Often times intent is lost when posting. The original post struck me as one that cries about pollution but still continues to use the products. Very much a NIMBY attitude, but they have no problem with someone else's yard. That may not be what was intended, but that is the way it sounds.

I am all for responsibility in companies and individuals. However, I am not for causes, movements, etc. Most of these are composed of mindless sheep who oppose anything that they think harms the cute cuddliness of the moment.

Find a clean responsible way to extract resources and present the product to the market in a fair manner where profit can be made, reinvestment can occur and innovation can happen.

Captain Planet did a huge disservice to a generation. Too many people see companies and corporations as evil for no other reason than they fact that they are companies or corporations. Some are good, some are bad, but that can be said of anything. Judge the company or corporation by their actions, just as you should with people.

Well I guess we can agree on something...

It was not intended as a defense, merely an explanation of the reason for my post. I cannot help it if you feel the need to over react.

The original poster did not present options, only a sarcastic statement. Which prompted my reply. Apparently, you are either stupid or dishonest for missing the third option of sarcasm.

Your statement leads me to believe that your are OK with radioactive waste water releases as long as they are not in America. Since you do not seem to indicate that you are against the uses of rare earth.

secure data within their network. Every solution he proposed uses and outside resource. Move away from storing all data? Use outside authentication? One time accounts? (this one really got me)

Are they that bad at the basics of security? Someone please tell me this is not the norm.

Again, the fact that he has data on a company negates your statement that he is for government transparency.

The guy has his own agenda, and at least two times in the recent past has come out against leaks. The first time was when he suspended an employee because of suspected leaks to Newsweek, and the second time is the story linked above.

Disclosure of the address is part of the normal procedure. If it out of the norm for this to be made public I could see your point, but it seems to me that he is attempting to change it in this case. I still find it highly ironic that a "advocate" of the stance that all information should be free would take this position. The debate then comes down to what is considered informaton, which is based on the individual view point.

It has been reported that Wikileaks has data regarding a company (a large bank). How does this fit with your criteria?

Also, the bail records are public information, not personal data. I was amused by the irony of his position.

The article says that Amazon can scale rapidly and quickly, but the title of the post led me to believe we would learn how they do this. I was expecting more...

It would be great to learn what technology is used to accomplish this rapid scale, as well as what network components support this.

So says the Anonymous Coward...