But they "won" the free market; competed via the rules, undercut their competition, delivered more convenient products for their customers, etc.

Basically the free market tends to generate dominant winners, what's the solution? Gov't regulations? Clearly the free market itself isn't going to do it.

I played Descent using that other controller - the Space Orb 360 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceOrb_360). It took a while to get use to and I was never proficient, but I got to the next level (among my friends that played) when I thought of the orb as a doorknob that directly controlled my ship, do drape my hand over the controller and pretend I was manipulating my ship: press down, move down; rotate forward, spin the ship along an axis, etc.

I bought Descent and sequels off GOG purely for nostalgia. I'd love to see a version like this article describes, procedurally generating tunnel mazes, etc.

I gather your definition of ruled is - have the White House? Are you aware that Congress actually passes the laws?

No, "ruled" is what the Republicans had for 6 years under Bush/Cheney. Control of the WH and both houses of Congress. We can see how awesome that turned out for the country.

Oh please, this isn't any different than being stuck behind someone moving their farm equipment (tractor, giant shredder, whatever) or a mail delivery truck. If you have good visibility you can still pass even if there is a solid center line. I live a mile from a street exactly like that, 2 lanes, solid the entire way, with a ton of mailboxes on it. Cars move around the mailman just fine, or heaven forbid have to wait a few minutes to go around when it is safe.

And at least a bike could pull over in a driveway or wide spot. Mail won't, well they pull over all the time and try to hug the mailbox so they sort of do that.

To be fair, that's because the definition of Libertarianism changes depending on who you ask. As the old joke about economists goes, ask 10 Libertarians what Libertarianism is and you'll get 20 answers.

The one I've heard most often is basically the radical capitalism version from David Friedman, in his book The Machinery of Freedom. If you somehow have superior credentials to Mr. Friedman, well I'd ask what the hell you are doing arguing on Slashdot among many other things.

Anyway, that version is all about a tiny government and replacing more services formerly provided by the government with competition, typically competing corporations. Through the magic of competition, according to him, all that other stuff just sorts out, since if you aren't happy with service X provided by contractor/corporation Y, then seek another bid/payment for services more to your liking. Fire protection, hospitals, national defense, schools, groceries, legal system, etc. all with no regulation or oversight, entirely existing on their reputations in the free market, competing with one another for your business with enlightened self-interest as the check.

Of course, this is totally unworkable in the real world and he admits as much in the closing chapters. Things like how impossible it would be to build national infrastructure without the eminent domain powers of government (e.g. somebody's property is getting "stolen" against their will), how lawsuit happy such a society would be (to people who counter that whatever contract you sign is binding... right, that's why ALL contracts in the business world are NEVER disputed, right?).

All your other variations seem like Libertarians realizing the pure form is BS and theoretical only.

You are basically advocating violent overthrown of the government, a.k.a. treason - "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them..." which is NOT going to convince a lot of people to join your side. Sure, you'll get the retards but having them in charge after the overthrow, assuming it all works out, would be even worse.

For all the flag-waving Constitution spouting anti-current-government rhetorical BS that gets thrown around here, you fundamentally can't have it both ways. You can't declare the Constitution perfect and the Founding Fathers all geniuses and things would be so much better if we'd just follow it to the letter, and ignore the fact that lobbyists and the money in politics and even political parties themselves were STUFF THEY DIDN'T FORSEE that is currently screwing things up. And the ugly truth is lobbyists have a first amendment right to advocate for their position - the fact they are better funded and more organized than a bunch of keyboard online ranting jihadists in their mom's basement isn't a fault of the system. The 1st Amendment says (paraphased) "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the government". Not "except the ones you don't agree with" or "except the ones with more money and organization" or "but not the people who do it professionally a.k.a. get paid a.k.a. lobbyists" or "not when their point of view makes me butthurt".

Think of it this way, gun nuts: what if lobbyists defended their right to petition the government as much as gun-tards defend their 2nd Amendment right to bear arms?

That is the ongoing clusterfuck of money in politics.

So man up and organize, exactly like Lessig is trying to do. That's working WITH the system, which again so many radical-Republitardian-free-market-gun-flag-waving-freedom-liberty-self-reliance-antitax ooze out of their pores constantly. Except when they don't agree, THEN its OK to throw the whole thing out amirite? You get everything you want OR violent overthrow? Democracy ONLY serves your interests? Fuck you.

Or as so nicely put in The Codeless Code:
http://thecodelesscode.com/cas...

Probably? Come on, that skit was from Saturday Night Live.

There is an excellent book about this: http://www.amazon.com/Salt-Sug...

The modern processed food industry, OK the American processed food industry, works hard to make processed foods appetizing by tweaking formulations and experimenting with salt/sugar/fat ratios.

I think the book does a balanced job of presenting the info without blaming the industry (too much). They do make the point the food industry targets convenience and cost, which consumers respond to. It isn't all the food companies fault that their customer base is kinda lazy.

The food industry has tried a few times to make their stuff healthier by reducing additive amounts, trying new tech - one very interesting thing for example is trying to use a different salt crystal, one ground into a different shape that absorbs quicker. It gives the same "pop" with less, due to its different shape. That's pretty cool!

Fascinating concepts... tell me, how do you rationalize your stance with the fact the U.S. was founded by stealing the land from the previous occupants? Are you willing to declare the experiment over and return all lands that were seized by force (i.e. all of them) back to the Native Americans?

That would be ideal, and there's nothing stopping the OpenSSL project from doing that.

OpenBSD is a group that says - we are relying on this code that is totally busted, let's fix it - and they prioritized their OS first. I don't see a problem with that. OpenBSD is already making their work publicly available for free, they don't have the onus to actually provide bullet-proof solid code for every platform on the planet. Turns out other OS hackers need to roll up their sleeves too, and fork over some cash to support the effort.

I don't think they care about how their font is interpreted.

I think this is more like - we're busy actually fixing code and not going to hire a team of web designers to produce a web 2.0 dynamic social-media-hooked-into website with a few links and a bit of text.

I'm not sure anybody is saying give Obama a free pass; some of us are just wondering where the FUCK all you constitutional-waving administration critics were during the Bush years... suddenly crawling out of the woodwork after hibernating 8 year I gather.

Sure, maybe Obama hasn't done everything perfect, but I know one thing: throwing Obama under the bus for what clearly started under Bush/Cheney is 100% bullshit.
It gives the impression of really wanting to hide and/or distance one group of politicians from a lot of crap they don't want to own up to, prefer to ignore or forget.

You want to examine and investigate Obama? I say heck yes, I'd welcome that, as long as the previous administration is similarly cross-examined. Bush/Cheney housed goddamn war criminals by any reasonable measure, and no way in hell is there justice if that whole group walks free, after convincing legion of fucktards like yourself to shift the spotlight. This crap didn't appear out of thin air in Jan 2009.

If I wanted to "easily poison" a water supply, I'd just form a corporation, say one that stores chemicals meant for coal mining, and build my facility near a river that supplies a small city's water supply.

That way, not only would I get limited liability if there was an "unforseen accident", my corporation could declare bankruptcy and dodge all lawsuits.

What happened to Ubuntu was they decided to "differentiate" themselves more, dreaming of monetization and profits. I'm not sure it is working out the way they thought it would.

I like Mint - the version that tracks debian (Linux Mint Debian edition). They do a ~3 month rolling upgrade from debian testing. So I get something a little more current than debian stable on Mint's nice Cinnamon UI. It's ideal except for one little thing - no LVM install by default. For that you need to jump through some hoops but it can be done. Well maybe I'll grab the latest and see if that separation has gone away.