All of the "democracies" as presently practiced are flawed to some degree. The primary problem is that complex issues of governance in any nation have to be ridiculously simplified and sloganized in order to be digestible to the voters
Of all government democracies, I would like to point out Israel's as being the best as a form of government with it's proportional representation.
Of course its policies to its "governed" territories and recent military excursions maybe questionable, but they do seem to have a government with a fair amount of 3rd parties (remember Sharon's new party was able to take power over the old one) and even has Arab members in the parliament.
That said... Proportional Representation systems actually work in a sense that they do allow for quick changeover from the hands of long term politicians and allow for 3rd parties to survive in politics.
Please! A share of stock is ownership of a piece of the company.
Actually, it is still intangible that it is still bits on a server somewhere and it is worth as much as the market allows.
In a sense if Blizzard erases your account or the company you purchased stock in goes belly up, then you are left exactly with the same exact thing... Nothing.
Tangibles include real estate, precious metals, and various other real world items that remain the same in a physical sense regardless of how the market values them.
As in... Even if I bought a house and housing market collapses tomorrow, I still have a house. If I buy 10,000 shares of Google and tomorrow they go bankrupt and no one buys them out... Well... I technically don't even have the paper since I use an electronic brokerage.
(but in the business world intangible assets are actually things like copyrights and patents)
What happens to this whole thing when the batteries die? Or when they have to jump in the water and it shorts out? Or when it just, you know, breaks? Soldiering is soldiering, no matter what technologies you equip your soldiers with. It's about being adaptable, flexible, and enduring.
I think you might miss the point. Technology is made to expand fire power or force extension.
A soldier who relies on good soldiering by poor technology will still be defeated by a bad soldier with exponentially better technology.
Even if the bad soldier's technology of breaks and the low tech soldier kills him, there will be another bad soldier with good technology to replace him. (ie... Soldier with AK47 kills soldier whose GPS has failed, but other solider aware of battle calls in air strike from a warship 150 miles away killing the AK47 soldier)
Rate of failure is consider part of the casualties which is actually the deciding factor in warfare more so than good soldiering and good technology.
Example: German soldiers in WWII did not loose because they were not as good soldiers or had bad gear (which in reality they were often better soldiers and had better technology than their counter parts) but rather they were simply unable to replace their losses both in manpower and their gear.
Hence, which is why the Pentagon is trying to come up with autonomous solutions as quickly as possible. I suspect by 2020 we will have Bolos running around on the battlefield and talking about "what the grunts" want will be a moot point because if you simply can replace your casualties with an assembly line... Well you can simply out build the enemy regardless of how many casualties they inflict.
Imagine if you will an Iraq war in which the insurgents could not kill a single American soldier because they were simply all in bunkers somewhere controlling their military units. A bloodless war (at least for us) in which the politicians wouldn't have to worry about people voting out of office for too many casualties.
So, what happens when the smart other side captures one of our soldiers?
1. Someone in a bunker monitoring the soldiers head cam pushes a button. 2. Solider explodes. 3. Word 2007 automatically prints a mail merge form to soldier's family expressing condolences.
Unless you are told/informed/read other wise, a network is NOT public.
What about web servers on HTTP? I for one don't go around sending emails to each website asking if it is ok to browse their website and I'm sure they don't want to spend responding to thousands of emails saying that is fine.
But to be fair, I don't talk to grannies and people who call in should know these things because it is part of their job description.
But to humor you... Here is a ficticious example.
Client: Hello, I'm looking for a file but I can't find it. Tech: Do you know you saved it as? We can search for it. Client: No. Tech: Do you know when you saved it? Client: No. Tech: Do you know when you last saw it? Client: No. Tech: Well... Lets just search all your files and see if anything looks familiar *remotes in and shows him list* Anything? Client: Nope. Nothing rings a bell. Tech: Weeeellll.... Do you know what is in the file? Maybe I could search for file contents. Client: Not really. Tech: If you don't know the files name, when it was created, or what's in it... Are you sure the file ever existed? Client: Well... Yeah... Um... Yeah because I deleted it it off the network by accident. Tech: Do you know which drive? Client: I don't remember... Tech: Was it important? Client: I don't know... It wasn't my file. Tech: What were you doing when you deleted file and when? Client: I don't remember. Tech:... Client: Hello? Tech: I'll get back to you. *click* *goes home for the day*
The next day: Client2: Hi. I'm trying to get into "client 1's" email. We had to terminate him yesterday for storing obscene images on the network drive, but he didn't delete them all and apparently the Powerpoint presentation for the CEO has gone missing and we think its there. Tech: Hrmm.... Which drive letter was he storing those images on? Client2: Umm... The X: drive. Why? Tech: Hold up... *access tape back up logs* xxx.jpg... xxx1.jpg.... presentation.ppt... Ah here we go. *emails it to client* There you go. Anything else? Client2: No. Wow thanks! How did you know this... Tech: Well... It was what was not known that tipped me off.
Moral of the story. Tell the truth and you'll get helped. Otherwise... We simply can't help you.
Of course this is internal support, but the same applies. People aren't psychics and saying "We simply can't help you" is a solution because it is actually impossible to do anyhthing.
There's plenty of more senarios, but in all cases the service bill will go up.
Actually, I could foresee military action in Iran in the next year resulting us being involved in a war versus Russia and China resulting in a scenario similar to "Red Dawn" which does not result in your phone bill going up.
Of course seeing that their will be no more phone companies or basic utilities due to the nightly bombing raids makes it a moot point in my scenario.
unless you own controlling or at least sizeable percentage amounts of stock in it.
See that is the problem with modern thinking about businesses.
Companies should encourage employees to feel that "it is their business" to promote company loyalty and treat them like part of the owners of the company. You are less likely to quit or do something bad if the company treats their employees this way.
No, its not "their fault" - they're nuts. Still, how do we deal with it? Lock up everyone who might be a threat? That will just alienate the already alienated, or make them hide more diligently until that fatal day when they seek revenge for imagined slights.
No. It means being nicer to people.
To friends, family and complete strangers.
Yes... I said complete strangers. We don't say please and thank you anymore. We don't hold doors for each other. We cut each other off in traffic and give each other the bird. We lie and cheat to get ahead at the work place. We gossip and ruin people's lives. We cut in line in grocery store and we try to rip off our waiter at the restaurant. We focus our lives our possessions and money and we don't give a damn to a man on the street or a kid who has had his world shattered. We say they are "crazy". We say they are "evil" and that it isn't our fault.
But it is our fault. Every single one of us have forgotten about all the other humans out there and we always trump "personal responsibility" on others without even thinking that we haven't even bothered ourselves.
I'm surprised more people don't go crazy in our society on a daily basis with the way we behave.
Everyone is about "ME! ME! ME!" without ever stopping to think about the fact they are hurting everyone else.
And I'm guilty as everyone else... But sometimes I think to myself "Maybe I shouldn't cut off that guy in traffic like that, he might go and snap."
This is why it is wrong for your second amendment rights to end at the boundary of a school.
If you heard gun shots at your school and you pull out a gun and ran down the hall way and saw another student with a gun, how can you be sure:
A. It is the killer B. Is not another student trying to protect himself with a gun C. That you won't be mistaken for the killer by a police sniper
Given that you have a split second to decide... You really would have to have gone through police or military training to know how to deal with this situation.
If V. Tech (like may schools) didn't ban firearms on its grounds, it's probable that some people in either group would have been armed and could have defended themselves.
To be Devil's Advocate, how many students carrying guns would have resulted in accidental deaths country wide if this gun policy was allowed?
Secondly, even if the students were allowed to arm themselves, how many would and have proper training in order to defend themselves. Short of anyone who also served in the military, if you have a small hand gun versus a person with an assault rifle (and bullet possibly body armor) the person with the assault rifle will usually win if they have the training to use it.
No, but out of curiosity I wonder what kind of weapon and or training the person had. This is the highest body count any mass murder has had on a rampage in the states.
The only higher World Wide (at least so far) was the Port Arthur Massacre with 35 deaths who used an AR-10 rifle.
I'm not pro or anti gun, but you simply can't go on a mass murdering spree like this with a knife or a bow and arrow.
It's can't last forever, at some point in a capitalist society people need to make a profit.
Who said anything about capatilism? Last I checked we lived in a socialist state. After all... In a true capitalist free market, it wouldn't be illegal to bypass DRM and companies wouldn't get paid anything unless they actually made a sale rather than tax compensation for "theoretical losses" due to piracy.
1. Every news channel is reporting it right now. 2. Slashdot has a 24 hour story submission turn around time (I submitted a Garry Kasparov storry and they didn't post another submitted one on same topic til the next day) 3. It is a tragedy and saddening, but again more people will die in Iraq today (and tomorrow) and in the scope of things it isn't the end of the world as we know it and may not be on topic with Slashdot at this point. Too much speculation of what happened as it is...
I hate to say this, but every time I bring out a classic on an emulator or old DOS Box I am sorely disappointed and now I won't even try to keep from ruining the nostalgia of games like Populous, Syndicate, or even Castles II.
When I played this games, I was amazed and they sucked hours out of my life.
But now... I realize how clunky game play was back then and that I put up with a lot more to play a game. Maybe the new games (and my DS) have spoiled me. I remember going through boot disks and extensive 100 page manuals just to get by and I liked it.
Now... The controls seem unintuitive and the game play lacking in a sense that it isn't bad, but it isn't how I remember playing it in high school.
To be fair, I will pull out a SNES emulator or the old DOS War In Russia (Hex Games are clunky no matter how good of a GUI you put on them) and play them for a bit.
Again... Maybe I'm getting old, spoiled, or the novelty of old technology is wearing off (I remember when I felt I was like a movie hacker the first time I sent someone a BBS message on a 1200 baud modem), but I won't play old games mostly to keep the nostalgia from being ruined.
Mac OS X contains plenty of DRM. FairPlay technology which restricts copying of songs purchased through iTunes (or more precisely, prevents playback unless the DRM technology is used to unlock the file).
I don't mean to be semantic (if that is even the right word), but Fair Play DRM is not built into OS X, but rather iTunes.
iTunes does run on Windows after all and can even be removed on OS X if you really want to get rid of it for some reason.
Secondly, FairPlay only comes into use when you buy from iTunes Music store. I don't have a single DRM mp3 on OS X at all.
The application should strive to achieve compatibility with the OS, not the other way around.
When I worked support for a Softwre developer, I would get into arguments over this with them. They wrote an app that basically would try to force its own DLL's into the System directory and require a reboot.
I explain, that if you have to reboot and put things into the Windows\system directory then it is going to give us nightmares on the support end.
Low and behold we actually had someone with a WinNT server install our software and it blew the server up. So much can go wrong when you start forcing the OS to comply with the software.
That said... Why should someone who will never run the older software be forced to carry all this baggage. From a support and consumer standpoint the apps should be modified and not the OS.
A large gathering of people puts an unfair burden on everybody else. But because society recognizes value in these things it is willing to grant temporary license to create that burden.
I've always seen a problem with this because the First Amendment specifically says:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Since in SCOTUS they have declared that the constitution applies to local and sate governments. Having to get a permit not only violates the spirit of the amendment, but clearly is almost impossible to interpret any other way.
Sure it causes a strain on society, but the text specifically says as long as they stay peaceful the government has no authority to say if they can gather at all in the first place.
Of course... This is still being fought in the courts by the ACLU (like them or not), but we will have to see on the matter. Although, I suppose its it understandable when other nations repress protests, but in the US is it a shame because it is one of the few specifics in the Bill of Rights that is fairly clear on the matter.
I am not going to put my companies email on a Google server across the Internet.
Although, I would like to point out that when some companies loose internet access they are unable to function properly even if they have internal email servers.
Sure you can send emails to coworkers... But doesn't do you much good sending emails to customers.
Of course you could co-locate your exchange servers off site, but again... Same problem but in reverse.
If it is a matter of trust that you suspect Google will go through your emails, then make them sign an NDA just like you would any ISP that you co-locate or host with.
Still what bothers me is that many companies can only dole out 100mb to their workers whearas, users will often by pass the feature by forwarding to a Gmail account. Security and connectivity head aches aside... Give your workers more space.
Emissary: The thousand nations of the Slashdot Empire descend upon you! Our moderation points will blot out the sun! Stelios: [grins] Then we will post comments in the shade.
California has already seen local environmental changes around large surface wind farms.
Care to site sources? From my understanding most new wind farms don't seem to make much difference as far as environmental impact because of the slow moving blades.
As in... No noise. No dead birds. Etc etc.
If you have the older systems, I think you may face more environmental issues.
And if you are talking about energy being removed from the system causing global cooling... Well... We can build a few more cattle farms to offset the heat lost with head gain, but seriously there is so little impact when you consider all the other things we do to the environment.
Personally, I like to advocate solar and wind over nuclear not because nuclear is more efficient, but because these type of non-nuclear resources can be put into the hands of the individual rather than government regulated industries.
Unless Uncle Sam is going to let me build a reactor in my back yard any time soon... I'm stuck with either wind or solar for my own usage.
Taking out 40MW of wind energy per wind farm from high altitude winds may not be such a good idea; that energy is doing something right now: mixing the atmosphere, generating heat, etc.
Just consider it a small cooling effect to offset the warming effect generated by Cow methane.
Slashdot Mirror
All of the "democracies" as presently practiced are flawed to some degree. The primary problem is that complex issues of governance in any nation have to be ridiculously simplified and sloganized in order to be digestible to the voters
Of all government democracies, I would like to point out Israel's as being the best as a form of government with it's proportional representation.
Of course its policies to its "governed" territories and recent military excursions maybe questionable, but they do seem to have a government with a fair amount of 3rd parties (remember Sharon's new party was able to take power over the old one) and even has Arab members in the parliament.
That said... Proportional Representation systems actually work in a sense that they do allow for quick changeover from the hands of long term politicians and allow for 3rd parties to survive in politics.
Please! A share of stock is ownership of a piece of the company.
Actually, it is still intangible that it is still bits on a server somewhere and it is worth as much as the market allows.
In a sense if Blizzard erases your account or the company you purchased stock in goes belly up, then you are left exactly with the same exact thing... Nothing.
Tangibles include real estate, precious metals, and various other real world items that remain the same in a physical sense regardless of how the market values them.
As in... Even if I bought a house and housing market collapses tomorrow, I still have a house. If I buy 10,000 shares of Google and tomorrow they go bankrupt and no one buys them out... Well... I technically don't even have the paper since I use an electronic brokerage.
(but in the business world intangible assets are actually things like copyrights and patents)
What happens to this whole thing when the batteries die? Or when they have to jump in the water and it shorts out? Or when it just, you know, breaks? Soldiering is soldiering, no matter what technologies you equip your soldiers with. It's about being adaptable, flexible, and enduring.
I think you might miss the point. Technology is made to expand fire power or force extension.
A soldier who relies on good soldiering by poor technology will still be defeated by a bad soldier with exponentially better technology.
Even if the bad soldier's technology of breaks and the low tech soldier kills him, there will be another bad soldier with good technology to replace him. (ie... Soldier with AK47 kills soldier whose GPS has failed, but other solider aware of battle calls in air strike from a warship 150 miles away killing the AK47 soldier)
Rate of failure is consider part of the casualties which is actually the deciding factor in warfare more so than good soldiering and good technology.
Example: German soldiers in WWII did not loose because they were not as good soldiers or had bad gear (which in reality they were often better soldiers and had better technology than their counter parts) but rather they were simply unable to replace their losses both in manpower and their gear.
Hence, which is why the Pentagon is trying to come up with autonomous solutions as quickly as possible. I suspect by 2020 we will have Bolos running around on the battlefield and talking about "what the grunts" want will be a moot point because if you simply can replace your casualties with an assembly line... Well you can simply out build the enemy regardless of how many casualties they inflict.
Imagine if you will an Iraq war in which the insurgents could not kill a single American soldier because they were simply all in bunkers somewhere controlling their military units. A bloodless war (at least for us) in which the politicians wouldn't have to worry about people voting out of office for too many casualties.
So, what happens when the smart other side captures one of our soldiers?
1. Someone in a bunker monitoring the soldiers head cam pushes a button.
2. Solider explodes.
3. Word 2007 automatically prints a mail merge form to soldier's family expressing condolences.
What he's targeting is the sale of violent games to minors, in the manner of R-rated movies.
Still, why doesn't he focus on violent crime? Or maybe rehabilitation of criminals?
Seems like a sucker punch to get votes from a non-issue.
Just because you can't do it, doesn't mean you don't have the right to.
Unless you are told/informed/read other wise, a network is NOT public.
What about web servers on HTTP? I for one don't go around sending emails to each website asking if it is ok to browse their website and I'm sure they don't want to spend responding to thousands of emails saying that is fine.
Sorry, but that is your job.
...
Actually, no.
But to be fair, I don't talk to grannies and people who call in should know these things because it is part of their job description.
But to humor you... Here is a ficticious example.
Client: Hello, I'm looking for a file but I can't find it.
Tech: Do you know you saved it as? We can search for it.
Client: No.
Tech: Do you know when you saved it?
Client: No.
Tech: Do you know when you last saw it?
Client: No.
Tech: Well... Lets just search all your files and see if anything looks familiar *remotes in and shows him list* Anything?
Client: Nope. Nothing rings a bell.
Tech: Weeeellll.... Do you know what is in the file? Maybe I could search for file contents.
Client: Not really.
Tech: If you don't know the files name, when it was created, or what's in it... Are you sure the file ever existed?
Client: Well... Yeah... Um... Yeah because I deleted it it off the network by accident.
Tech: Do you know which drive?
Client: I don't remember...
Tech: Was it important?
Client: I don't know... It wasn't my file.
Tech: What were you doing when you deleted file and when?
Client: I don't remember.
Tech:
Client: Hello?
Tech: I'll get back to you. *click* *goes home for the day*
The next day:
Client2: Hi. I'm trying to get into "client 1's" email. We had to terminate him yesterday for storing obscene images on the network drive, but he didn't delete them all and apparently the Powerpoint presentation for the CEO has gone missing and we think its there.
Tech: Hrmm.... Which drive letter was he storing those images on?
Client2: Umm... The X: drive. Why?
Tech: Hold up... *access tape back up logs* xxx.jpg... xxx1.jpg.... presentation.ppt... Ah here we go. *emails it to client* There you go. Anything else?
Client2: No. Wow thanks! How did you know this...
Tech: Well... It was what was not known that tipped me off.
Moral of the story. Tell the truth and you'll get helped. Otherwise... We simply can't help you.
Of course this is internal support, but the same applies. People aren't psychics and saying "We simply can't help you" is a solution because it is actually impossible to do anyhthing.
There's plenty of more senarios, but in all cases the service bill will go up.
Actually, I could foresee military action in Iran in the next year resulting us being involved in a war versus Russia and China resulting in a scenario similar to "Red Dawn" which does not result in your phone bill going up.
Of course seeing that their will be no more phone companies or basic utilities due to the nightly bombing raids makes it a moot point in my scenario.
unless you own controlling or at least sizeable percentage amounts of stock in it.
See that is the problem with modern thinking about businesses.
Companies should encourage employees to feel that "it is their business" to promote company loyalty and treat them like part of the owners of the company. You are less likely to quit or do something bad if the company treats their employees this way.
The problem, having worked for a time as customer support for an extremely large company, is simply how many people actually DO lie.
I would have to agree... I don't mind the lying as much as the withholding of information since that is vital to actually solving the issue.
After all, how can you fix something if you don't know what happened to cause it?
No, its not "their fault" - they're nuts. Still, how do we deal with it? Lock up everyone who might be a threat? That will just alienate the already alienated, or make them hide more diligently until that fatal day when they seek revenge for imagined slights.
No. It means being nicer to people.
To friends, family and complete strangers.
Yes... I said complete strangers. We don't say please and thank you anymore. We don't hold doors for each other. We cut each other off in traffic and give each other the bird. We lie and cheat to get ahead at the work place. We gossip and ruin people's lives. We cut in line in grocery store and we try to rip off our waiter at the restaurant. We focus our lives our possessions and money and we don't give a damn to a man on the street or a kid who has had his world shattered. We say they are "crazy". We say they are "evil" and that it isn't our fault.
But it is our fault. Every single one of us have forgotten about all the other humans out there and we always trump "personal responsibility" on others without even thinking that we haven't even bothered ourselves.
I'm surprised more people don't go crazy in our society on a daily basis with the way we behave.
Everyone is about "ME! ME! ME!" without ever stopping to think about the fact they are hurting everyone else.
And I'm guilty as everyone else... But sometimes I think to myself "Maybe I shouldn't cut off that guy in traffic like that, he might go and snap."
This is why it is wrong for your second amendment rights to end at the boundary of a school.
If you heard gun shots at your school and you pull out a gun and ran down the hall way and saw another student with a gun, how can you be sure:
A. It is the killer
B. Is not another student trying to protect himself with a gun
C. That you won't be mistaken for the killer by a police sniper
Given that you have a split second to decide... You really would have to have gone through police or military training to know how to deal with this situation.
If V. Tech (like may schools) didn't ban firearms on its grounds, it's probable that some people in either group would have been armed and could have defended themselves.
To be Devil's Advocate, how many students carrying guns would have resulted in accidental deaths country wide if this gun policy was allowed?
Secondly, even if the students were allowed to arm themselves, how many would and have proper training in order to defend themselves. Short of anyone who also served in the military, if you have a small hand gun versus a person with an assault rifle (and bullet possibly body armor) the person with the assault rifle will usually win if they have the training to use it.
Did the gun sprout legs and arms and go beserk??
No, but out of curiosity I wonder what kind of weapon and or training the person had. This is the highest body count any mass murder has had on a rampage in the states.
The only higher World Wide (at least so far) was the Port Arthur Massacre with 35 deaths who used an AR-10 rifle.
I'm not pro or anti gun, but you simply can't go on a mass murdering spree like this with a knife or a bow and arrow.
It's can't last forever, at some point in a capitalist society people need to make a profit.
Who said anything about capatilism? Last I checked we lived in a socialist state. After all... In a true capitalist free market, it wouldn't be illegal to bypass DRM and companies wouldn't get paid anything unless they actually made a sale rather than tax compensation for "theoretical losses" due to piracy.
1. Every news channel is reporting it right now.
2. Slashdot has a 24 hour story submission turn around time (I submitted a Garry Kasparov storry and they didn't post another submitted one on same topic til the next day)
3. It is a tragedy and saddening, but again more people will die in Iraq today (and tomorrow) and in the scope of things it isn't the end of the world as we know it and may not be on topic with Slashdot at this point. Too much speculation of what happened as it is...
I hate to say this, but every time I bring out a classic on an emulator or old DOS Box I am sorely disappointed and now I won't even try to keep from ruining the nostalgia of games like Populous, Syndicate, or even Castles II.
When I played this games, I was amazed and they sucked hours out of my life.
But now... I realize how clunky game play was back then and that I put up with a lot more to play a game. Maybe the new games (and my DS) have spoiled me. I remember going through boot disks and extensive 100 page manuals just to get by and I liked it.
Now... The controls seem unintuitive and the game play lacking in a sense that it isn't bad, but it isn't how I remember playing it in high school.
To be fair, I will pull out a SNES emulator or the old DOS War In Russia (Hex Games are clunky no matter how good of a GUI you put on them) and play them for a bit.
Again... Maybe I'm getting old, spoiled, or the novelty of old technology is wearing off (I remember when I felt I was like a movie hacker the first time I sent someone a BBS message on a 1200 baud modem), but I won't play old games mostly to keep the nostalgia from being ruined.
Mac OS X contains plenty of DRM. FairPlay technology which restricts copying of songs purchased through iTunes (or more precisely, prevents playback unless the DRM technology is used to unlock the file).
I don't mean to be semantic (if that is even the right word), but Fair Play DRM is not built into OS X, but rather iTunes.
iTunes does run on Windows after all and can even be removed on OS X if you really want to get rid of it for some reason.
Secondly, FairPlay only comes into use when you buy from iTunes Music store. I don't have a single DRM mp3 on OS X at all.
The application should strive to achieve compatibility with the OS, not the other way around.
When I worked support for a Softwre developer, I would get into arguments over this with them. They wrote an app that basically would try to force its own DLL's into the System directory and require a reboot.
I explain, that if you have to reboot and put things into the Windows\system directory then it is going to give us nightmares on the support end.
Low and behold we actually had someone with a WinNT server install our software and it blew the server up. So much can go wrong when you start forcing the OS to comply with the software.
That said... Why should someone who will never run the older software be forced to carry all this baggage. From a support and consumer standpoint the apps should be modified and not the OS.
I've always seen a problem with this because the First Amendment specifically says:
Since in SCOTUS they have declared that the constitution applies to local and sate governments. Having to get a permit not only violates the spirit of the amendment, but clearly is almost impossible to interpret any other way.
Sure it causes a strain on society, but the text specifically says as long as they stay peaceful the government has no authority to say if they can gather at all in the first place.
Of course... This is still being fought in the courts by the ACLU (like them or not), but we will have to see on the matter. Although, I suppose its it understandable when other nations repress protests, but in the US is it a shame because it is one of the few specifics in the Bill of Rights that is fairly clear on the matter.
I am not going to put my companies email on a Google server across the Internet.
Although, I would like to point out that when some companies loose internet access they are unable to function properly even if they have internal email servers.
Sure you can send emails to coworkers... But doesn't do you much good sending emails to customers.
Of course you could co-locate your exchange servers off site, but again... Same problem but in reverse.
If it is a matter of trust that you suspect Google will go through your emails, then make them sign an NDA just like you would any ISP that you co-locate or host with.
Still what bothers me is that many companies can only dole out 100mb to their workers whearas, users will often by pass the feature by forwarding to a Gmail account. Security and connectivity head aches aside... Give your workers more space.
Emissary: The thousand nations of the Slashdot Empire descend upon you! Our moderation points will blot out the sun!
Stelios: [grins] Then we will post comments in the shade.
California has already seen local environmental changes around large surface wind farms.
Care to site sources? From my understanding most new wind farms don't seem to make much difference as far as environmental impact because of the slow moving blades.
As in... No noise. No dead birds. Etc etc.
If you have the older systems, I think you may face more environmental issues.
And if you are talking about energy being removed from the system causing global cooling... Well... We can build a few more cattle farms to offset the heat lost with head gain, but seriously there is so little impact when you consider all the other things we do to the environment.
Personally, I like to advocate solar and wind over nuclear not because nuclear is more efficient, but because these type of non-nuclear resources can be put into the hands of the individual rather than government regulated industries.
Unless Uncle Sam is going to let me build a reactor in my back yard any time soon... I'm stuck with either wind or solar for my own usage.
Taking out 40MW of wind energy per wind farm from high altitude winds may not be such a good idea; that energy is doing something right now: mixing the atmosphere, generating heat, etc.
Just consider it a small cooling effect to offset the warming effect generated by Cow methane.