If you have no background in electronics at all, this might be a good place to start:

http://www.innovatoys.com/kits-labs/50-in-one-electronic-project-lab/165

Very basic analog and radio circuits, which in my opinion is the best place to start, and at under $30 it won't break the bank. You'll go through all the projects pretty quickly - but then you can start experimenting with your own circuits. No soldering required - just connect the pre-tinned wires to the connector springs. I had a similar kit from Radio Shack when I was young and first getting into electronics, and I loved it. I even ended up stripping it of parts to use in my own projects when I graduated to building circuits on perfboard.

Whatever kit you begin with, analog or digital, you'll want a Digital Multi-Meter, or DMM. It doesn't have to be a good one, and these days a cheap one can be had for 10 or 15 dollars. Because you're just beginning, I suggest not getting an auto-ranging meter - you'll maintain a better sense of where you are and what you're doing if you have to pay attention to the range setting.

Best of luck to you sir; if electronics continues to interest you then you're in for a lot of fun!

What else would we expect when we privatize the entire government and effectively do away with accountable public entites? That's only a slight exaggeration of the current situation - soon it won't be an exaggeration at all.

It's also not entirely an issue of privatization. Even when the DEA didn't have the private-sector taint outlined in the article, they were over-zealous over-enforcers with their own political power and their own obvious vested interest in keeping drugs illegal and penalties harsh.

That said, you are right, and ruthlessly weeding out private-sector parasites like Desert Snow would be a very good place to start - presuming there's enough accountable government power left to do so.

gets both larger, (higher BMI, greater average height), and older, (aging population). Something's gotta give.

I know! How about some shareholders agreeing to make slightly less profit on their investments in order to increase comfort and safety for many millions of people? And how about the food industry agreeing to dial it down on the addictive, fattenning foods they make and push?

Nah, silly idea - forget I said it. What was I thinking?

Another good point - thanks. I guess what it comes down to is what nurb432 said:

Once upon a time, I basically trusted the government to at least try to do the right thing. They were often fuckups, and occasionally larcenous or downright evil, but I never had the constant feeling I have now, that they are the enemy. So at one time I was relatively happy to let them take care of such matters; now I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.

Good question - in the heat of the moment when I posted I didn't think of it. I'm not sure I can give an accurate, or even a final, answer to it right now. But the following points occur to me:

- It's easy to make a grenade and have some confidence that it will work; no testing is required, so the fact that one is breaking the law needn't be obvious. Not so with UAV's.
- One can practise grenade-throwing by throwing a baseball; becoming a competent UAV controller requires a lot of practice with a real UAV under real-world conditions. So it's easier to hide grenade practice than to hide UAV practice.
- There aren't any significant peaceful uses for grenades, whereas UAV's have many peaceful uses.
- Grenades aren't usually used to spy on people.

So no, at first blush I don't feel the same about 'grenades and stuff'. The issue of UAV restrictions seems more complex and nuanced to me. That's not to say I won't eventually decide that they should be similarly regulated - just that it's a more difficult question for me to answer.

On the one hand, UAV's represent a potential danger to people on the ground, and to airplanes - not to mention the privacy implications.

On the other hand, (if my understanding is correct), military and law enforcement agencies are free to fly UAV's whenever and wherever they please. This represents a further un-levelling of the playing field - the government is steadily acquiring powers which make it impossible for citizens to control/hold responsible/overthrow their own elected leaders.

I honestly don't know the answer - I only know that it both scares me and pisses me off that the government can do whatever it wants with UAV's, while my ability to use them is very, very restricted.

I think the premise of your argument, (that the primary concern of Three Letter Agencies is stopping crimes of various kinds), is largely false. The prime directive of these agencies, (organisms if you will, because they have many characteristics of living entities), is to grow, to thrive, to gain power, and to become ever more robust and resistant to damage. For example, the last thing the NSA wants is an end to terrorism and various foreign threats. Too much money is at stake, and too many jobs, careers, and personal empires are on the line; if enough enemies don't exist in reality, they will be fabricated as required. (BTW, all that data they're gathering comprises a shitload of raw material for said fabrication). Ditto for the DEA, (that's why you'll never see legalization of drugs), the military, etc.

Wars of various kinds, (including NSA 'intelligence wars'), are simply too profitable to be 'won' or otherwise concluded; the agencies in question will continue to expand their power and reach so they can make damned sure that the wars will never end. As for the "slumbering public", your description of them answers the question you asked.

Only an issue when somewhere down the line this kind of policy becomes compulsory.

The vast majority of the population believes the "I have nothing to hide so I have nothing to fear" bullshit that the authorities are peddling in oh-so-many propagandistic ways. "Be a good little citizen, and you'll never come to harm!" So soon, almost everybody and his dog will sign up for this "money saving" Trojan horse, and then it will be impossible for anyone to buy insurance without consenting to the insurance companies raping their privacy.

If I didn't maintain burner email accounts with them out of sheer inertia, they wouldn't even be on my radar.

I'm in Canada and have a choice among several ISP's on the same wires - so you have MY condolences...

The last time I tried IMAP was about 8 years ago. I was told it wasn't possible to keep messages on both the server and my computer at the same time. If that's not true, then thanks - I'll definitely look into IMAP.

Funny, and at least a little bit true, yet you were modded down. That kind of makes your point for you, doesn't it?

They'll pry that from my cold dead fingers.

I use POP3, so I can have local copies of all emails. I keep messages on the server too, so it's easy to sync up several machines - that way I can have them on both my notebook and my desktop. All my music is local, and I keep local copies of any videos, documents, etc. that I care about. Occasionally I even save Web pages as HTML so I can have access to the content even after it changes in or disappears from the wild.

As far as I'm concerned The Cloud is a sometimes-convenient augmentation to local storage, not a replacement for it.

Mod parent up!

I'm a Canadian. Right now I use Bell because my GF wants to keep her Sympatico address. But I miss the days when I had an ISP called TekSavvy, which delivered DSL service via the Bell phone lines, while the phone service on those same lines was provided by Bell.

I wasn't totally satisfied with the service, (though I felt it was way better than Bell's had been), and was about to switch to another ISP when I ended up moving. But that was the beauty of it - I could choose from among several ISP's with just a few phone calls. (Plus a minor interruption of service while Bell 'accidentally' messed up the changeover).

I shudder to think of living someplace where I have NO choice of ISP, or am forced to choose between a 'wired' monopolist bully and a 'wireless' monopolist bully.

Subwoofers - causing annoying bystanders for over 50 years!

Don't you just love the playful ambiguities of the English language?

Thanks for the informative reply! I'll take that info into account during future rants. However, I'd still prefer there to be a greater awareness on the part of Joe Public that an electric car isn't magically an emission-free vehicle.