The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has been doing these "studies" for a while. Here's some details on the 'pilot study': http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/pub/HS810704/pages/ExecSummary.html

http://www.pire.org/topiclist2.asp?cms=63

They don't stop everybody, they stop, say, every third car. And they use high-pressure sales techniques to try to get "biological samples". But they actually don't arrest people they find impaired; they try to arrange transportation for them. And they don't claim to actually collect or register DNA, just the presence of drugs. I don't think that makes it right, but let's at least be accurate about what they're doing.

More information and links to past examples of these "studies":

http://www.politechbot.com/2007/09/21/colorado-sheriff-creates/

No, seriously - can anyone offer a reason why we should believe what they say?

Wow. I think you need to re-read what I wrote. Carefully.

Pointing out that people can successfully choose not to avail themselves of anonymity - that one can choose to express oneself openly despite risks - is simply not the same thing as saying anonymity should be banned, or even that the option for anonymity isn't important. I don't know who you're arguing with, but it isn't me. If you want to start a fight, you'll have to look elsewhere.

You need this environment. Even if none of your current opinions are controversial. Because one day yours, or your childrens' opinion won't won't be welcomed by government.

See here.

Don't you dare click on the "Homepage" link next to every single one of my comments, you NSA spy!

You confuse ANY-one and EVERY-one.

Actually, no. You are confusing the two.

The original question was, who uses a real email address to register anywhere?. (Rhetorically) implying that "EVERY-one" doesn't, or shouldn't, use their real identity on the Interwebs. I replied, pointing out that that's not the case - there are people that do, in fact, enter discussion with their real identiies.

I didn't claim (a) that "EVERY-one" does that, nor that (b) "EVERY-one" should do that, nor that (c) "EVERY-one" should be required to do that. I simply pointed out that (1) it's possible to do that, and (2) at least some people actually do that.

But you, apparently, think that if "ANY-one" does something, that automactially means "EVERY-one" should. To paraphrase Babbage, 'I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a conclusion'.

Nobody wants to work for a bad employer, but most people want to be without money even less.

I'm willing to take the risk, and I was two decades ago, too. So far, it's paid off. I haven't had too much trouble finding places to work with a minimum of BS. I wasn't terrified when Google put Usenet online - but then, I'd always been polite when expressing my thoughts. If someone wants anonymity so they can be the "asshole", I find I have limited sympathy.

Happy to see that you live a privileged life

What makes you think I say any old fool thing that pops into my head, like an anonymous coward? I'm also on Facebook, but I'm careful what I post there, too.

Your real name is Dr. Manhattan? That's an awesome name.

To reiterate: "or (in the case of places like Slashdot) made it easy to find my real name"

You're not the one who gets to decide what is unacceptable; prospective employers do.

I wouldn't want to work for an employer that would consider anything I've said "unacceptable".

I've always used my real name when commenting, or (in the case of places like Slashdot) made it easy to find my real name. For decades now. There are a couple posts on Usenet I'm embarrassed about (for example, I got my signs reversed trying to explain the link between electricity, magnetism, and Relativity once) but nothing I would be uncomfortable if a prospective employer saw, or appearing on the front page of the newpaper.

Greg Hewgill created "Copilot" by reverse-engineering the original Palm Pilot, and released it under the GPL. It was so useful as a development and debugging tool, Palm Inc. took over development and renamed it POSE, the Palm OS Emulator. Still, of course, available under the GPL.

(Because of all that, I was able to port POSE to Android.)

Admittedly, the ROM images are copyrighted, but that's not the same thing as the emulator itself. Same thing for the game machine emulators like MAME and such.

But I'd give you a bump if I could.

Viruses that attack bacteria could be very effective, and harder for bacteria to evolve around. But they're not without downsides; while it's unlikely such a virus could evolve to attack human cells, weird recombinations could happen in a cell that happened to be infected with two viruses at once, one human, one bacteriophage. And more likely, they could wind up attacking 'good' bacteria that our bodies need to have around.

Hopefully our biotech is starting to get to the point where we can tailor viruses to specific targets, at least some of the time. Things like this give me some hope. If we can do that, we can do at least some of that kind of tailoring.

The Police are there because contractors can't stop or direct traffic.

But off-duty police officers can?