Seems like that would be a good role for the Open Software Initiative.

How about the term "Free Source"? It allows the FSF to continue having the word "free" as in freedom. And it allows the OSI to still focus on the source code. And realistically, the source code really is the only "free as in beer" portion. Additionally, it solves the problem that the OSI has, in that "open source" already has a meaning in the intelligence community, causing the term to not be trademarkable.

So your claim then is that a society that allows the freedom to own slaves is more free than a society that disallows slavery?

Isn't the fact that his site is called "Inner Depravity" enough of a warning? I think you could make a pretty good argument that the "norms" that should be used to judge such a site should include only those people who would go to a site after seeing that name.

I assume that when you said Parker pens, you meant the really nice and expensive models. But the cheap (about $5) Jotter is the pen that fits all of my needs. I write like a left-hander, with the side of my palm resting against the paper. So the ink has to dry quickly, or it will smear. The Jotter ballpoint is one of the few pens that works for me in this respect. Another reason I use it is that it's solid metal, and won't break or leak in my back pocket, so I can always have it with me. I'm not sure if it's available in fine point for your small writing, but I think it meets all your other requirements.

You do realize that the poll workers are not elected, right? Why should they be given more access? And Texas law does allow observers in the polling places as well -- they just have to be from Texas (and the same county in some instances).

I've been an election observer in my state (Missouri). Just watched what was going on in the polling place for a few hours. I can assure you that if I were to cause any sort of scene, I would have been made to leave. The polling place I was observing was very well run, like I would expect most to be.

Also of note is that in most (all?) polling places (at least in my state), the poll workers represent both of the major political parties, to ensure that they're monitoring each other.

Then why did you continue writing 11 more sentences?

Warren Buffett is giving 10% of his wealth to the Gates Foundation every year, and has done other philanthropic work. He's never had plans to give it to his children. And he's done a pretty decent job of managing his wealth without harming the average workers at his companies.

I believe that there's a 4th kind of factor: something you can do. For example, you might be able to pick out some of your favorite items, even though you don't remember which favorite items you registered. Or you might be able to type your password in a different rhythm than anyone else can (without a lot of practice); again, it's not something that you can memorize/remember/know, and it's not really something that you are or have. Bruce Schneier has an article on one of these kinds of authentication factors.

It sounds funny, but quite possibly the most cost-effective solution. I once needed to convert some documents from an old StarOffice format to an XML-based DocBook format. I looked into pulling them into OpenOffice and saving them as ODF, then writing a conversion program. Then I looked into having it outsourced. It would have actually been cheaper to have somebody in India re-type the entire 700 page document in the new format than spend my own labor writing a conversion program.

The First Amendment guarantees freedom of the press, not of journalists. At the time it was written, "the press" meant "the printing press", not "people who write". So it means that people have the right to publish their ideas. It does not mean that certain people have the right to publish their ideas. So defining "journalist" should have no affect on First Amendment freedoms.

Of course, if judges are too stupid or corrupt to realize this, then we're all screwed.

I was going to say something similar. Perhaps when we start seeing the costs, we'll start working on the problem. Hopefully it won't be too late by then.

I don't understand why the environmentally-minded folks don't try to talk more about the costs. Basically, speak in a language that Conservatives/Republicans can understand, to get them to take actions in their own interest.

The way I like to put it is this: Imagine 9 out of 10 doctors tell you that you're going to die unless you take some specific actions. Most likely, you'd take those actions, to preserve your future self-interests. Now imagine 9 out of 10 experts on the climate tell you that if you don't stop/reverse global warming by taking some specific steps, you're going to have to spend trillions of dollars to protect or rebuild coastal cities, as well as severe weather situations away from the coast. If you're rational, you'd most likely take those actions, to preserve your future self-interests.

Luckily, if they're just counting web bandwidth, we can just use other protocols, or tunnel through other protocols.

Duh! The Internet is not equivalent to the Web. Especially since BitTorrent takes up a large part of the bandwidth used these days. (And perhaps video/audio streaming protocols, but I'm not sure if those are primarily HTTP-based or using other protocols (RTSP, RTP, etc.) these days.)

Next time you send them an email or letter, be sure to CC your Attorney General.

I'm not quite sure how that meets their mission:

Then again, I'm not sure how much of what they do furthers their mission. It would seem that most of the things they do actually restrict freedom of movement.