How could those rates be compared? I suggest that any data sourced from AA would be invalid, since the source would be a groups of admitted chronic liars. :)

There has always been a large contingent within (and outside of) the AA fellowship that hoped AA would be a tool to get us heathens back into the church. The woman who introduced the founders was one such person, and there have been many throughout the history of the fellowship.

But it hasn't worked, despite the seeming evidence. It is possible, even easy, to attend meetings and practice the program without having to indulge in thinly disguised Christianity. FWIW, it's also possible to be both an Atheist and an AA member.

The often overlooked key is to let each member define what the word "God" means. Its a founding principle

Completely OT, but "sparking debate" is just as likely to get tagged as "troll" or "flamebait". Which is a shame. Much like beauty, its in the eye of the beholder I suppose.

Oh, they aren't totally opposed to the NSA, they just want to be sure the NSA is controllable.

Are you kidding me? The NSA loved this blog post. Hell, they may have even wrote it.

In summary, it said NSA good, politicians in Washington bad. The same politicians who are now getting people riled up, all because they want to take the NSA down a notch or two.

Snowden's "leaks" and the controversy in their wake, are part of a carefully thought-out campaign to take power away from the NSA.

ITM!

Why must it be fear? Why can't the motive simply be "What I post on Slashdot is nobody's business"?

No. Google is CIA, not NSA.

Sorry if this is a dup,

Why yes, there are objective methods. Here's what you should look for:

Are you sure she was the party exhibiting bad judgement? I'm not. I'm of the opinion the "authorities" in this case were the ones guilty if poor judgement.

So "Intelligence" means don't take risk? Do only what is permitted?

"A competent board..." sounds wonderful, but I can't think of one anywhere in the tech industry. Some are less incompetent than others, but where is a good one? Apple? Oracle? Less competent boards, rather competent CEOs.

Control

If true, this is a great example of where the classification system fails. Why in hell would something like that need to be classified? Oh right, to save someone's reputation/feelings.

There is something to be done here, but banning things from China is a simplistic action that is more style than substance. “We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them”. Of course, I've seen little evidence that solving the problem is the goal here.