On the one hand, I think that OSC is correct about the source of appeal for the original series. IMHO claims that there was meaningful social progressive thinking are revisionist and overblown . I think that OSC is correct in explaining the ardent devotion of original series fans as the reaction of a group of people who by and large had not been exposed to Science Fiction in its more nuanced forms. IMHO the original series, from the point of view of significance from an artistic point of view doesn't hold a candle to H.G. Wells, let along Ray Bradbury.
That being said, schlock space opera like original series created the critical mass necessary for ST:TNG first season to come about, which, speaking personally, contained some of the most riveting and fascinating tv I've ever seen or ever expect to see. The fact that there will most likely never be another episode as fascinating as Encounter at Farpoint or DataLore saddens me. Again, IMHO, these episodes could stand up to OSC, Bradbury, Simmons, Asimov. If the original series had to happen for them to ever be created -- well, good!
Ultimately, the point of the article -- aside from good old iconoclasm -- appeared to be that we don't need perpetual sequels in the Star Trek universe.
Wiretaps are definitely scary. Personally I'm such a boring individual that if the Feds listened to my conversations they would probably become narcoleptics, but hey -- on principle -- I'd prefer they didn't listen in.
Thing is, I'm not scared by this article. There are 290 million people living in the United States, and a 19% increase amounts to around 273 extra wiretaps across the country. Not scary. In fact, I'm surprised that the number is 10 times larger, given that it appears to be a small fraction of the number of crimes investigated every year that should have been wiretapped.
Furthermore, it may interest you to know that the legal standard for getting a wiretap is rather high (which is why there are so few of them).
Before issuing a Title III wiretap
warrant, a judge must find that: (1) "normal investigative
procedures have been tried and have failed or reasonably
appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried or to be too dangerous"; and (2) there is probable cause for believing "that an
individual is committing, has committed, or is about to commit" one of a list of specifically enumerated crimes, that the
wiretap will intercept particular communications about the
enumerated offense, and that the communications facilities to
be tapped are either being used in the commission of the
crime or are commonly used by the suspect.
See United States Telecom Assoc. v. FCC . So how, you ask, is it that there were no wiretap requests turned down if the standard is so high, and it's used relatively rarely?
Simple. It's not like the police officers are going "Hey Judge, we need a wire-tap on this guy Frank 'cuz I think he's doing "crimes" -- and we need it yesterday!" What actually happens is the police officer goes to government lawyer. The government lawyer -- who does this all the time -- then tells the police officer 9 times out of 10 that they haven't met the standard. Even that 1 time out of 10, the government lawyer approaches the judge ex parte (i.e. not in a court proceeding) which allows the judge to indicate through subtle nods and grunts that the wiretap request is half-cooked, and to come back later. So you just don't get denied applications. By the way -- denied applications are the last thing the police want, because then -- dollars to donuts (hehe) when it comes time to the criminal trial, the wiretap evidence will be considered inadmissible even if the police eventually did get their wiretap.
What Devlin Barrett, the reporter who wrote the article, should have mentioned, is how many wiretap requests were officially turned down over the last few years. But the reporter omitted this information, most likely because very few requests have been officially denied within the last decade. So the alarmist language used in the article makes it, IMHO, FUD.
Shame I have no mod points, or I would mod parent as troll. I will now proceed to feed the troll. The phrase "there are theories" should be banned from the popular lexicon -- it is a convenient way to distance an unpalatable remark. In parent post, "starvation", "fertility", and "homosexuality" all refer to the same ostensible danger -- namely that there are too many people. About 30 years have passed since mainstream science debunked the "Malthusian Nightmare" -- apparently the news has not yet filtered down to ACs posting on Slashdot (always the last to hear). Interestingly -- and I could ramble for a while on this subject -- from parent's warped perspective, rampant homosexuality would actually be *good* for welfare of the species, since it would imply some hypothetical automatic population control mechanism. Yes, I believe that this is homophobia, but homophobia mixed in an amusing way with a bastardized version of Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis. How amusing! Let me be the first to welcome our gay population-controlling overlords.
Not to be contrary for contrary's sake, but, in contrast to the overwhelming number of prior posts, the idea of buying virtual real estate in an MMORPG isn't *necessarily* bad. Stephenson fans may recall "The Street" in SNOW CRASH, where early adopters turned out to have made a sound investment. I'm not suggesting that Stephenson's fiction is future fact -- but how many slashdotters would deny the probability that at some point in the next ten years, there will be an MMORPG of sufficient popularity and durability that buying real estate in choice areas might make financial sense. For those of you who know a think or two about business, the global 3G spectrum license bubble makes this island investment plausible by contrast.
In short, it shouldn't be assumed that virtual MMORPG real estate is necessarily a bad investment. It's going to happen, if not today, then some day soon. Now, if you're suggesting that buying an island in *this particular* MMORPG is a bad investment, that's something different entirely. Since I don't know dick about the MMORPG, I can't comment.
Slashdot Mirror
That being said, schlock space opera like original series created the critical mass necessary for ST:TNG first season to come about, which, speaking personally, contained some of the most riveting and fascinating tv I've ever seen or ever expect to see. The fact that there will most likely never be another episode as fascinating as Encounter at Farpoint or DataLore saddens me. Again, IMHO, these episodes could stand up to OSC, Bradbury, Simmons, Asimov. If the original series had to happen for them to ever be created -- well, good!
Ultimately, the point of the article -- aside from good old iconoclasm -- appeared to be that we don't need perpetual sequels in the Star Trek universe.
Duh.
Regards, Moiche
Thing is, I'm not scared by this article. There are 290 million people living in the United States, and a 19% increase amounts to around 273 extra wiretaps across the country. Not scary. In fact, I'm surprised that the number is 10 times larger, given that it appears to be a small fraction of the number of crimes investigated every year that should have been wiretapped.
Furthermore, it may interest you to know that the legal standard for getting a wiretap is rather high (which is why there are so few of them).
See United States Telecom Assoc. v. FCC . So how, you ask, is it that there were no wiretap requests turned down if the standard is so high, and it's used relatively rarely?Simple. It's not like the police officers are going "Hey Judge, we need a wire-tap on this guy Frank 'cuz I think he's doing "crimes" -- and we need it yesterday!" What actually happens is the police officer goes to government lawyer. The government lawyer -- who does this all the time -- then tells the police officer 9 times out of 10 that they haven't met the standard. Even that 1 time out of 10, the government lawyer approaches the judge ex parte (i.e. not in a court proceeding) which allows the judge to indicate through subtle nods and grunts that the wiretap request is half-cooked, and to come back later. So you just don't get denied applications. By the way -- denied applications are the last thing the police want, because then -- dollars to donuts (hehe) when it comes time to the criminal trial, the wiretap evidence will be considered inadmissible even if the police eventually did get their wiretap.
What Devlin Barrett, the reporter who wrote the article, should have mentioned, is how many wiretap requests were officially turned down over the last few years. But the reporter omitted this information, most likely because very few requests have been officially denied within the last decade. So the alarmist language used in the article makes it, IMHO, FUD.
Regards,
Moiche
--Moiche
In short, it shouldn't be assumed that virtual MMORPG real estate is necessarily a bad investment. It's going to happen, if not today, then some day soon. Now, if you're suggesting that buying an island in *this particular* MMORPG is a bad investment, that's something different entirely. Since I don't know dick about the MMORPG, I can't comment.
Cheers,
Moiche