Smug looks and wearing the t-shirt of a band that was around before you were born will likely aid entry as well.

I understand it's a separate point, which is why I posted this with a reference to rambling. I am not necessarily trying to argue your position on the FCC's actions, which really makes this all offtopic. I was just curious what your personal take on the law was.

I found this part of your response particularly interesting. I am not sure that you can make the leap from "I don't consider the law to be something that must be followed..." to "...you hate the rule of law..." I actually think the law has a place in society. It serves a very particular function in that it gives folk a basic framework from which to derive their ideas on what is appropriate in a particular society and what is not. I also think that it serves a very important function in that it gives a society the power to eliminate diseased cells (dangerous people) from the rest of the body. That said, I think the law needs to have its roots in some form of basic rights in order to have any teeth. Once you start moving beyond that, the law starts becoming an entity which no longer serves its original function of protecting the body (society) from diseased cells (dangerous individuals), but rather becomes an entity that serves the subjective agenda of whatever particular subgroup of people control the law at that point. That's a problem. However, that's also a different discussion to have. In my opinion, the law is a very necessary and beneficial part of society, so making the leap to say that I hate it, and prefer the rule of men seems odd odd to me...Furthermore, the law is handed down by men, so I am not sure where the distinction comes from. I guess the part of your claim that I find most intriguing is the following:

That, to me, is precisely what defines the concept of law. Our liberties are simply our liberties because they were handed down to us by folk that claimed power years ago. The only reason the law is shaped the way it is today is because, at some time in the past, a particular group of humans that were in power declared that these liberties are essential, and these are the means by which they could be protected. If a different group of humans were in power at the time the law, our liberties, and the protection of those liberties available to us, the people, would be quite different. I suppose I don't see how the law is in any meaningful way distinguishable from men with power. When it comes down to it, the most powerful humans, be it through violence, or money, or charisma, or whatever, are the ones that will, inevitably, influence and determine the law. It is through their power that the law is enforced (even if that means giving a small amount of controllable power to some other subset of people). So I fail to see how the rule of law is in any way distinguishable from the rule of man.... Perhaps you could expand upon that?

Regarding this it seems that it is already arbitrary whether or not we follow the law. There is nothing keeping me from breaking the law at my will. If I want to do something illegal, I can. It's that simple. Of course, I do so knowing, full well, that I will have to take responsibility for that decision, even if it means prosecution by the powers that be. If I determine that the cost of breaking the law is negligible to the benefits derived from breaking it, then I may very well chose to break the law. I guess what I am getting at is that the only thing that prevents us from breaking the law is our own, subjective assertions that following the law is the right thing to do, be it short term or long term. I don't understand, therefore, why following the law is more important in the long term since such a decision is still subjective with respect to our own view of what's right for the long term....

Also, regarding changing the law, what if the system by which the law can be legally changed has been set up in such a manner that it is impossible for anyone, save those that are already in power, to change the law? I am not saying that is the case, I would just like to hear your thoughts on the matter.

For the record, I am not attempting to derail your position regarding the FCC on this matter. I am just curious to hear your thoughts.

Otherwise...wow. I feel bad for them.

I don't feel sorry for anyone with such lax morals. WTF is wrong with people?

You know, this may be the first valid argument I've ever seen for the uber-lockdown thing Apple has with the iPhone/iPad OS. As much as I hate recent Apple products, I can do nothing other than agree with this statement. Good job, sir.

Money

No, I just thought pixie dust might aid in the delivery of "magical" products...

This is one of the worst flamebaiting articles I've seen in awhile. The title is

But then they go on to prove something completely unrelated:

How exactly does this make the piracy number any easier for developers to swallow? They put their hard work into a game and 80% of people using their work have not paid for it. The only thing we really learn from this article is that people will do anything to spin piracy into a positive action.

"Beaver - damn; visible from space!" :P

There are potholes in the roads near my house that are visible from space (on Google).

No we do it here too. We just have been messing with the internet longer so it is no longer news, damn n00bz.

I suspect that Google has this so sandboxed to hell they don't give a fuck what you do to it. VM inside a VM inside a VM inside a VM rebooting and losing state every 5 minutes sounds about right. Also alternate between linux and windows in the VMs, and make sure to run Norton antivirus on all hte Windows ones.

For optimal security, randomly vary the VM recursion depth so attackers can't figure it out.

You can already get stuff to do this for free. Is this stuff that's getting sold made for the less technical crowd or something?

It's unlikely to do any good lobbying Harper. Harper's unfulfilled dream is to be President of the U.S.A. He's as much big business, especially big oil business, as any American President could be. Further Harper's modus operandi demands he serve the wishes of the copyright lobby. His use of the media to cast his opponents in the worst possible light is his guiding star as a politician. He's a consummate sophist, seemingly utterly without any philosophy, other than to win and hold onto power. He has done cameos in various popular TV shows in slick, self deprecating clips. A politician who relies as heavily on superficial, mass media self promotion as does Harper will cut a wink 'n nod, tacit deal with big media companies. I think it's critically important to note the heavy use politicians in all countries make of mass media to further their political agendas. In the U.S.A. a loop is closing around the American citizenry. Big government, the military industrial complex and big, mass media corporations comprise an unholy trinity. In Canada the military industrial complex is missing but the possible crippling of the rights of individual citizens remains as much of a threat as corporations are given greater entitlements while being able to shield themselves from just punishments for their wrong doings. Two main problems come from the need to create jobs and compete internationally. Politicians need job creation programmes to bring home the bacon to their constituents and big business can deliver massive job creation programmes as well as threaten massive job losses. Further the majority of advanced, industrialized countries seemed to have opted for promoting mega corporations as a new, privileged class akin to medieval knights whose resources better ensure successful international competition.

Yes, that occurred to me too. I just have this feeling that if I ever get this project truly off the ground, somebody's going to use it to spot UAVs in Afghanistan and I'll suddenly be a terrorist.

I'm not a Buddhist either, just an interested of under-informed outsider, so I ask with all sincerity:

Wouldn't they likely contend that "total X abandon is physically and emotionally damaging"
for all values of X?