter groups - You aren't really a true religion until you have had your first major schism. People are fickle and don't want to necessarily follow the "orthodox" viewpoint. Now I'm not calling those splinter groups valid religions, but the ones they splintered off from can be looked on as such. Now just prove who is the splinter group?
To be defined as a religion doesn't take all of these things, but the more you got, the more it helps. For the most part, judges will use "common sense" for something like proving is a belief system is a legitamate religion. This approach to worshiping code certain can take on many aspects though.
BTW, using religion as an aspect of political protest has a much longer tradition than even non-violent protests that you see much more commonly, and tends to get neglicted by the ruling governments until they can't do anything about it. (C.F. Christianity and the Roman Empire, as well as the Catholic Church and Communism... especially in Poland and much of Eastern Europe).
I've been trying to explain this situation to my mother, who is a 1st grade elementary school teacher and clueless enough regarding technology that it took her over a year to learn how to use a VCR. (She is now using AOL to surf the internet... but I gotta acknowledge that it is a good fit)
I was trying to explain why copyright needs to expire, and why the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act was really a bad thing. I kept trying to come up with really absurd ideas because I was originally trying to explain why "Steamboat Willie", by Walt Disney, should be in the public domain by now. She just didn't get it and even said that Disney should get perpetual copyright protection.
I knew that she had totally lost it when I suggested that the heirs of William Shakespear might complain and demand royalties for plays written by the great bard. She thought it was a good idea and was trying to decide how we should go about paying those royalties...
One of the problems here with Sklyarov is trying to find the appropriate analogy with non-techie folks, espeically those who don't even have a clue what a programming language is at all, much less why telling a programmer that they can't read in a data file and convert that data to another format (because it is illegal, not because it is technically challenging or impossible).
One analogy that I've come up with is something like this:
Imagine somebody who for fun in another country (say, for example, Russia) has decided to counterfit US Currency (they like the looks of Ben Franklin on the $100 bill). In the country where they live it is perfectly legal, as long as it is the currency of another country (and in this case no treaties regarding this either... I know this is a stretch of the imagination.)
Now imagine that this same printer decided that he wanted to come to the United States on a conference regarding legal document ingravings, and presented a discussion regarding the inadequacies of the US currency system and why it is so easy to counterfit US money. (For a side note, imagine that US currency was printed on construction paper with a mimeograph machine... but don't let the analogy get carried too far.)
Now imagine that the US Secret Service arrested this same printer for printing the money, even though none of it ever even came to the United States. (BTW.... IANAL but my gut feeling is the Secret Service would indeed arrest somebody in this same situation, and I'm curious if you could get arrested as a foreign national for counterfiting even if it is done somewhere else.)
***********
I would like to see a killer analogy that could be given to representatives of the US news media to show just how rediculous this arrest really has been.
I would have to say that I actually disagree with you on a minor point.
See Article VI, Clause 2 of the US Constitution:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
(Emphasis added)
I'd like to point out that the US Congress could theoritically designate Saddam Hussein as emperor of the World and the Americas by treaty and probabally get away with it (although they would probabally also get thrown out of office when they run for reelection). This would be the supreme law of the land.
I'll admit if I'm wrong here, and I'd like to know of any case history in regards to overruling an international treaty in US courts. The following is a heriachical view of US laws (from my understanding of US law... IANAL)
US Constitution
International Treaties ratified by Congress
Laws passed by Congress
Federal Common Law Judgements
Laws passed by state legislatures/municipalities
State Court Common Law Judgements
Presidental/Gubinatorial Executive Orders (applies only to federal/state employees... but still can have the effect of law in may cases)
International Treaties signed by the President but not yet ratified by the Senate (generally has the effect of an executive order, like some of the SALT treaties signed between the USSR and the US)
Executive Department Regulations (like OSHA rules, IRS tax regs, other buracratic stuff)
As can be seen here, the international treaties have substantial influence over US policy, which is why some people are still complaining in the US about American involvement in NATO.
Here is a non-obvious use for Freenet that is completely legitamate and in fact uses the Freenet technology as an integral piece for its use:
Distributed File Server - Place a group of files into a "directory" that is shared across the network via Freenet nodes. Of particular note, this "file system" would be OS independent, but to share stuff in a peer workgroup situation (I'm thinking a LAN-only freenet here) you wouldn't even have to worry most of the time if your co-worker's computer is on or not.
** Yes, this is being done with other software, but you asked for a legitamate use.
Another very beneficial use:
Http over Freenet: (the implementation has already been done... go to the Freenet site to check it out)
Putting web content on freenet. This has the advantage that the person who wants to "host" a website doesn't actually need a physical server (or server farm). Additional benefits are that a "freenet-web site" can't be slashdotted... this just spreads the information further into more nodes, and in fact makes the data more accessable.
In terms of free speech, this is already a critical piece for the China Daily News (an independent Chinese-language news web page that is currently being censored by the People's Republic of China. In fact, China is currently blocking most attempts to even obtain Freenet.)
Another very beneficial use would be for the IPN (Inter-planetary Internet). Freenet out of the box (as in using just the current implementation... more or less... there may have to be some tweaks to get it working right) can be used to cache and forward data files in a manner that FTP couldn't even dream.
The fact is that Freenet is already rattling some cages, and reading the mailing lists is enough to get paranoid about every conspiracy group you can think of... Bavarian Illuminati, Counsel of 500, UFOs, New World Order, ect. The fact is this software is designed from the fundimental foundation as a means to send data without censorship of any sort. If this means that warz or mp3s can be sent when other people don't want them tranfered, together with political speech, that is the price of freedom.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about that. If you ever get a chance to come into the Salt Lake City, Utah International Airport by air, you can see one of the largest open-pit mining operations in the world. I guanentee that you will be able to see this from the moon as a major crater on the earth.
That said, I would prefer having a mine like that on the moon than having to breath the smelter fumes coming from the processing plant.
I know that this is a reply to an old post, but here it is:
This idea was first proposed by Robert A. Heinlein in the book "The Man who Sold The Moon". In it he suggests that a popular soft drink company puts a logo on the moon for a certain amount of money (and the fictional company was called 6+, but that is another story.)
It was even more interesting when they suggested that the USSR (remember this was written in the 1960's) might instead put up a big red hammer and sickel emblem on the moon instead.
Unfortunately, the Lunar Environmentalists will stop anything like that from happening. That is another story however.
This was used in the past to stop the Mormons in Utah, claiming that the support of polygamy was an illegal act and therefore all of the property of the Mormon church was confiscated by the US Army. At gunpoint.
If you used the church to spread the message of peyote, that would also be considered an illegal activity.
That was the point of the Religious Liberties Act, that attempted to push the legal recognition into something that would make the test of whether it was a religion as to if it was a compelling interest of the state to ban certain activities, such as ritualistic child sacrifice, legalized prostitution, or dodging a military draft (aka Mohammad Ali).
It does help if you can prove an outstanding history of a certain belief (such as the American Indian tribal worship with the use of peyote, or the Quakers non-violence stance where they refuse to wield guns, even if drafted into the Army).
Alternatively, it is common for the tax-except status to be pulled from a church that violates the non-profit status, or promotes political activities.
There are a couple of problems with this line of reasoning. First of all, it presumes that you know all of the technical issues to do telepresence (aka Heinlein's "Waldos"). You still have to get the robots/monitoring equipment into place and the sort of equipment you are talking about takes quite a bit of infrastructure in order to get it going. I believe that this is used in parts of the Nuclear Power industry quite a bit, because the risks far and away stronger than the cost of the equipment. Check out the web site for INEEL for some additional information regarding the use of robots as you are suggesting, but in another context.
The other problem is the concept that people just can't live in space. What is going to need to happen for space flight to be exciting again like it was in the early 1960's is to have people up there sticking their nose in places that nobody has ever been to before. A color television just doesn't do the same justice as a human eye, noticing subtle stuff that you would just miss on a monitor. The geology that Harrison Schmitt of Apollo XVII did on the moon just couldn't be duplicated by sending a Viking-style probe to the moon, grabbing a couple of rocks, and coming back to the earth. Much of what we know about lunar geology is due to the efforts of the last three Apollo missions.
It is also unavoidable that people MUST eventually get into space. To doom humanity to this little chunk of rock in an obscure backwater arm of a rather ordinary galaxy is, in my opinion, a great waste of the amazing potential of mankind.
Finally, there is the often quoted phrase "LEO (low-earth orbit) is more than halfway to the rest of the Solar System." If you get a strong human presence in a low orbit environment, it will be essentially trivial to travel anywhere else in the solar system, including Mars, the Asteroids, etc.
Mind you, I am not saying that there wouldn't be tasks that couldn't be done via remote-control. There will be stuff like this, and where appropriate it should be done. Just don't openly dismiss the fact that this is the only option that should be considered.
The one exception to what you are describing is what could be collectively called "Reference Works".
This would include things like the CRC Handbooks, Telephone directories, Specifications (like RFC's), alumni lists, maps, gazeteers, etc. (I can go on and on here... but I hope this gets the point across).
This is one area where an "open source" book of a more traditional sort would be of exceptional value. The DMOZ web site is a good example of what could be done as a collaborative effort, and I think there would be some good that came out of some efforts like this.
I would have to agree though, that an open source version of J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord Of The Rings" would be a stupid application of the principle, or for a better example, Abraham Lincoln's "Gettysburg Address" (which is in the public domain right now). Sure, you can "modify" the speech, apply poetic license to it, or even rework it for your own use (many US Presidents already have). But to release the "Gettysburg Address v. 2.0" would be just stupid.
That said, even in this case it would be useful to have a public document (like the Gutenberg Project) where you can review the document for historical accuracy, and through a peer reviewed process update grammar and spelling errors that have been propogated over time. But I digress at this point.
Dang... I don't have a link to find at the moment, but there were some initial attempts to do exactly as you have proposed.
There were some experimental tests done in Hawaii (due to a huge thermal differential between the surface water and the deep sea ocean... which is about 1 degree celcius) The problems came mainly from the fact that the deep sea water is **VERY** high in nutrients, and after it was warmed up, tended to produce a bio plume of critters trying to take advantage of the nutrients. Things kept getting into the intake pipes (like coral growing inside of the temperature exchange chambers) so the plant would have to be completely rebuilt every few years if it were made into a production energy facility.
There were some positive side benefits (like revitalizing a dying coral reef) but by itself it proved to be a much more expensive way to produce energy than most other alternatives, like a solar or wind farm.
Larry Niven in his "Tales of Known Space" series wrote about a floating criminal gang that would monitor the news for riots and other massive public gatherings.
The cool part was that they would use "stepping disks" (very much like Star Trek transporters) to enter into the crowd, steal a couple of items, and then get out before the police could get things under control. There were government attempts to control this behavior, but these were "professional" thieves that hacked the global transporter system. (Larry Niven even described some problems with transporter machines being found in every livingroom... I digress here though.)
I agree that Slashdot is quite a bit like this floating party that zaps information providers.
There are times, however, when this kind of behavior is useful. The DeCSS mess was one of those cases where I knew it would be important to spread the word on Slashdot and make sure that copies got to everybody and their cyberpet.
Sure... the GPL doesn't discourage such blatent behavior... but the US Copyright code does.
I wouldn't recommend you to try that stunt, because it would open all kinds of other legal problems as well.
As it appears as though the first ammendment to the US Constitution is completely useless now, there are even further attacks on the freedom of speech, such as this bill.
Keep in mind that the argument of (Code == Speech) has not been established by the courts, although as a professional software developer I would argue strongly that it is. I resent the fact that there are certain algorithms that I can't implement, simply because of some stupid regulation or other political objective.
I admit that there could be illegal forms of software, but in my opinion it should be somthing like the proverbial yelling "Fire!" in a crowded room. Writing and using software to perform a DNS attack, or secretly installing something like Back Orifice without the users permission would certainly come close. However, even in these cases I can think of legitamate uses for the software, even though it would be more like a set of lock picking tools. It would be the way it is used that is illegal rather than posession of the tool itself.
Furthermore, I feel that abuse against an individual which stops them from performing immediate typical actions (like the DNS attack I mentioned or grabbing data from a system by deliberately subverting security measures) should be illegal. These nebulous laws that protect an industry are questionable at best. The DeCSS controversy is also a good case in point to show that more traditional forms of expression (such as publication in a newspaper or a public reading of the sourcecode for DeCSS) can also be restricted with these very same laws. (Actually, it would be cool if we could get a congressman to read DeCSS from the floor of the US House of Representatives, but I degress here). The proposed SSSCA hearing would even make that kind of speech illegal. Think about it.
I also think that the time for something like the Open Cores project is going to be critical in the future, where not only is the software going to need to be free and open, but the hardware designs as well. This way we are no longer held to the mercy of a company like Intel that could force new standards like what is being proposed.
I would be rich... (this abused phrase notwithstanding).
/. readers) would consider archaic. I mean, 16 bit processors are finally being used for many missions and 8 bit processors are still common.
Seriously, there are so many futuristic NASA research projects (most of them in the $10,000 to $100,000 range). They cover everything from anti-gravity to blowing bubbles (liquid soap bubbles).
I personally think this is what NASA does best, and the results from these research grants are quite interesting. It is also very unlikely that NASA will ever do anything with most of these research projects.
{Rant Mode On}
Just for an example, there hasn't been a new propulsion technology for manned spaceflight since the 1970's (mainly due to politics... including internal NASA stuff too), and even the robotic probe missions are using what most geeks (and
I would consider myself to be a major NASA supporter, and I do vote for congressmen that are supportive of the space industry. I would also say, however, that I think the days of NASA are numbered and I wouldn't mind the complete dismantling of the entire agency. They are too stuck in the past (reliving the glory days of Apollo), and are actually doing more harm than good now for giving me or my children the opportunity to work and live in space.
As a percentage of the US Federal budget, NASA is now totally inconsequential. During the 1960's NASA was second only to the Department of Defense. Now, NASA doesn't even show up except on a list of miscellaneous agencies, and even the Department of Defense now comes in third of fourth (it is grouped with the Department of Veteran Affairs and the State Department to show it as a bigger piece of the federal budget in the 2001 tax booklet from the IRS).
I'm not advocating a renewal of NASA funding to 1960's funding levels (which was about 10% of the Federal Budget), but I am suggesting that it certainly is no longer a national priority, as defined by the United States Congress and the President of the United States.
Unfortunately, with much of the space infrastructure in Texas and strong Republican states (like Alabama, Utah, or swing states like Florida and California), I highly doubt that it could be cut with the current administration either.
{Rant Mode Off}
The Tenth Article of Ammendment of the US Constitution clearly states:
This clause above all others should say that states clearly have the right to enact legislation, even stuff that may even be unconstitutional on the federal level (because of limited powers of the federal government).
People in the EU please note this as well (before all of your national sovernty is gobbled up by the EU federal government). Each US state is an independent soverign entity, and can even pass treaties with foreign governments (subject to congressional approval... another story there).
On a more philosophical viewpoint, it is very healthy for 50 states to have 50 sets of laws (it is too late to stop that anyway.) If you think that living in Idaho is just like living in Mississippi, I would challenge you to actually go and visit both places.
The main point is that each state should be a testing ground for new political ideas, and if they are successful (like some of the anti-cell phone laws... just as an example) they will be adopted by other states.
If some bad laws are passed (again using the anti-cell phone laws as an example) there are some nice things about it.
What I'm trying to get across here is that there is a genuine role for state governments to play in the regulation of commercial enterprises, and they may even have some roles to play in the regulation of the internet.
And the other thing... the message that I'm replying to mentioned that it was just worrying about each of the 50 states. With the internet, you also need to worry about the other 200 + countries that your e-mail message could end up in as well. Just try to be the sender (or even the recipient) of porn in Saudi Arabia.
Check out SpamCop
This site does a fair bit of what you are suggesting, including e-mail forwarding, spam tracing, generated keys, the database stuff, and more. I would like to get some of the stuff he is doing via GPL'd software (some of it is, BTW), but he does a pretty good job, and even seems to annoy the flagrant spammers a bit.
There is free spam reporting, including an anonymizer to inform the offending ISP that they are being used by spammers. They can reply to the blind e-mail forwarder, but they won't get your address directly.
If you want to build a better mousetrap, (or spam trap, as it may be), this is a good resource to use as a benchmark (or talk you out of your project... but don't let that stop you.)
What do you mean by saying that the government is doing nothing?
/. to assume.) What more do you want?
For traffic accidents:
There are seatbelt laws, vehicle safety standards, lighting standards, collision tests, traffic laws (that comprise whole chapters in most state legal codes), civil engineering to design highways that reduce accidents, and much more.
In fact, the red tape you need to go through to build a production motor vehicle is incredible... I would like to see you just try and get a few buddies to build a car, and try to give it away (with a helpful donation from somebody like Wm. Gates III or equivalent). Half of your development team would have to be doing nothing but dealing with government regulations and filling out paperwork.
Regarding drinking:
Ever heard of the 18th Ammendment to the US Constitution? Read it sometime. I would say that is a rather drastic approach to dealing with drinking, and there are substantial laws to deal with it, including one case where somebody who just killed somebody in an accident will now spend the rest of his life in jail because he was drunk while driving. What more do you want, the death peanalty for driving drunk? I'll admit though that I get surprised when I hear about people that have been arrested 30+ times for a DUI and somehow still keep their license (being a friend of the mayor, bribing judges, finding a loophole in the law, the arresting officer doesn't show up to the trial, etc.)
In some ways I regret that the 18th Ammendment was repealed, but even with that off the books now, there are still many regulatory laws controlling how alcoholic is produced and consumed... even if it is just going to be used in a fuel take on a car (complicating the issues I mentioned above).
Smoking:
Why do you think the tobacco companies setteled out of court with the law suits from most of the US states? Almost every state in the US now has some sort of "indoor clean air act" that prohibits smoking in public areas. Despite warnings from the US Surgeon General, countless piles of money spent on public service ads (including television, radio, newspaper, and magazine ads, not to mention billboards, posters, and anti-smoking programs for schools), a heavy public relations effort (including entire episodes of television news magazines like 60 Minutes or Dateline), millions of people still smoke.
********************
OK, I'll presume for a moment that you meant the United States Government. (I was presuming that you were an American... which isn't always good on
There is a difference between passing laws and actually getting them enforced. And in all of the cases I'll admit that we as citizens of this country can do more to help improve what we are doing in these areas.
But to say that the government is doing nothing is really stretching the imagination.
For some additional information, the following is the Library of Congress catalog number (according to the Library of Congress web site):
.A37 1942
E312.17
I did some more digging, and found the following information that should be of use to identify the source of this quote:
BTW, the "National Tribune" is now known as "Stars and Stripes", a rather well known newspaper for US military service personnel. It was later reprinted on December 21, 1950 in the "Stars and Stripes" magazine.
Apparently this was originally pbulished in 1859, and there have been some other references to this quote as well. It has been said that the references to this from the 18th Century are scarce (as the following quote from the preface to George Washington's quote should indicate). Some additional research indicated that the soldier in question, Anthony Sherman, didn't even enlist in the Continental Army until 1778, but from my experience in dealing with 18th Century American records (and I do have some personal experience) it isn't as easy as typing a name into a computer database search engine.
This quote is found in several places on the internet. Typing in "Washington Vision" as search terms will get many of these to come up.
For those really not familiar with US history, during this time period the British army had won just about every major military battle up to this point, General Benedict Arnold had just defected with many soldiers to the British, and most of the rest of his army was just about to leave because their enlistment was just about expired. To be honest, this was a critical period in US history becuase the very existance of the United States of America was truly in jeapordy, and even George Washington was considering to throw in the towel.
The following is in his words:
In response to this, the United States Senate was discussing this very problem (which is appropriate because they are the body that will actually declare a state of war against somebody.... not the President).
They were pointing out that fifth ammendment protection rights and other technical short commings (like wiretapping laws and proper search and seisure laws) that would normally get a case thrown out of court simply don't apply in this situation. All you need to do is convince a bunch of senators that counrry so and so is responsible for the attacks, and you will see bombs and armies flying over there. I even heard a senator (on CSPAN2) specifically mention that the Miranda warnings weren't even necessary in this case.
This is kinda scary in that respect. BTW, in regards to international law, I think you need to read Machevelli's "The Prince" before you make any real judgements. The current mood is to actually punish the country that sponsored or at least harbored and encouraged these terrorists. This doesn't bode too well for Iraq, Afganistan, or even Iran or Palistine. The last think you want people in America to see right now is a bunch of people parading around and yelling praises to the fact that everything happened.
OK, I'll admit that you don't NEED to read The Hobbit in order to understand LOTR, but it does provide background material regarding Dwarves, Hobbits, the men of Laketown, and how Hobbits ended up with the one ring of power. Frodo also comes across the petrified Trolls, and there are some other references to events and places from The Hobbit.
I also think that if you aren't ready for some "meaty" reading material that The Hobbit is also a good starting point. I would recommend The Hobbit for an introduction to Middle Earth for children who are still beginning readers that may get lost with LOTR. I also know friends who turned in a book report for LOTR in elemtary school, getting it rejected because the teacher thought that the student couldn't have possibly read the book because it was too difficult for her to read it.
BTW, knowing how to operate Unix OS shells is certainly useful to running Linux, and it also helps to know the history of Unix if you are going to try and make some changes to the Linux kernel. I would like to see somebody make a substantial kernel changes without knowing at least in thumbnail another Unix system. If you are refering to a "novice" computer user... you may be more correct, but it would still help to know general Unix commands (which are quite a bit different from non-Unix based OS's like VMS, CP/M & dirivatives (including MS-DOS), Amiga OS, etc.)
Keep in mind that The Hobbit was written more as a children's novel. It also provides a really good introduction to Middle Earth and its inhabitants. Not only that, but there are references in LOTR to The Hobbit that are important, and Tolkien wrote LOTR with the idea that the reader would already be familiar with The Hobbit.
Also, after reading about Bilbo Baggins, you will want to know what happens to him and the ring... you will get hooked into reading LOTR.
I would agree that there are many injustices in America, and basic freedoms being taken away. All that said, where exactly is a place to go that you could enjoy more freedoms?
I'll admit that Russia is beginning to look very attractive, but they still need to get their act together, and learn what ideas they need to reject from western democracies (like the DCMA... BTW) but still allow their citizens to enjoy basic freedoms.
China? Yeah, right.
Australia? A resonable choice, but it is becoming more like the US in all the wrong ways.
New Zealand? I don't know if they would appreciate it if a couple of million Americans suddenly showed up in their country (assuming a mass exodus). Still, it has some appeal to Americans wanting to get out of the country.
Anywhere in Europe? America is made of people who wanted to get away from Europe. I think both America and Europe are better for everybody leaving. (no pun intended)
Africa? Again... yeah, right.
India? WTF?????
Latin America? Heck, the United States needs to point guns just to keep people out. Brazil isn't too bad (I've lived there) but the governments in this region are still too unstable, and rather prone to military takeovers.
Canada? From the viewpoint of Americans, this is simply a country that should be called US-#2. I know canadians and that isn't exactly true, but at the same time, their laws tend to follow the US at least for things that affect the average person. Again, this is a good choice if you simply have to get away, but extradition is much easier from Canada than many other countries.
Middle East? And you want to go there for more freedoms? Yeah, right. Israel isn't too bad for the ordinary citizens, as long as you understand that everybody else in that region wants to kill you as an ordinary citizen. It is also hard to become an Israeli citizen if you are not a Jew.
Moon? Mars? Antarctica? At least there isn't a government at these three locations, but there are some rather important technological problems that need to be solved, and probabally a whole lot of money before you can even think of living in these places. The environmentalists would probabally have a hard time with a large, permanent settlement in Antarctica, which could only be successful anyway if they did mineral extraction (oil, natural gas, mining, etc.) The oil from Antarctica would be extreamly expensive.
Anyway... I'm just saying that America may have its problems, but so does the rest of the world. Instead, at least for now, you need to work with what you got and at least use the basic freedoms that you still have. That and be grateful that at least America will let you leave if you want for now. Indeed, leaving America isn't a problem, the problem is trying to get back in. Even as a US citizen.
To be defined as a religion doesn't take all of these things, but the more you got, the more it helps. For the most part, judges will use "common sense" for something like proving is a belief system is a legitamate religion. This approach to worshiping code certain can take on many aspects though.
BTW, using religion as an aspect of political protest has a much longer tradition than even non-violent protests that you see much more commonly, and tends to get neglicted by the ruling governments until they can't do anything about it. (C.F. Christianity and the Roman Empire, as well as the Catholic Church and Communism... especially in Poland and much of Eastern Europe).
I've been trying to explain this situation to my mother, who is a 1st grade elementary school teacher and clueless enough regarding technology that it took her over a year to learn how to use a VCR. (She is now using AOL to surf the internet... but I gotta acknowledge that it is a good fit)
I was trying to explain why copyright needs to expire, and why the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act was really a bad thing. I kept trying to come up with really absurd ideas because I was originally trying to explain why "Steamboat Willie", by Walt Disney, should be in the public domain by now. She just didn't get it and even said that Disney should get perpetual copyright protection.
I knew that she had totally lost it when I suggested that the heirs of William Shakespear might complain and demand royalties for plays written by the great bard. She thought it was a good idea and was trying to decide how we should go about paying those royalties...
One of the problems here with Sklyarov is trying to find the appropriate analogy with non-techie folks, espeically those who don't even have a clue what a programming language is at all, much less why telling a programmer that they can't read in a data file and convert that data to another format (because it is illegal, not because it is technically challenging or impossible).
One analogy that I've come up with is something like this:
Imagine somebody who for fun in another country (say, for example, Russia) has decided to counterfit US Currency (they like the looks of Ben Franklin on the $100 bill). In the country where they live it is perfectly legal, as long as it is the currency of another country (and in this case no treaties regarding this either... I know this is a stretch of the imagination.)
Now imagine that this same printer decided that he wanted to come to the United States on a conference regarding legal document ingravings, and presented a discussion regarding the inadequacies of the US currency system and why it is so easy to counterfit US money. (For a side note, imagine that US currency was printed on construction paper with a mimeograph machine... but don't let the analogy get carried too far.)
Now imagine that the US Secret Service arrested this same printer for printing the money, even though none of it ever even came to the United States. (BTW.... IANAL but my gut feeling is the Secret Service would indeed arrest somebody in this same situation, and I'm curious if you could get arrested as a foreign national for counterfiting even if it is done somewhere else.)
***********
I would like to see a killer analogy that could be given to representatives of the US news media to show just how rediculous this arrest really has been.
See Article VI, Clause 2 of the US Constitution:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
(Emphasis added)
I'd like to point out that the US Congress could theoritically designate Saddam Hussein as emperor of the World and the Americas by treaty and probabally get away with it (although they would probabally also get thrown out of office when they run for reelection). This would be the supreme law of the land.
I'll admit if I'm wrong here, and I'd like to know of any case history in regards to overruling an international treaty in US courts. The following is a heriachical view of US laws (from my understanding of US law... IANAL)
As can be seen here, the international treaties have substantial influence over US policy, which is why some people are still complaining in the US about American involvement in NATO.
Here is a non-obvious use for Freenet that is completely legitamate and in fact uses the Freenet technology as an integral piece for its use:
Distributed File Server - Place a group of files into a "directory" that is shared across the network via Freenet nodes. Of particular note, this "file system" would be OS independent, but to share stuff in a peer workgroup situation (I'm thinking a LAN-only freenet here) you wouldn't even have to worry most of the time if your co-worker's computer is on or not.
** Yes, this is being done with other software, but you asked for a legitamate use.
Another very beneficial use:
Http over Freenet: (the implementation has already been done... go to the Freenet site to check it out)
Putting web content on freenet. This has the advantage that the person who wants to "host" a website doesn't actually need a physical server (or server farm). Additional benefits are that a "freenet-web site" can't be slashdotted... this just spreads the information further into more nodes, and in fact makes the data more accessable.
In terms of free speech, this is already a critical piece for the China Daily News (an independent Chinese-language news web page that is currently being censored by the People's Republic of China. In fact, China is currently blocking most attempts to even obtain Freenet.)
Another very beneficial use would be for the IPN (Inter-planetary Internet). Freenet out of the box (as in using just the current implementation... more or less... there may have to be some tweaks to get it working right) can be used to cache and forward data files in a manner that FTP couldn't even dream.
The fact is that Freenet is already rattling some cages, and reading the mailing lists is enough to get paranoid about every conspiracy group you can think of... Bavarian Illuminati, Counsel of 500, UFOs, New World Order, ect. The fact is this software is designed from the fundimental foundation as a means to send data without censorship of any sort. If this means that warz or mp3s can be sent when other people don't want them tranfered, together with political speech, that is the price of freedom.