Yes, I think that's true, but competitions will help focus minds. Most competitions will last a few years, including a period of laying out the requirements.

I envision a new protocol to replace 3 remote security functions: SSL/TLS, IPSec, and SSH. I think SSH is the most secure of the three of those today but they could all three use a rethink.

The ultimate goal, though, is not to do this as a separate project but as a unified community effort like the NIST competitions (see Standards).

We don't need "software updates that improve the security of OpenSSL", we need a whole new protocol.

If you really want to be helpful, Google, provide support and coordinate a competition to create a new SSL protocol, à la AES and SHA-3. Then we could make progress towards truly better security.

I think you've hit on an area that needs reform.

My organization has about 4000 phone numbers which we can assign as we please (DIDs) and a /16 IP address block. For the DIDs we're locked in to a particular carrier, with the /16 since it's an assignment from a regional registry (ARIN) which means we can go to any carrier and advertise that out via BGP. Why shouldn't we be able to do the same with phone numbers?

(Obviously, this is much easier now with SIP than it has been with prior technologies, but I haven't heard of calls for reform on this front.)

There is also a battery pack in the mid-section of the plane (page 787.0.7), near the trailing edge of the wings.

I found it hard to complete every issue every week until I discovered the aforementioned audio edition. Now my drive to work is much more bearable (bordering on a pleasure!). If you have a short (or no) commute, YMMV of course. :)

Yes, I agree completely. The summary spoke exclusively of cell phones (although the title didn't say so), even the land line phone system will crash under the load during an emergency situation or other unexpected event.

I once tried to call my father (who was at his work) from our home (land line to land line) immediately after a moderate earthquake. The call would not go through because all the lines were taken up. We managed to complete the call and speak to each other after waiting about 15 minutes. Capacity problems are not inherent to the cell network.

I read The Economist (every week) and I am constantly amazed by its quality and informativeness. Although, I must mention, I technically don't read most of it since I consume the Audio Edition during my commute to work. The articles I don't get to during the week (because my commute is slightly shorter than the average audio edition length) I typically try to catch up on with the dead-tree edition that is delivered. If the USPS ever ends Saturday delivery that's one thing I'll miss: getting my delivery of the economist before Monday.

The subscription price is a little steep (about US$120), I feel like I could not go without it.

All patient records should be open and available to the patient. Those records will have the caveat that they can never be used against the doctor or hospital which produced them. If the credit ratings agencies can claim that their piss poor evaluations of mortgage-backed securities were protected speech then the same can certainty apply to medical records. Establishing this in law is simple and straightforward.

I couldn't agree less what what you say. Doctors only have their interest in mind and when I talk to doctors I listen as a skeptic, usually verifying what they say with a lengthy search on the internet (on websites like webmd, mayo clinit, nih/cdc etc) to check for consistency.

ALL your medical records should be open to you, and even better, HANDED to you as you exit the clinic/hospital. HOWEVER, the content of those records should not be used, in any way, against the doctor. It should be protected speech. This would have two effects: 1) the doctors would be more honest with patients 2) Statements like

would disappear in the explicit sense but still be hinted at to those who can read between the lines.

You might be surprised to find out how many people fail in one, if not multiple of the points you mentioned. Take, for example, me:

IPv6 Capable operating systems: Not really. I run Mac OS X 10.6, which, wile "IPv6 capable" does not have support for a critical IPv6 component DHCPv6.
IPv6 Capable router: Not really. My router does not support IPv6 without some serious hacks. Plus it doesn't support DHCP-PD at all.
IPv6 Capable cable modem: Yes, but only because I just (two months ago) bought a new modem.
IPv6 Capable internet service: Yes, and it's been available from my ISP for a long time.

The major problem with the majority of devices is not the "first level" IPv6 support (e.g. ability to get an IPv6 address via SLAAC) but second level and beyond (DHCPv6, etc). IPv6 is a protocol which is still very young and not "fully" supported by most software/hardware, mostly because it is still changing. It will be a long while before IPv6 has the maturity of IPv4. I just laugh when I read marketing drivel with statements like "IPv6 supported!" because until they provide more details, I just assume that it means it can self-assign a link local address and that's all.

Yes, and there are examples that the Classroom + Khan is an effective model. The Economist has an article describing how the Los Altos school district is using Khan's videos to provide the "dry lecture" which is assigned for homework while classroom time is used for supervised problem solving with the teacher roving about helping any struggling students. That model makes complete sense to me especially since we keep hearing stories about how parent's can't do their kids homework (I've been called in to help my little cousin with her math homework at times when her parents were thoroughly confused).

Try this:

4 USC 1

Reminds me of the Ali G bit where he asks whether they are prepared that someone might crash a train into the White House