What do wing nut freedom blogs have to do with the facts of the case? Mr. Bundy, family, and staff forbade the carrying of firearms by the people on his property.

Eric Parker wants to lay on a public bridge on a public road and aim weapons at people, he should probably be arrested. He had nothing to do with Mr. Bundy's situation other than a misguided attempt to "help". He should not have been there, and he should not have taken up arms.

Please show evidence he was asked to be on that road by anyone actually involved in this measly $300,000 civil case. (Yes, $300,000. The $1M number bandied about by the "rule of law" whiners, is after exorbitant "penalties" that any business would make disappear upon settlement with a good lawyer.)

We have hundreds if not thousands of tax dodgers who owe far more than Mr. Bundy. Al Sharpton, comes to mind. $3.5M. He gets the highest "law enforcement" appointee (who illegally ran guns to murderers in Mexico by forcing law-abiding gun stores to sell them, I might add... great law enforcement there...) to speak at his conventions.

Can you find an IRS Top Ten Most Wanted list? I can't. Probably has something to do with who's on it, and which politicians they pay off. FBI Top Ten Most Wanted, no problem. IRS? Nope.

If you're so concerned about Mr. Bundy's back taxes, perhaps you should get an army to surround Al Sharpton's house with 200 rifle-carrying soldiers.

The "BLM Action" currently has an estimated cost of $2M to the U.S. taxpayer. Let's see... if I were asked if I wanted $2M spent to bother a rancher in the Nevada desert for a $330K bill... nope. Not worth it.

Someone else wants that land, and someone at BLM ordered up an Army. Interesting how we haven't heard who that was yet, isn't it? Who at BLM has the authority to assemble a standing army? I'd like to know.

Such veracity. Didn't you claim that Mr. Bundy had none? Pot. Kettle. Black. I see.

I don't care who's egging it on. I've been listening to only interviews with the man and his family, themselves.

Those turning it into a 2A issue, are nut bags on both sides. Including you.

If anything it was a 1A issue... "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

And possibly a 3A issue... "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."

What "Hannity" or any other idiot turns it into is none of my concern as a Citizen. What is my concern as a Citizen is, is whether or not I find it appropriate for Federal armies to steal private property and show up in military dress and fully armed as a military to do so.

Since we're an Oligarchy and headed worse in that direction, my answer is no.

If you believe that, and I don't...

We as a People don't send 200 armed agents to collect $300K bills. Nor do I have any interest in funding such.

Staged. Bundy and family banned carrying of weapons on their land and made folks disarm. The photo from the bridge is a single photo, no one can find any attribution for it, nor Copyright notice (interesting, considering all of the outlets that are using it, they apparently don't have permission of the photographer under the law), and hell... it's the world of Photoshop. The *key* photo for all the whiny media outlets seems to have appeared from nowhere with no attribution.

Which even if true, means it's inept to send 200 armed soldiers to collect. That's not how we handle debts in the U.S.

If it were, we'd have surrounded Al Sharpton's house with 200 armed agents many years ago for the $3.5M in back-taxes he owes. And we probably wouldn't want the top law-enforcement person in the country speaking at his events.

BLM already ran off over 50 other ranchers in the area. Pretty sure Bundy's "damage" was a lot less than the 50 other ranches combined in the late 80s and early 90s when they started claiming the land was theirs to manage instead of the State of Nevada's.

His family was using it 76 years before BLM existed. Incorrect.

Bundy's family was using it 78 years before BLM even existed. Incorrect.

I think we need to take a serious look at the "many eyes" theory because of this. Apparently, there were no eyes on the part of parties that did not wish to exploit the bug for close to two years. And wasn't there just a professional audit by Red Hat that caught another bug, but not this one?

I have to say I'm even less confident in the plan to couple it to DNSSEC.

Sure. We're better. But we need to be even better than that.

I'd say more than just the "community". We have a great many companies that incorporate this software and generate billions from the sales of applications or services incorporating it, without returning anything to its maintenance.I think it's a sensible thing to ask Intuit, for example: "What did you pay to help maintain OpenSSL?". And then go down the list of companies.

OK guys. We've promoted Open Source for decades. We have to own up to our own problems.

This was a failure in the Open Source process. It is just as likely to happen to closed source software, and more likely to go unrevealed if it does, which is why we aren't already having our heads handed to us.

But we need to look at whether Open Source projects should be providing the world's security without any significant funding to do so.

Jeff, I'm sorry that you're paying more. I'm envious that your state is implementing single-payer, though! California considers and rejects the bill every session, so far.

MVP itself is not-for-profit. Interesting that they think the pool in the two states they focus on is now that much more expensive. I can't imagine why.

Thanks

Bruce