The laws that will have to be passed in order to comply with this treaty will be abused, just like similar laws have been before:

http://computerssuck.wordpress.com/2009/04/08/acta/

full disclosure: shamelessly promoting my own blog post

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/david_keith_s_surprising_ideas_on_climate_change.html

He brings up exactly this kind of geoengineering solution, talks about the good parts and the bad parts and the side effects of the idea. Then he suggests even if we don't do it, maybe China (or someone else) will do it in 50 years and we won't be able to stop them at that point. And we won't even have a good idea on what our response should be if they are planning to do it, since we won't have any idea of the consequences for a particular method.

He concludes with the idea that whether geoengineering is a good idea or not, we should start thinking the various ways it could be accomplished now, rather than waiting, even if the purpose of thinking about it is to decide not to do it.

So does this guy representing the NZ RIAA do the work out of the NZ consulate in NYC, on the same floor as the "All Asian Massage?"

Also, aside from Bret and Jemaine, there's just Steve who should be worried about copyright infringement, since there's only 3 musicians from NZ. Although, it seems like Jemaine and Bret could use all the free publicity they can get.

O'ahu is about 50 miles across, which is about 157 miles in circumference. That would be a little over 78 miles per hour. On a bike. You must have ginormous leg muscles!

That is the major reason I mentioned that it may have to be a government agency, so that the private firm
wouldn't be able to simply pass the bad expereience buck along. Of course, that eliminates competition to
go with a central system.

Maybe this is an idea: companies don't outsource to one place, but to several (all?) through a common
interface to keep organizational ovehead down. The customer service companies would have to pass
security checks an such-like (lwt's not get bogged down on such details). Thus, consumers could
call any of the service companies as front ends, and will naturally gravitate towards ones that provide
a better experience, and the companies being served by the industries pay by number of customers
serviced.

Seems tough to me, personally, to balance the competing forces here. Take returns for example:
as the seller, I really don't want you to return soemthing unless absolutely necessary, but as a
customer I would like to do so with impunity. Anybody have any ideas or insight as to how companies
themselves handle these sorts of competing drives?

Maxim