Having our rights violated by government is, itself, a "National Security Threat." (At some point, doesn't the term "National" refer back to the people whom that government is supposed to serve?)
It's not merely about our "way of life" they they are supposedly trying to defend: If this program is being used for *any* sort of political advantage, it threatens our democracy, itself -- and that can cost American lives. Bad policy decisions have killed more Americans than terrorists. (Katrina, Health Care, the Environment, economic and employement policies...)
What if they've been engaged in political surveillance that allows them to gain advantage in elections? They don't have to go as far blackmail for stifling dissent -- but then again, how do we know they're not doing that? We already know the FBI has been abusing its power by infiltrating and surveilling groups like the Quakers. (Doesn't anybody remember COINTELPRO?)
Then again, maybe these folks running the show don't believe in democracy, in the first place.
Aren't many of the people in the current Administration the same people who supported Death Squads in Latin America during the 1980's?
What -- are we supposed to just believe they have "good intentions" based on what they say?
Do you really trust Cheney, Rumsfeld & Co. to spread "our" point of view throughout the Middle East?
Just what IS that point of view?
Isn't it obvious that these bozos are NOT COMPETENT to access and deliver the Truth -- considering how often REALITY has kept body-slamming them every time and again?
Bush advocating that "Intelligent Design" be put on equal footing with Natural Selection in our Schools... Ignoring and diminishing the science and reality of numerous environmental problems -- including global warming... They appointed a 24-year-old college dropout to be the spokesperson for NASA!
They lack a coherent framework with which to understand reality, so they make disasterous policy decisions, e.g.: Their denial of the scientific analyses of the Gulf Coast levy sytem is what made the consequenses of Huricane Katrina far worse than they had to be. Their analysis of political reality are no less flawed flawed as their take on physical (aka: scientific) reality. Where were those WMDs? Where was that post-war plan???
After promoting junk science and Jebus -- what makes you think they're qualified to promote the USA?
This issue is long solved: developers should encode their data semantically using XML.
Doing so makes it *trivial* to output your data, formatted however you want, as long as it is a something that any current or near-future browser will understand.
In their raw XML data, developers can use standard HTML for markup, when necessary -- or any conventions they want, really -- as long as they realize this markup is not necessarilly what they have to send to the browser.
Take your pick: you can do this dynamically, every time a user hits a page -- or you can pre-render static files. Using the same XML data file(s):
XML + XSL ==> XHTML
XML + XSL ==> XHTML "2.0"
XML + XSL ==> HTML 4.01
XML + XSL ==> HTML 5.0?
...And, of course, the raw-data, itself, can be filtered or converted at any future point:
XML + XSL ==> XML, and this output can be fed-back into any of the operations above.
Which is why it is the duty of we, the public, to intensely criticise any corporation when it does do something unethical, so that the ethical choice becomes the most profitable one.
You've drank the cool-aide -- when issues become a matter of "personal choice" far less gets done. How else would corporations and their neocon allies want you to respond to all the various economic, environmental, and social problems to which they may contribute?
This is a "political" issue -- so a solution is likely a "political" one that involves some machinery of government.
For example: Perhaps it should be illegal for carriers like MSN to disciminate against which type of speech they will stifle -- which is exactly what they are doing. (whether or not that speech is on their servers -- otherwise, they shouldn't offer the service.)
Otherwise: What if Google didn't likle what you were talking about in your private emails -- or even public discussions -- Should Google be allowed to revoke your Gmail acount???
So... does Marquette have tax-exempt status?
Are taxpayers paying for any research going on there?
Can we disconnect Marquette from the publicly-subsidized, municipal water and sewer systems?
Slashdot Mirror
Having our rights violated by government is, itself, a "National Security Threat." (At some point, doesn't the term "National" refer back to the people whom that government is supposed to serve?)
It's not merely about our "way of life" they they are supposedly trying to defend: If this program is being used for *any* sort of political advantage, it threatens our democracy, itself -- and that can cost American lives. Bad policy decisions have killed more Americans than terrorists. (Katrina, Health Care, the Environment, economic and employement policies...)
What if they've been engaged in political surveillance that allows them to gain advantage in elections? They don't have to go as far blackmail for stifling dissent -- but then again, how do we know they're not doing that? We already know the FBI has been abusing its power by infiltrating and surveilling groups like the Quakers. (Doesn't anybody remember COINTELPRO?)
Then again, maybe these folks running the show don't believe in democracy, in the first place. Aren't many of the people in the current Administration the same people who supported Death Squads in Latin America during the 1980's?
What -- are we supposed to just believe they have "good intentions" based on what they say?
Do you really trust Cheney, Rumsfeld & Co. to spread "our" point of view throughout the Middle East?
Just what IS that point of view?
Isn't it obvious that these bozos are NOT COMPETENT to access and deliver the Truth -- considering how often REALITY has kept body-slamming them every time and again?
Bush advocating that "Intelligent Design" be put on equal footing with Natural Selection in our Schools... Ignoring and diminishing the science and reality of numerous environmental problems -- including global warming... They appointed a 24-year-old college dropout to be the spokesperson for NASA!
They lack a coherent framework with which to understand reality, so they make disasterous policy decisions, e.g.: Their denial of the scientific analyses of the Gulf Coast levy sytem is what made the consequenses of Huricane Katrina far worse than they had to be. Their analysis of political reality are no less flawed flawed as their take on physical (aka: scientific) reality. Where were those WMDs? Where was that post-war plan???
After promoting junk science and Jebus -- what makes you think they're qualified to promote the USA?
Where do I invest my Money?
Doing so makes it *trivial* to output your data, formatted however you want, as long as it is a something that any current or near-future browser will understand.
In their raw XML data, developers can use standard HTML for markup, when necessary -- or any conventions they want, really -- as long as they realize this markup is not necessarilly what they have to send to the browser.
Take your pick: you can do this dynamically, every time a user hits a page -- or you can pre-render static files. Using the same XML data file(s):
Someone tell me: Where's the "problem"???
Which is why it is the duty of we, the public, to intensely criticise any corporation when it does do something unethical, so that the ethical choice becomes the most profitable one.
You've drank the cool-aide -- when issues become a matter of "personal choice" far less gets done. How else would corporations and their neocon allies want you to respond to all the various economic, environmental, and social problems to which they may contribute?
This is a "political" issue -- so a solution is likely a "political" one that involves some machinery of government.
For example: Perhaps it should be illegal for carriers like MSN to disciminate against which type of speech they will stifle -- which is exactly what they are doing. (whether or not that speech is on their servers -- otherwise, they shouldn't offer the service.)
Otherwise: What if Google didn't likle what you were talking about in your private emails -- or even public discussions -- Should Google be allowed to revoke your Gmail acount???
So... does Marquette have tax-exempt status? Are taxpayers paying for any research going on there? Can we disconnect Marquette from the publicly-subsidized, municipal water and sewer systems?
Isn't THAT the "elephant in the room?"
Please mod parent as immigrant-bashing TROLL.