Exactly. Until now, the only reason for capping / metering bandwidth has been money - the cost to pay for bandwidth & the cost to upgrade the network, as well as the increased revenue they could net if they charged more. If AT&T's network is swamped by malicious (remember, they are trying to cause problems) usage, it lends legitimacy and support to AT&T's potential decision to end the "unlimited" plans.

AFAICT (can't RTFA, slashdotted), the comments this guy is protesting are not for canceling contracts immediately, but more like "in the future, we'll probably stop offering that, and then sunset the existing contracts when they come up for renewal". Either way, I don't think this kind of protest is going to have any positive results.

If they did want to terminate the existing unlimited data plans and change them to metered plans, I suspect that wouldnt be as hard as you think. I don't know what the terms are of the AT&T contract are (are there any informed folks out there willing to share?), but I wouldn't be surprised if there is a bit in there that allows AT&T to amend certain parts without negating the whole thing. They also probably have something in there that limits the consumers' recourse to 3rd party arbitration, which isn't really 3rd party, since it is a 3rd party of AT&T's choosing. Plus, if the consumer terminates early, they'll be hit with a termination fee to cover at least part of the subsidy. Would that be fair or nice? No, but so what? Most consumers would get the notice in the mail, get a little angry, and put up with it. Most iPhone customers aren't about to leave their iPhones behind to switch carriers, and most don't know how to jailbreak one.

Great. If this guy goes and speaks truth to power with a "digital flash mob", I can picture two outcomes. One: AT&T's digital network is brought to its knees, normal customers who are not part of the flash mob are pissed off, and AT&T issues a press release saying that unlimited data plans are obviously having a negative impact on the network and will therefore be terminated. Two: AT&T's network sees little or no disruption, and therefore they realize they have nothing to fear from angry customers. Unlimited data plans are terminated anyway.

True. That being said, perfectly normal deliveries are only a couple degrees away from life-and-death struggle. I'm glad my wife and I made it to the hospital for our son's birth. It was almost a textbook childbirth, but could easily have been fatal for one or both without the right medical personnel around.

I probably would have called 911 and put it on speakerphone. In the event of complications or anything not covered in the wiki, someone can answer questions. Obviously, the guy did a pretty good job regardless of the source he used, so I can't really criticize what he did, or the source he used. That being said, when that kid grows up, its teachers probably won't even let him/her use Wikipedia as a source in a school research paper.

Going for funny, actually. Spam? How so?

Pedantic nitpick: That isn't being pedantic, that's being redundant.

The baby didn't cry at first. Then it realized that its own father had just used a user-editable, non-authoritative guide to performing a life-and-death medical procedure, and it hasn't stopped crying since.

That's how you know it's going to be a lawyer. ;)

(apologies to NewYorkCountryLawyer and cpt kangarooski)

I wonder if they had anyone from Iceland consulting on this. They have lots of geothermal heating and power generation there on a geologically active land mass, but AFAIK, they've avoided triggering earthquakes.

I try not to be pedantic, but slipping and using "wreckless" in the case of earthquake damage is ironic.

Huh. And if the Judge and/or Lawyer play Mafia Wars, does the Ethics Advisory Committee assume this means they are involved with the mob?

Why the hell does is seem that I always run out of points just before reading something like this?

[devils_advocate]
If the leaked emails and other data constitutes, as you say "concrete evidence", what is so ridiculous about drawing conclusions from it?
[/devils_advocate]

Seriously, though, regardless of whether the data and science of AGW is sound, some of the ethics of its supporters play right into the hands of their opposition. The truthers and other conspiracy theorists have long been saying that there is a conspiracy to promote AGW theory and stifle criticism and alternate climate theories. Now with the lost original data and leaked emails, this either (depending on your point of view) proves them right, or at least gives them a reason to believe so.

15 minutes of fame isn't going to make AGW doubters go away. Ignoring them won't make them go away. Encouraging open criticism is the only solution. It has prevailed in other scientific disagreements, there is no reason to suppose it won't in this case ... eventually. You'll never convince everyone, but you'll convince a whole lot more people with openness than with secrecy.

I considered wording like that, but was trying to avoid possible bias. I went with "create the appearance", because that is neutral. The emails did in fact create that appearance in the minds of many, hence the importance of TFA. Whether that appearance is correct or not is another debate.