You might want to check that number — you claimed a count per unit volume right after you wrote "per unit area." Perhaps you meant 0.14/1000km^2/year, or 0.27/100km^2/year (0.14^(1/3)^2)/1000^(1/3)^2/year)?

[I've taken the liberty of reflowing your text and eliminating your extraneous spaces preceding terminal punctuation, in order to improve both cohesion and my ability to reply.]

Yes — absolutely I say vote "vote for third parties" (especially to voters in "safe" states (i.e., non-swing states)). I also say "vote your conscience," "voting for 'lesser' evil is still voting for evil," "third parties need your vote — some D/R candidates don't even want you to vote," and "voting for a third party isn't 'wasting your vote; voting D/R (especially in a "safe" state) is wasting your vote."

The third parties are one of our best shots for restoring liberty, and they deserve the support of everyone who values the liberties that the authoritarian D/R Corporate Party has sacrificed on the altars of control, security theater, and corruption. (I usually recommend that people on the left vote Green, and people on the right vote Libertarian — both parties' anti-authoritarian platforms emphasize the restoration of civil liberties. It's a recommendation I encourage others to espouse if they like, as it conceals no left/right agenda.)

I'm a left/socialist-libertarian, and I disagree. The Libertarian Party's last presidential candidate — Gary Johnson — was an excellent choice for them; a completely sane, former two-term governor of New Mexico. As a left-libertarian, I was in agreement with nearly all of his social and foreign policy positions.

I congratulate you for your unusual recognition of this for what it is (a distraction) — but it also illustrate the vast majority of issues on which the D/R factions of The Corporate Party are in agreement, as well as serving as divisive mechanism of control of the populace, via "divide & conquer" and by dissuading us from uniting against the government or their draconian policies. This strategy failed recently, in a wonderful coming-together between left and right for the "Restore the Fourth" rally in DC to oppose mass-surveillance. Hopefully, this is the beginning of a trend that will continue all the way to the voting booths in 2016.

I've been force-seeding this PBS Frontline: "Two American Families" episode since the day it aired.

(I also indefinitely force-seed some other Frontline episodes: one on domestic surveillance ("Spying on the Home Front;"") bullshit forensic pseudoscience (accepted in most US courts as incontrovertible truth) and its life/family-shattering consequences ("The Real CSI;" and the counterproductive "War on Drugs" and its life/family-shattering consequences ("The House I Live In" (Independent Lens; not Frontline.)

(Going further off-topic, I also indefinitely seed torrents for which I've become the sole-seeded, as I feel a responsibility to maintain stewardship — to delete them would be tantamount to burning the last copy of a book extant in only one library.)

The torrent is one file, and the video is 720p, x264/AAC MP4, 1.64GB. The hash is: 8AA420C27E1829A762DBBB6FA72898587AE2FE71

HTTPS .torrent Link

To Jer: Sorry for "flame-baiting" you (in "public," if you will,) on your apparent inability/unwillingness to post replies that have fuck-all to do with the parent's comment. To no avail, I thought I might coax you into providing an explanation for this consistent and extremely irritating habit of yours. Oddly, you seem to be able to reply contextually in JEs, just not under stories. Is this practice of yours meant to annoy only the parent poster with irrelevant "Reply to [post] by Jeremiah Cornelius" messages, or meant to annoy everyone, or what? You must have some explanation — why not share it? Maybe everyone could reap the benefit(s) you do from posting "replies" to arbitrarily-selected posts.

I think it's too early to tell, as James Gosling just lacks the experience most people are used to from those like him — there's still a lot left for him to learn from his father, industry veteran Jim Goose. Once his father retires, though, I think James will get to chance to really spread his wings, and we'll probably see some very good ideas of his take flight. For now, though, I think he's just a bit green around the beak.

I don't disagree, but Wikipedia has an article about this "paper terrorism."

I haven't seen a definition of so-called "terrorism" that suggests it has anything to do with the things people are afraid may kill them. Otherwise, that would seem to suggest that (for example) acrophobes are afraid of "tightrope terrorism." :o)

If you look at Wikipedia's list of nations' judicial body counts for 2011, you'll see a list of nations that I think most would probably agree are despotic/tyrannical police states and/or nations in which the rule of law is paid lip-service, at best.

100 nations (51% of UN member states) have abolished it, and more have stopped using it. I think this trend shows that — as was the case with universal suffrage, slavery, and so on — the rest are just on the wrong side of history. I think that by the end of the century, this ultimate deprivation of human rights will be banned worldwide, so long as tyranny doesn't prevail.

Operative term where where? Your post has fuck-all to do with the post you replied to. Stick to writing your your JEs — you seem to be able to find the "post" button when you write those.

I suppose you're right — it doesn't take me long to forget about the (b)ads I never download or lay eyes on.

Thank you. :o)

I remember that in an exchange with mcgrew, you put forth a self-developed technique, which you'd named and detailed on your website (which isn't working for me today — though I'm experiencing DNS failures and timeouts in recent days). All I can remember is that it involved an increasingly-adversarial arrangement imposed upon the responsible entity, it was less adversarial than "zero-day exploit" but more adversarial than "responsible disclosure," and it was quite persuasive. Do you remember it, (and if so, can you please recite it here)? Have you abandoned your idea? I hope you haven't — it was certainly preferable, I think, to "responsible disclosure," though I can't remember the level of risk it exposed the reporter to.

Thank you. :o)

I agree, but cold fjord didn't say he saw the post in its initial state. It displayed the same way for me, in a moderated/modified state.

Snowden, NSA, and Bitcoin.

If you're talking about coverage via the "big six" US corporate news media, coverage depends partially on the political and economic interests of the parent corporation, and partially on the projected profitability of the coverage. The former could be determined somewhat by the legal bribes a corporation has given to political candidates. I'm not interested, as I don't share interests with any of those corporations. Thus, I don't get any of my news from them, instead preferring mostly foreign outfits with a smaller stake in determining what is fit for someone in the US to read about.

I don't know, but maybe if the US hadn't participated in overthrowing Libya's government, there would be a police department there to investigate murder cases. Other than "many dead, many injured during protests/riots/attacks coinciding with anniversary of 9/11 attack on US," I remember and care little about those small uprisings through 2011-2012, except for my continual belief that the US should quit meddling in the affairs of sovereign states in which a US presence is unwanted by the majority of the populace.

There are other misdeeds, crimes, and atrocities being committed by the Obama administration that I'm far more concerned with right now, like the indiscriminate mass execution of civilians abroad via remote control (Obama: "I'm getting very good at killing people."); the mass surveillance of myself, fellow citizens, and fellow innocents across the globe; the ongoing suspension of habeus corpus under the NDAA 2012; banksters walking free, while incentivized to crash the economy for fun & profit again, as spending for assistance for this nation's most-in-need is cut; the "most transparent administration in US history" waging a war to punish/silence whistle-blowers throughout the federal government and military; and so on and so forth.

Are you concerned about any of those things? Do you consider any of them more important than the attack that occurred in 2012?

When I read about something bad that's happened, my foremost concerns are: "In what way is this event affecting the lives of vulnerable civilians now, and in what ways may this event affect the course of future events that may cause them and others harm in the future?" When you read about something bad that's happened, be it the passing of bad legislation or some natural or intentional harm affecting many people, what are your foremost concerns?

I believe it was meant to foster a discussion about NSA's post-Snowden propaganda campaign, but we don't seem to be having that discussion, as far as I've read.

It's not a bug; mozumder's starting score is -1, which is caused by having poor "karma," which is caused by being down-modded more than up-modded.