If they become an established content providor it will force torrents to be treated like an intrenched pipeline like cable, satellite, or broadcast.

I double dog dare you!!

"Large inherent losses" can be easily dealt with if there is a large supply of affordable energy.

The cost per unit of energy must be calculated to include the cost of the storage scheme. If that total cost is viable then it is "problem solved".

I've never seen a cost analysis of what it would cost to use hydrogen generation as a storage medium. There are so many uses and benefits that I've always been interested in that as a system.

The "measurement made by a conscious being" is not the deciding point. It just makes it more interesting. The quantum implications of the uncertainty principle doesn't require a consciousness to 'make a measurement' that would cause a wave function to collapse to a single solution. It happens all the time with normal interactions. The only unique thing about a consciousness being involved is we can decide to set up the conditions where it will happen and then we notice it. No one spends a lot of time on what we don't notice...

I think almost all of this discussion comes under the second heading of: http://www.suck.com/daily/1997...

RAID is not a backup or an archive solution.
If you store a raid it can't detect data and/or media degradation because the system isn't running. I haven't seen many safe deposit boxes that allow you to run a computer inside of them. The drives will most likely degrade inside of 10 years.

To archive something you want archival media. Something like the 100+ or 200+ year gold archival DVDs and Blu-ray discs. The readers for those disks will be available for a couple decades at least. (Look at M-Disc as an example)

Enforcement has always been about money instead of safety. NHTSA studies have consistently shown that driving slower then the flow of traffic has a WAY higher risk of causing of accidents then driving the same speed faster then the flow. The fact is people get excited by speed so they put up with the focus on speed and cops get a rush out of enforcing it. It is much more interesting then enforcing failure to yield / right of way and other truly dangerous acts.

Can the police supply a single instance where Waze actually caused a single injury of a police officer? If is amazing how many police officers signed up for an exciting career in law enforcement (exciting because it has risk) and recently they have been starting to whine about the risk from non credible sources of risk.

Exactly!
I can see the headline now: "340 car pileup caused by 'terrorist' who rented a snowplow."

The issue is money. The Mac and PC products are major dollars multiplied by a major quantity of installs which equals $$$$ for development. And people are willing to pay those prices as the market clearly shows. Unless you have a large player make the investment (like a major studio) or unless you get a huge developer base (like Linux has) you aren't going to end up with anything compelling.

They found it wearing a thong and lacie bra.

From the OP it said it disappeared in "the early naughties".

Yeah! Americans won't stand for slave like labor conditions which is why the iPhone bombed in the US market after working conditions at Foxconn were revealed. Yup! The iPhone is completely dead in the US!!!

Or option B ... - You are a complete idiot.

There is nothing safer then being "made helpless by law".


Oh yeah ...
CHEMTRAILS ARE REAL. Because condensation because of low pressure vortices is much less believable then a secret program to spend money to spray chemicals that have never been detected and have never been reported by low paid airport ramp workers!

While we are talking to idiots... What other swamp land can I sell?

This gets to the heart of it. The type of person you put in an organization obviously fuels the traits of an organization but over time it will be trumped by the structure of an organization.

First off, If you haven't read "The Peter Principle" (1969) find a copy. It is funny but the humor is built on the fact that it is based on truth. Once you start getting a feel for how the normal actions of people are influenced by life inside a hierarchy then turn your head to the problem of how people get to the upper portions of the hierarchy. The leading motivations of people will be getting a raise or bonus, getting a better position or a promotion, and avoiding being terminated. The way you do this is by currying favor with people above you in the hierarchy, and creating alliances with people at the same level or below you. (And yes, "currying favor" can be as simple as simply doing a good job but it also includes making other people's work look bad...)
The number one way to accomplish this is to have a convincing, persuasive personality. The ability to actively manipulate someones impression of you is not tied to any level of morality and is commonly found in sociopaths. A famous quote, "Power corrupts ..." leads in to an observation in many financial news sources over the last 10 years that CEOs have a MUCH higher percentage of psychopaths then the general population. Just one example: Do psychopaths make good CEOs? The pretty obvious conclusion that the tendencies that lend well to the "climb to the top" also tend to lean away from moral functioning.

Existing in a framework of power is not a way to build toward actions that would be perceived as moral. A new organization can be a wonderful thing because it was created in situ. But as time passes the inexorable influences of a hierarchy will bend it in much less altruistic directions. Over time your only real influences to counter this are the need to counter outside negative perception ("Hey! They aren't moral!") and the need to fight stagnation which leads to reorganization.

You can ascribe the actions of a hierarchy as being what you think of as moral but a hierarchy is not sentient so it cannot be moral.
You are an individual sentient being so you are able to judge that the Salvation Army acts in a way that you perceive as moral. That is your perception not the thinking judgment of a hierarchy.

--------
BTW - Good example using the Salvation Army. They are the only charity that I support!!!

The cost of reviewing video with nothing going on IS free, as even the cheapest camera will only show video where there is motion detected. I would bet the average single family residence (with no kids) probably has less then 5 minutes of motion at the front door and driveway during a day. Fast forward and your time is now down to close to nil.

Add to this the rapid development and falling cost of machine intelligence with video processing and you are looking at the beginning of a totalitarian "video state". The technology exists to use video surveillance to use facial recognition and processing of objects to automatically issue citations for j-walking or littering. I bet we could think of hundreds of other profitable invasive uses that are possible. Of course people (sheep) say, "Oh they would never do that." And a few decades ago people would never have believed that the government would have the ability to look at every purchase transaction that people make, and they certainly wouldn't have believed that "The People" would ever stand for that level of intrusion. But you have a credit/debit card with you right now and using it doesn't make you flinch.

Governments nowadays ALL coin the phrase "sources of revenue". What this means is the people working in government see the citizens that they are supposed to serve as their source of $$$. The fact is that government cannot resist getting their hands on more money (numerical unit of power).
The law used to be a framework where if someone caused a problem they could find a way to deter them from being a problem. There was no intention of enforcing all laws 100% of the time. Now when something happens the agents of the government never ask, "Should we apply this law? but instead only ask, "Can we apply this law?". Add this to the endless search for more revenue and you have a future where the video camera sees you drop a $5 bill, detects dropped paper, and the facial recognition system mails you a $1000 littering fine.

The endless creep of intrusion is headed that way and unless something huge happens it will slowly become the norm. But thank god!!! It will make you safer!!!!
But safety is a FEELING, especially when it doesn't come with a real percentage of improvement in life expectancy. And LIBERTY (all in caps!) is a RISK and it always was a risk. A risk that a lot of people died for.

There is a major difference. The wholesale government surveillance of the Internet, the ramp up of government drones, and the government "video surveillance state" comes down to one thing:

It is now cost effective for governments to micromanage EVERYONE'S life.

If you you don't recognize that this is the most dangerous thing that has happened to liberty and civilization in general you aren't awake. If they felt that this person was dangerous enough that they were willing to pay for a manned 24/7 stakeout then that has already introduced a massive self limiting level of restraint on the process. Popping something on a pole for a cost that is less then one day's wages and then letting it mop up anything is not remotely like a stakeout.

Be very clear about this: A government is a hierarchy. A hierarchy is just an organizational construct. By definition a hierarchy CANNOT HAVE A MORAL CONSCIOUS!. Only an individual can be moral. The basic drives and influences of a person in a hierarchy is not remotely focused on exercising morality. It is focused on power dynamics of having someone above you and someone below you. (Not a great way to exercise "morality" ehh?!)

Always remember: If you had a teenaged child with the same fiscal responsibility and penchant for dancing around the truth as ANY government you would ground them for life.
(And I have to listen to people who want to give up MY rights because they believe an organization chart called "government" will magically take care of things for them. Shheeeshh!!!)