I seriously doubt that there is anyone here who honestly believes in any good outcome of this initiative. Cut copyright terms? Implement saner policies? Right... what, there are communists in that Committee?

I think we really need a "+1 Scary Insightful Funny" mod here.

Orthodox Christianity had strong support from the government and KGB in the later Soviet years - from 70-s onward almost every high-level church hierarch had also been an KGB officer. On the other hand, Soviet ideology was rapidly becoming a religion on its own - with the cult of undead Lenin-Osiris, heavy symbolism and obscure irrational ideology. It was so backward and unnatural that it never took off for real, but it was enforced on every citizen of USSR from the very birth (and I'm speaking literally here - red stars and Lenin's portraits were mandatory in all clinics, nurseries and kindergartens. When powers-to-be realized that it doesn't work, they fell back to (secretly) supporting Christianity. By the 1990 it was full-on religious restoration throughout all of Union - and Party was behind it, no doubt. The rest is history.

One can say that it is true only while there is someone who somehow perceives the concepts of "triangle" and even "property". So unless you can say that all Psyche is supernatural, properties of a triangle is not a supernatural entity, it's just a psychical object - as natural as any physical object, just of the other nature (pun not intended).

I think we all know answer to this one, right, my fellow meatbag?

Even when Tokamak was introduced for the first time, it was obvious that idea of using fusion process as a heating element (using steam or other inefficient way to convert heat to electricity) is simply laughable. Laser-based fusion is horrendous even as a concept - it's as barbaric as trying to create mass transit using 19-th century tram carriage propelled by small-scale nuclear blasts. There is absolutely no engineering elegance in it, even less than in the first-generation (fission) nuclear plants.

I find Focus Fusion or some other non-billion-budget projects much more appealing - not because they have more chances to succeed (most of them don't), but because they represent something new. New technologies, new designs, new way of thinking at least. Compare NASA and SpaceX - yes, latter would not be possible without the former, but for now our real chance to progress towards easily accessible space-travel lies with (comparatively) small private companies, not with some inefficient hulking money-consuming monstrosity. Of course I would be glad to any form of cheap fusion energy, or any form of "consumer-grade" space-travel, but for now my hopes don't lie with NIF or NASA.

His name is James, James Cameron
The bravest pioneer
No budget too steep, no sea too deep
Who's that?
It's him, James Cameron
James, James Cameron explorer of the sea
With a dying thirst to be the first
Could it be? Yeah that's him!
James Cameron

Oh yeah!

I have a faint feeling, judging by comments, that we have a major case of 'whoosh' here.

Hmm... people, who used to burn factories, were they from the police or army? Were they backed up by the full extent of the law, publicity and all-powerful corporations? I don't think that Industrial Revolution and Luddites are correct analogy to modern times and reactional forces like RIAA.

So, MakerBot vs IP holders (patent and even copyright owners). Hmm, so hard to predict who will be supported and protected by courts, media, politicians, regulating agencies and so on. So hard.

Oh, and imagine something even more interesting - automation of accounting and legal departments, for example? IBM's Watson with a lawyer's database - not a lawyer itself, but potentially an extremely powerful tool in the hands of, say, RIAA? Apple? Monsanto? Hundreds or thousands of cases with only a handful of people to manage and represent company in courts? That's an interesting thought, don't you think?

Who is more likely to party - C*O's of Monsanto or people who own tractors and farms and being sued out of their pants by said Monsanto? It's not a question of automation per se, it's a question of wealth, power and sociopathy. And robots are tipping the balance faster and faster - imagine if corporations could automate lawyers?

Yeah, I've read it, liked the plot, but it's still a very schematic story that lacks really interesting characters (of course, that's even good for this kind of story - easier to identify oneself with the main character). But Vonnegut's "Player Piano" hit me much harder when I've read it - I think that ending of the book contains one of the most frightening insights into the human nature. Given such chance we would destroy ourselves gladly, meeting our slow, but inevitable extinction with a smile. Well, let's hope that some new frontier emerges before everyone who is not happy with our current direction is... excluded from the equation.

Ah, winter makes me pessimistic...

Actually, I was trying to say the same - for me "to show how are you doing something" is not at all equal to "to do said something". And the moment these people would feel that they can cut out the costs of that show - poof! It's gone. Hell, in such future the world of "Transmetropolitan" would look like a slightly chaotic Utopia.

Take any parasite - is it an enemy to its host? Or even simpler - do you feel any strong emotions towards all the animals who were killed to become the contents of your sandwich? They aren't clueless, but "enemy" is too strong a word for them - they consider common people only as food for their ambitions, as some common resource to fuel their careers. Only equals can be enemies, and they do not feel equal to "the people" in any way. We'll have to come up with some other term.