I think this article misses the point. It has nothing to do with launch schedules at the Cape or politics. This has everything to do with recovering the first stage. Look at a map. He has to launch and recover in U.S. territory in order to to comply with U.S. arms export regulations. If this is true, pickup of the first stage in Florida is not much of an option. But Puerto Rico is perfectly position for a powered landing of the first stage when doing an equatorial launch from the Brownsville Texas area.

I predict the next announcement will be a landing site in Puerto Rico for recovery of the first stage. My question is, does he even need permission to land in Puerto Rico? Can't he just get permission to land at an airfield? We aren't talking about a launch, just a powered landing. I'm sure there would be regulatory hurdles, but nothing like that needed to build a launch site.

Ya, my thoughts exactly. Sounds like a hacker challenge to me. I'll bet it is cracked in less than 3 days from this posting on Slashdot. Anyone else wanna make a bet?

Just so you know, if you are a U.S. citizen you are taxed on your income anywhere in the world. It does not matter if you leave the country or not, or if you use the public services. The U.S. government will still come after you if they discover that you have earned income overseas. Most countries are not like this, but as I recall there are a few others. Even changing citizenship may not be an option. If they determine that you changed citizenship to avoid taxes they can deny you entry back into the U.S. on those grounds. And now with the current economic situation, the U.S. is pressing hard, along with the E.U., to force banks around the world to report all financial transactions, stripping away any privacy you may have had in overseas banking before.

I read the article and while some of the comparisons between socialism/communism and capitalism may be a bit overstated, the real point I think he was making was that of a new paradigm that is neither, that of collective social action that is not governmental at all. It transcends the traditional thinking that we have. Open source has certainly paved the way for this type of collective thinking and organization. And social networking sites, if not abused, have the potential to enable collective planning and action that may move more deeply into the political arena allowing greater participation in politics. Unfortunately, I fear there may be darker side to this as these sites can also be abused. Knowing what you believe, your political affiliations and beliefs and your network of friends and family could be a dangerous tool if held by a totalitarian government. I for one am fearful of putting too much info on these types of sites as I have no way of knowing how this information may be used in years to come by the government or by future employers, corporations, etc. And no, I don't wear a tinfoil hat.

I think the closing paragraph is the most enlightening:

"We underestimate the power of our tools to reshape our minds. Did we really believe we could collaboratively build and inhabit virtual worlds all day, every day, and not have it affect our perspective? The force of online socialism is growing. Its dynamic is spreading beyond electronsâ"perhaps into elections."

I think this will be the inevitable result of of what we have started as the "open source" revolution. That which we are dong in online communities will soon spread and even dominate into the real world organizations and social structures. And while it looks like this author focuses on the positive aspects, which I think are many, we should also consider at least some of the negative consequences this may lead to in our society. If we collectively think about these issues now, maybe we can guide this movement and avoid some of the potential nasty pitfalls.