Does this sound like unreasonable search & seizure to anybody else? It certainly does to me... when the government doesn't have to justify its actions to a judge or disclose their actions to anybody else.
Anybody who has ever been arrested, tried, convicted, of any misdemeanor or above should be tracked using this technology. It's just a good idea - we can keep an eye on criminals.
Better, you could program the automatic doors of your home or office to not let in tagged criminals.
By storing the information in XML format, you can interactively query a RFIDed criminal to find out what their background is (violent vs. non-violent, type of theft, drug use, current income level, gender, SSN, credit history, etc.) and let your security system decide on the fly whether you want that particular entity on your premises.
In fact, governments, building owners, and residents could publish their specification for the type of people they will allow into their space -this will solve all sorts of social ills in the future. The Upper Eastside of New York City, for example, could specify:
The notion that the state has no responsibility to broadcast TV/radio that hasn't been influenced by commercial concerns is
Well, I'll disagree there... it's true that state-funded film, TV and radio production have brought out some fantastic productions (thinking of the canadian film boards, American PBS and CPB, and their relatives in UK, NL, DE etc.)
It's the American businessmen running Congress and the Whitehouse who seem to want government out of what we call "public broadcasting." The PBS and its relatives crank out some damn good productions. However, voters collectively don't pool together enough election-year dollar$ together to influence our elected "representatives" to get them to think public broadcasting and production is a good thing.
The conservatives even tried to kill NEA (National Endowment for the Arts) awhile back, because some tiny sliver of its funding was awarded to racey artists like Mappelthorpe.
They label it "socialism"... like that was a bad thing.
If you live in or visit NYC, there's a venue that sort of specializes in experimental instruments and music, some free jazz and other stuff. It's Tonic, on Norfolk in the Lower East Side, and they've earned a solid reputation for hosting some great musicians of lesser known genres. JohnZorn has played there many times.
One night I saw a guy put a cello bow to a tiny wooden contraption with audio pickups attached. He proceeded to produce some eerie and beautiful music. Others followed with homebrew synthesizers. Weird, intriguing night.
Columbia University has a computer music program, and some of the students there host a monthly demo called dorkbot, for people making experimental music, audio, video, robots etc.. It's held in a dozen other cities, check the website.
Two radio stations that carry new and experimental music programs are WFMU and WNYC. FMU has numerous programs which spotlight other music, while WNYC carries a single show, quite good, called New Sounds, hosted by John Schaefer. It's a bit on the pedigreed end of the spectrum, and although John Zorn is a frequent reference point, I haven't heard him as a guest on the show, though I'm not a regular listener. Most definitely worth a listen, it's on each night at 11pm ET.
Both can be heard online, and both stations maintain archives of their shows.
My understanding is, they're something else while still *out there* (asteroid or some other inter-planetary-or-stellar junk), and they become meteors *upon entering* the atmosphere. If anything's left when it hits the ground, that's called a meteorite.
Just today, the U.N. released a report stating that "dead zones" (oxygen-starved areas) in the world's oceans had doubled since 1990, with some as large as 70,000 square kilometers:
The main cause is excess nitrogen run-off from farm fertilizers, sewage and industrial pollutants. The nitrogen triggers blooms of microscopic algae known as phytoplankton. As the algae die and rot, they consume oxygen, thereby suffocating everything from clams and lobsters to oysters and fish.
"Human kind is engaged in a gigantic, global, experiment as a result of inefficient and often overuse of fertilizers, the discharge of untreated sewage and the ever rising emissions from vehicles and factories," UNEP Executive Director Klaus Toepfer said in a statement. "Unless urgent action is taken to tackle the sources of the problem, it is likely to escalate rapidly."
Rates are declining, but the deceleration rate varies depending on who you ask. The handful of reports at cia.gov seem to point to a lower deceleration rate than the highly biased overpopulation.com. CIA has reports based on 200 census, whereas your link seems to reference pre-2000 analysis.
You get more human bodies on the face of the earth, you'll get more sh!t, refuse and greenhouse gasses, that remains undisputed. The real queston is what the effect is and will continue to be, and whether mankind will become more responsible about their output, and stop expecting the rest of the planet's lifeforms to absorb it all.
You're right, we could get food to everybody. But the problems we face are on the output side: sewerage, garbage, industrial toxins, internal combustion.
People in the United States among the best environmental policy -no wonder environmentalists don't want to see it downgraded. Hell, many countries in South America still allow leaded gasoline! Raw, untreated sewage is spilled directly into Sao Paulo's rivers, which run through the city down to the beach! Imagine if that were the case in the U.S.?
Because of the political limitations imposed, I doubt that food (like wealth) will ever be equally distributed. Even under old-skool communist and socialist systems, distribution wasn't that great (although food distribution was generally better than capitalism, as it was treated as more of a basic right), but then again you probably lived under a dictatorship in which your life was consider just a resource for the system.
If we have twice as many people as we have now (as is predicted for 2040), all consuming and outputting at similar levels to today, imagine the big problems our ecosystems will face.
And, remember those tax refunds? Paid out against record massive budget deficits? More borrow and spend: Because they weren't paid from a budget surplus, we get to pay them back, with interest.
Remember also, under Mr. Clarke, 5 seperate terrorist attacks took place, most of them under Clinton.
Remember also, under Mr. Bush Junior, the single largest attack ever on American soil took place, completely bypassing all of our massive military defenses -the absolute best on the planet (built to intercept Soviet fighters and nucular bombers, let alone passenger jets, with standing protocols for following FAA hijack intercept requests - and they weren't even called into action, goddammit.)
Four aircraft, known at the time to be hijacked, known at the time to be way off-course, all candidates for immediate NORAD interception, were allowed to continue flying until all four crashed, three of them into their targets, one of them plunging into the headquarters (!) of said massive military, two of them destroying some of the most prized real estate on the planet, thereby sending the American center of capitalism into a depression. How's that for a military well-prepared to protect us against threats? Imagine if this had been a Soviet nucular attack? Sheesh, we'd all be dead.
Hell, forget the allegations of a drunken, coked-up AWOL Dubya in the 70's, he was friggin' AWOL on 9/11! Yup, he hung around an elementary school, at the other end of the eastern seaboard, until well after the attacks had taken place, then tucked his tail into Air Force One and ran off into hiding! How's that for a show of military leadership?
Oh yeah, now that's a president you want to re-elect. Kerry's got nothing on him.
The hundreds of thousands under Saddam, or the thousands while we were removing him?
Hundreds of thousands that were killed while Saddam was supported and sanctioned by the U.S., including his WMD programs. I've never understood the moral relativism that makes it okay to:
1) Support and fund a mass murderer by supplying him with WMD technology, 2) Send send high level envoys to shuck and jive while he's building those WMD, 3) Look the other way and whistle while he uses WMD to mass murder his own citizens, and 4) Continue to support him afterward, and then 5) Cite what you supported as being evil and mount a large-scale invasion to oust your former partner in crime?
The only plausible explanation is that today's U.S. government is packed with hypocrites and liars.
Over one percent of the population has served time in prison. So, are you saying you'd like to restrict the flying privileges of that segment of the people? Wasn't being in prison the punishment, or are they to be punished the rest of their lives?
"Innocent until proven guilty." So much for the idea of the criminal justice system being about reform, eh?
Probably I look more like a potential terrorist (long hair, scraggly beard, army boots, disheveled clothing) than anybody here, but I've never been even searched since 9/11, whereas my 68-y.o. mother, grandmother of two, gets searched almost every time she flies.
What about all the tens of thousands of people who've been arrested on criminal charges for carrying a deadly weapon (3+" knife blade, unloaded gun, nunchucks.) I bet they're gonna be flagged "violent criminals" and be denied access to the country's jet transportation system.
Surely you haven't all missed the inverted coefficient-time relationship inherent in the presented sample? As you know, a major signifier in Coxbury matrix analysis of at-work affairs clearly delineates the role-relationship correlation. Therefore the sample is obviously out-of-bounds, as should be obvious to any first-year student of the discipline. Rather than anomaly, this clearly identifies as an early datapoint in a trend which might lead to future observation of unqualified detachments from societal roles and the subsequent liability reduction.
In other words, the boss gets to fuck the secretary without fear of retribution. Nice!
Your analogy fails, because to many drivers, it's their mechanic, or their spouse/parent/relative/neighbor/friend who looks after the machine's internals for them. For a lot of people, simply getting in the car and driving it is what they know.
The analogy holds up, being that the average car owner takes their vehical to an expert who does the regular servicing. Sure, you and I know where the drain plug is located on the oil pan of our tanks, but do you think the graphical designer cares whether their Volvo even has one? Nope, they just want it to work, and they pay experts to solve the problems outside their domain.
ps. that third one looks kinda like Tinkerbells legs sprouting out of a frog's ass. Kindagruesome. Time to order dinner from that Frenchy place on third ave.
That's the real question... If they've invested upwards of $80-100 million (that we know about) in them, directly or indirectly, was it all just donations to the Darl McBride Charitable Foundation, or are they holding paper?
Slashdot Mirror
Does this sound like unreasonable search & seizure to anybody else? It certainly does to me ... when the government doesn't have to justify its actions to a judge or disclose their actions to anybody else.
Anybody who has ever been arrested, tried, convicted, of any misdemeanor or above should be tracked using this technology. It's just a good idea - we can keep an eye on criminals.
;>
Better, you could program the automatic doors of your home or office to not let in tagged criminals.
By storing the information in XML format, you can interactively query a RFIDed criminal to find out what their background is (violent vs. non-violent, type of theft, drug use, current income level, gender, SSN, credit history, etc.) and let your security system decide on the fly whether you want that particular entity on your premises.
In fact, governments, building owners, and residents could publish their specification for the type of people they will allow into their space -this will solve all sorts of social ills in the future. The Upper Eastside of New York City, for example, could specify:
<Entities_Allowed>
<Income minimum="50000"/>
<Convictions allowed="white_collar"/>
<Race allowed="caucasian,asian"/>
<Memberships disallowed="ACLU,NYCLU"/>
<Jokes onyou="april foools"
</Entities_Allowed>
The notion that the state has no responsibility to broadcast TV/radio that hasn't been influenced by commercial concerns is
... like that was a bad thing.
Well, I'll disagree there... it's true that state-funded film, TV and radio production have brought out some fantastic productions (thinking of the canadian film boards, American PBS and CPB, and their relatives in UK, NL, DE etc.)
It's the American businessmen running Congress and the Whitehouse who seem to want government out of what we call "public broadcasting." The PBS and its relatives crank out some damn good productions. However, voters collectively don't pool together enough election-year dollar$ together to influence our elected "representatives" to get them to think public broadcasting and production is a good thing.
The conservatives even tried to kill NEA (National Endowment for the Arts) awhile back, because some tiny sliver of its funding was awarded to racey artists like Mappelthorpe.
They label it "socialism"
Britain is the country that taxes another "free" commodity, television. One is useless, the other useful, the reader will decide which is which... :)
If you live in or visit NYC, there's a venue that sort of specializes in experimental instruments and music, some free jazz and other stuff. It's Tonic, on Norfolk in the Lower East Side, and they've earned a solid reputation for hosting some great musicians of lesser known genres. John Zorn has played there many times.
One night I saw a guy put a cello bow to a tiny wooden contraption with audio pickups attached. He proceeded to produce some eerie and beautiful music. Others followed with homebrew synthesizers. Weird, intriguing night.
Columbia University has a computer music program, and some of the students there host a monthly demo called dorkbot, for people making experimental music, audio, video, robots etc.. It's held in a dozen other cities, check the website.
Two radio stations that carry new and experimental music programs are WFMU and WNYC. FMU has numerous programs which spotlight other music, while WNYC carries a single show, quite good, called New Sounds, hosted by John Schaefer. It's a bit on the pedigreed end of the spectrum, and although John Zorn is a frequent reference point, I haven't heard him as a guest on the show, though I'm not a regular listener. Most definitely worth a listen, it's on each night at 11pm ET.
Both can be heard online, and both stations maintain archives of their shows.
My understanding is, they're something else while still *out there* (asteroid or some other inter-planetary-or-stellar junk), and they become meteors *upon entering* the atmosphere. If anything's left when it hits the ground, that's called a meteorite.
Just today, the U.N. released a report stating that "dead zones" (oxygen-starved areas) in the world's oceans had doubled since 1990, with some as large as 70,000 square kilometers:
The main cause is excess nitrogen run-off from farm fertilizers, sewage and industrial pollutants. The nitrogen triggers blooms of microscopic algae known as phytoplankton. As the algae die and rot, they consume oxygen, thereby suffocating everything from clams and lobsters to oysters and fish.
"Human kind is engaged in a gigantic, global, experiment as a result of inefficient and often overuse of fertilizers, the discharge of untreated sewage and the ever rising emissions from vehicles and factories," UNEP Executive Director Klaus Toepfer said in a statement. "Unless urgent action is taken to tackle the sources of the problem, it is likely to escalate rapidly."
Rates are declining, but the deceleration rate varies depending on who you ask. The handful of reports at cia.gov seem to point to a lower deceleration rate than the highly biased overpopulation.com. CIA has reports based on 200 census, whereas your link seems to reference pre-2000 analysis.
You get more human bodies on the face of the earth, you'll get more sh!t, refuse and greenhouse gasses, that remains undisputed. The real queston is what the effect is and will continue to be, and whether mankind will become more responsible about their output, and stop expecting the rest of the planet's lifeforms to absorb it all.
You're right, we could get food to everybody. But the problems we face are on the output side: sewerage, garbage, industrial toxins, internal combustion.
People in the United States among the best environmental policy -no wonder environmentalists don't want to see it downgraded. Hell, many countries in South America still allow leaded gasoline! Raw, untreated sewage is spilled directly into Sao Paulo's rivers, which run through the city down to the beach! Imagine if that were the case in the U.S.?
Because of the political limitations imposed, I doubt that food (like wealth) will ever be equally distributed. Even under old-skool communist and socialist systems, distribution wasn't that great (although food distribution was generally better than capitalism, as it was treated as more of a basic right), but then again you probably lived under a dictatorship in which your life was consider just a resource for the system.
If we have twice as many people as we have now (as is predicted for 2040), all consuming and outputting at similar levels to today, imagine the big problems our ecosystems will face.
Actually, it's known as "borrow and spend." :)
And, remember those tax refunds? Paid out against record massive budget deficits? More borrow and spend: Because they weren't paid from a budget surplus, we get to pay them back, with interest.
Yippee.
Remember also, under Mr. Clarke, 5 seperate terrorist attacks took place, most of them under Clinton.
Remember also, under Mr. Bush Junior, the single largest attack ever on American soil took place, completely bypassing all of our massive military defenses -the absolute best on the planet (built to intercept Soviet fighters and nucular bombers, let alone passenger jets, with standing protocols for following FAA hijack intercept requests - and they weren't even called into action, goddammit.)
Four aircraft, known at the time to be hijacked, known at the time to be way off-course , all candidates for immediate NORAD interception, were allowed to continue flying until all four crashed, three of them into their targets, one of them plunging into the headquarters (!) of said massive military , two of them destroying some of the most prized real estate on the planet, thereby sending the American center of capitalism into a depression. How's that for a military well-prepared to protect us against threats? Imagine if this had been a Soviet nucular attack? Sheesh, we'd all be dead.
Hell, forget the allegations of a drunken, coked-up AWOL Dubya in the 70's, he was friggin' AWOL on 9/11! Yup, he hung around an elementary school, at the other end of the eastern seaboard, until well after the attacks had taken place, then tucked his tail into Air Force One and ran off into hiding! How's that for a show of military leadership?
Oh yeah, now that's a president you want to re-elect. Kerry's got nothing on him.
(Mr. Bush even says he watched one jet crash into the WTC live on TV! -then heads on into the school! wow.)
giving somebody else the same rights you have is somehow weakening yours is stupid and craven
:)
Amen... er, agreed!
Was this a joke? The link from the first page to the second points back to angelfire, redirecting traffic back to her site!
The hundreds of thousands under Saddam, or the thousands while we were removing him?
Hundreds of thousands that were killed while Saddam was supported and sanctioned by the U.S., including his WMD programs. I've never understood the moral relativism that makes it okay to:
1) Support and fund a mass murderer by supplying him with WMD technology, 2) Send send high level envoys to shuck and jive while he's building those WMD, 3) Look the other way and whistle while he uses WMD to mass murder his own citizens, and 4) Continue to support him afterward, and then 5) Cite what you supported as being evil and mount a large-scale invasion to oust your former partner in crime?
The only plausible explanation is that today's U.S. government is packed with hypocrites and liars.
rules largely dictated by the US
Not to mention largely abused and ignored, including the paying of dues when due, not just when the US has some war proposal it wants rubber-stamped.
Maybe ya oughta consider changin' yer name, its got a history. ;)
Over one percent of the population has served time in prison. So, are you saying you'd like to restrict the flying privileges of that segment of the people? Wasn't being in prison the punishment, or are they to be punished the rest of their lives?
"Innocent until proven guilty." So much for the idea of the criminal justice system being about reform, eh?
Probably I look more like a potential terrorist (long hair, scraggly beard, army boots, disheveled clothing) than anybody here, but I've never been even searched since 9/11, whereas my 68-y.o. mother, grandmother of two, gets searched almost every time she flies.
What about all the tens of thousands of people who've been arrested on criminal charges for carrying a deadly weapon (3+" knife blade, unloaded gun, nunchucks.) I bet they're gonna be flagged "violent criminals" and be denied access to the country's jet transportation system.
Yeah, CAPPS is gonna be a real hit.
My colleagues,
Surely you haven't all missed the inverted coefficient-time relationship inherent in the presented sample? As you know, a major signifier in Coxbury matrix analysis of at-work affairs clearly delineates the role-relationship correlation. Therefore the sample is obviously out-of-bounds, as should be obvious to any first-year student of the discipline. Rather than anomaly, this clearly identifies as an early datapoint in a trend which might lead to future observation of unqualified detachments from societal roles and the subsequent liability reduction.
In other words, the boss gets to fuck the secretary without fear of retribution. Nice!
Yours,
Doktor S. van der Schlong
Your analogy fails, because to many drivers, it's their mechanic, or their spouse/parent/relative/neighbor/friend who looks after the machine's internals for them. For a lot of people, simply getting in the car and driving it is what they know.
Neil Stephenson made the apt comparison of computers to cars, with Macs being the Volvo-esque, hermetically sealed O/S, Windows 95 a station wagon, and Linux a tank.
The analogy holds up, being that the average car owner takes their vehical to an expert who does the regular servicing. Sure, you and I know where the drain plug is located on the oil pan of our tanks, but do you think the graphical designer cares whether their Volvo even has one? Nope, they just want it to work, and they pay experts to solve the problems outside their domain.
I pity you and your genetic tree.
"Stay away from my house, you freak!!"
That's because Steve Tyler is Liv's dad.
That's right! Humans who have experienced similar transformations are all living happier lives!
Jump back in your SUV, nothing to see here, move along.
Nothing to see here, move along.
ps. that third one looks kinda like Tinkerbells legs sprouting out of a frog's ass. Kinda gruesome. Time to order dinner from that Frenchy place on third ave.
The researchers have been collecting samples. Nothing statistically significant. Jump back into your SUV and move along.
That's the real question... If they've invested upwards of $80-100 million (that we know about) in them, directly or indirectly, was it all just donations to the Darl McBride Charitable Foundation, or are they holding paper?
When did this begin, and how was it engineered? How far back does it go?
These are the questions a DoJ probe should be asking. Was Darl hand-picked by MS?