Years back I worked for a company who did a very successful display at the Louisiana Children's Museum in New Orleans: http://www.bentmedia.com/case_studies/teamturtle.php

The computers were all touchscreen enabled and put into cabinets like kiosks, and they were scheduled to automatically restart if a crash was detected and relaunch the multimedia presentations. The exhibit itself was bright, colorful, and interactive.

I wasn't directly involved with the implementation of this project so I don't know all the details, but maybe from the photos in the case study you can get a sense of how it was set up. I remember it being a pretty big hit - and while I don't know the extent of any "unpleasant surprises" that are sure to occur with a project like this, when I visited the exhibit I recall everything working very smoothly.

And yet the people "at the top" - in business, in government, in organized crime, everywhere - play these same games with each other, and have played these games with each other for centuries. Somehow, the whole thing still "works" and they manage to stay "on top". How do they pull that off? How do they keep the house of cards from falling when every one of them knows that every other one of them would turn on them if the moment was right? It doesn't sound like it would be possible to keep an organization going in an environment like that, but somehow they do it.

I think the Whitest Kids U'Know said it best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2Aqfp5iMnw

that very thing happened a few years ago - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5152740.stm

pepsi declined the offer and reported it as a theft of trade secrets.

The article keeps referring to what was stolen as "codes". Does that mean "source code" or are they talking about some kind of access codes or authentication keys or something, like the way people call their bank PIN their "secret code" ?

But you see, the point is that someone still DOES make horse buggies. People still go to Central Park to ride the buggies, and SOMEONE has to create them.

That's the great thing about a niche market - if you're the only one in a certain business, be it horse buggies or resurrecting Polaroid film, you might very well be able to get enough customers who are interested in your product to stay in business.

If they think that enough people still find the old-school Polaroid film appealing, then they'd be stupid NOT to take their money, since no one else wants to.

If you put the users to work, you "get" the value of the work they're performing in exchange for your content. It might not be "money", but you might be getting enough value from their menial tasks that it could be worth your while.

I guess that's the sort of thing I'm looking for. I just wonder why nothing has yet filled that need, if the Libertarian party has diverted so far from that completely reasonable path. If the answer is "no one really wants that", then I suppose that answers the question about Americans and the things they really cherish, as opposed to what they claim to cherish.

Your reply illustrates exactly what I mean, and just reinforces my question... how did the Libertarian party become equated with "death by salmonella"?

How did a party that says "People should be free to live their lives and take responsibility for their lives" become the "idiotic" party that screams "government control is bad bad bad"?

There is nothing inherently wrong with the notion that people should be free to live their lives, and that people should be encouraged to take responsibility for their lives, and I tend to think that if you ask any American if they agree, they would say "yes".

But I still don't understand why the one party who claims to stand for that very thing is dismissed as a bunch of crackpots and lunatics who want everyone to be killed by unsafe food.

Legitimate question: why is the Libertarian party so marginalized in America? Their platform basically represents everything that most Americans will claim to believe in, so why do they have so little support? Is it them? Are they just bad at marketing themselves to the American Public? Are they so idealistic as to be completely impractical? Is it that Americans are actually pretty hypocritical? They say they love freedom and liberty, but then when they realize how much responsibility it takes they say to the government "ew, you take care of everything".

If it's the case that the Libertarian Party is essentially too uncompromising on ideals in order to function in the real world, isn't there a middle ground somewhere? Some party that says "yes, we really do love liberty, and we recognize that it requires responsibility, but here are some concessions that we recognize must be made for the real world". Who is that party? Is that kind of thinking what gets us Democrats and Republicans?

I've just never understood why "Libertarian" has become such a joke of a thing to be, when it essentially encompasses everything that Americans are "supposed" to cherish.