Seriously? I mean, seriously? ICANN, even briefly, introduced online gaming into the process of creating new top level domains? I knew that the Internet could resemble a circus, but that really stretches the limits of believability.

Pardon me while I file a registration for .barnum.

I hope he has insurance on that ;)

I would suggest that the government of the state of Utah may at least develop a plan for some new and ongoing Public Service Announcements, to address the concerns of the matter to the public, before any more controversial measures could ever be taken to more serious consideration for civil discussion and possible legislation, in the state.

It seems to stand to reason that the fires could have all been prevented, if the individual recreational shooters having started each respective fire would've been aware of the additional dangers posed when discharging firearms in a dangerously dry climate, and would've been aware that they were in a dangerously dry climate, and moreover if they would've been personally responsible enough to then avoid discharging their firearms in that climate - and if they would feel they must get some firearms practice, nonetheless, then to use use controlled ranges, as the state had so wisely suggested.

I'd say it could be more effectual for the state to suggest to individual gun owners and gun enthusiasts in Utah they must all exercise their own respective senses of knowledge and personal responsibility, more effectively - and for the state to perhaps set the example, as such - to the point of preventing those wildfires, specifically. I think that that should be far more effectual than any too impassioned arguments, in regards to the many popular concerns of the matter, in the overall democratic climate of the state and the broader nation.

That's my two cents, just thinking to the broader scope of the matter - erm, so to speak.

In one rendition, and in some abstraction: Google processes a search query by executing an algorithmic function onto a limited data set, then displaying the results of that function. Though, for purposes of philosophical rhetoric, I may be willing to limit the concept of "opinion" to such a matter of algorithmic selection, I don't know if the concept of opinion could be either judicially or legislatively defined as such, and the definition be accurate to all of: The lexicon; the systematic function of a search engine; the principles on which the system was designed. So, in short, I don't know if the concept of "Opinion" would apply to that, in the courts.

Separately: Though I am not a lawyer, I would like to think that you could claim that the Offend-o-tron would be an expression of your right to free expression. No comment about 4chan ;)

Cheers, ser!

I would think that the measure of "free speech by an item of software" would boil down to a matter of the rights and limits for free expression by the programmer[s] of the item of software. Granted, DNRTA - with apologies, will get to it shortly...

...mmm, kinda?

Thanks, but I really didn't ask such an oblique question.

Do oil refineries have to pay insurance to the surrounding communities, for the possibility of a catastrophic failure at a refinery? I don't suspect so. Oil refineries in the US, then, implement security protocols, checkups, and more checkups, to prevent the possibility of refinery failure.

I'd like to mention, then, that NewSpace companies will have more on the line than any governmental space agency even possibly could. I'm sure they must all well understand the full extents of the importance of launch vehicle safety and launch site safety, thoroughly.

I hope that someone will be able to frame that theory in a more rational light, perhaps not directly associating it with any grisly details of such a tragedy. I think that the theory is so possibly dangerous, on any angle, the discussion of it should brook no sensationalism.

I think it just makes for a nice conversation piece - intriguing news, at that, honestly. Certainly, an economic change in any area may serve to create some related cultural shifts, in that area and surrounding areas. Whether in the abstract, or in any more pragmatic details, why should we be so concerned about it, at that?

Do we want the city to stop developing a stronger technological entrepreneurship base? Probably not the best of goals.

Do we want real estate agents to stop increasing prices, if that trend continues? "Good luck with that."

Or do we simply not want to replace all the struggling artists with entrepreneurs? Is that the expected outcome? Maybe some of those new businesses will support the local arts communities - "problem solved," lol.

I'm certain that the city of San Francisco, and of her neighboring metropolitan areas, can constructively adapt to such change, in however it goes.

I understand that the matter of students' performance on standardized tests could serve to produce some statistical basis for discussion. It's my impression that for some points of view in which it would be held that national science education is lacking, those points of view may not be based so much on results of standardized tests, however, as much as on opinion and, perhaps, also experience - namely experience outside of the context of any predictable, standardized test.

Then again, I'm also no fan of the idea, "We're doing good enough.* Let's do even worse, 'cos we can relax now, after all."

* or well enough either.

Google is the infamous search giant:
1) to which Microsoft now presents some competition, in the search engine industry, with Bing
2) already competing with Microsoft, in mobile operating systems industry
3) rumored to have lots of user data, as in some relation to Google AdSense(tm) technology.
4) which allows users to voluntarily opt in to browser history tracking, with such as Google Web History and the Google toolbar - and to my understanding, that feature is not enabled by default, the user actually has to opt into it, just as I've had to, for so much as search history tracking.
5) all of the above

It sounds to me like Microsoft may be suggesting some doubt towards companies collecting data about user browsing habits. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised, then, if Google may be the main FUD target they could have in mind, at that. Fortunately, though, no one company owns the discussion.

n/t

...but not suggest that a troll comment should launch a thread. It's all the same political FUD, to me.

Lol omniprsident. Omnipresident is on the ___ watching ___ ___ ;)

I'd meant that in reply to this other article, but it seems I had clicked the wrong link for that. My mistake.