Schools and libraries must block social networking sites?
US House Resolution 5319, the Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA), was passed by a 410 to 15 vote tonight. If the Resolution becomes law social networking sites and chat rooms must be blocked by schools and libraries or those institutions will lose their federal internet subsidies. (See http://www.techcrunch.com/2006/07/27/us-house-resolution-targeting-myspace-web20-passes-410-15/ ) This seems crazy... I can't believe it passed 410 to 15. Apparently our legislators are afraid that they might be perceived as failing to protect children otherwise? There has got to be a better way. For one thing, it makes no distinction between wide-open sites and those where the site operator provides moderation. And there's a vague notion of visual depictions that are... harmful to minors. In our zeal to protect children, what kind of adults will they end up as? And how are schools and libraries supposed to become aware of, and then block, new social networking sites? What about the sort of distributed social networking systems that are coming (e.g., PeopleAggregator). What is this philosophy that allows Iraqi children to be killed, maimed and starved in the name of freedom while denying American children intellectual freedom in the name of safety? Banning just doesn't work. Never has, never will. I was pleased to see that voting against it were Mike Honda and Zoe Lofgren, who represent Silicon Valley. Nice to see that the locals understand that this is not the way forward. I made my opinions known to them when it first came up in committee. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: RFK Jr. interview
Ahoy,
I'm here late for this conversation.
Pardon me.
On Jul 23, 2006, at 4:00 PM, jdiebremse wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
only the party in
power has been this corrupt and this cynical.
Where have you gone Dan Rostenkowski?
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you!
;-)
I do hope your not equating Rostenkowski kiting postage in the same
realm of nastiness as these Abramoff/Reed/Delay/Republican
mega-kleptos?
Really?!?
Those staunch defenders of Family and American Way were eager to hide
slavery and prostitution in the Marrianis {sp?} Islands for big bucks
to turn tariff inspectors' eyes away even as Made In America was
stamped on tainted goods unduty-bound for the States.
Remember when a blue collar manufacturing job could support a family?
Sure, both parties have corruption. Big discovery, Perry Mason defense
for the bleeding obvious offers Exhibit A. What's truly graph-able now
is the 10x rate so-called Republicans plunder our public common
resources for their privateer gigs. By my thumbnail guesstimate
they've done as much in this last 10 years as Democrats did in three
decades... not adjusting for inflation. This administration used up
the Clinton-Gore surplus cash they came in with and have gone on to
use the family credit card to dig this country deeper into debt than
all previous leadership combined - that's all our presidents, all our
wars, all our debts from two hundred plus years ago to now, surpassed
in a few short no-bid tax-haven years.
Seen the wreckage over at die Heimat-Sicherheit yesterday? According
to a bipartisan congressional investigation some $34.3 b-b-billion in
contract spending alone is missing, misspent boondoggled ... with
over half those Homeland Security contracts no-bid. Amazing what the
hidden hand of the un-Free Market hath wrought. Productivity is
absolutely smokin' {up in a puff} as privatization fever grips the body
politic - feel safer America?
Nick Arnett:
Our leaders are responsible to tell us the truth about all things,
but most of all when they're putting our troops in harm's way,
visiting death and destruction on another people. It doesn't
matter if their intent was the very best, there's
nothing complex about making statements that turn out to be
wrong. Call it an exaggeration,but it's not just a different
point of view, it's wrong.
False. Untrue.
For all your posturing, the word mistake somehow never entered
your lexicon. Or are you seriously suggesting that Bush, Rice,
Rumsfeld, Blair, Aznar, et al. honestly believed that Iraq did not
have WMD's?
I will.
It's one important reason our betters felt OK attacking Iraq, but not
North Korea, or Iran.
As a layman taking in the international news over the years I
distinctly recall the same Saddam son in-law defector that neo-con
Richard Pearle, etc, oft-quoted for WMD voracity had {in the very same
debrief} insisted Hussien had systemically destroyed all those weapons
to prevent an American pretext for trouble. This was not the only
report by any measure and corroborates what the UN inspectors relayed
before Bush had them running for cover from his impending Schlock
Offal campaign. What we've seen is a fine example of feeding emotional
beasts red meat while we were already worried about Anthrax {wherever
did...} and shoe-bombers {LoL}.
head shaking
And so-called conservatives were so full of disdain when Clinton parsed
what is is.
I was a Defense Contractor when 9-11 occurred and by November 2001 I
had army officers telling me they were going to Iraq. Not Afghanistan.
Two months from WTC and these guys were overjoyed at the opps for rank
advancement and anxious to stick it to anybody ass-kicking with
occasional mention of warming up those '91 Gulf War leftovers to finish
them off. This Bush cabal had an overarching Iraq plan going into the
GwB's initial election and let Afghanistan fall over in a heap chasing
their dystopian wet-dreams of oil-igarchy. 9-11 was an emotional
cudgel they adroitly, repeatedly, consciously, delightfully whacked us
with as their buddies pick the pockets of the crowd - to this day.
Unlike Nick, I cannot extend these traitorous shadowmen the courtesy of
a benefit of doubt.
They have known all-too-well what they were doing and mesmerized by
their own echo-chamber chanting were certain that a few decade-old
stockpiles of ponies just HAD to be in there somewhere, if they just
kept digging... and killing.
Well, we're waist-deep in the big muddy and the damn fool sez, 'Press
on'.
And, um, if you agree that they had disarmed, though not in
public, then
don't you agree that our leaders told us things that weren't true
in order to justify this war?
And I suppose that John Kerry, Bill Clinton, and Al Gore *also* told
us those thing in order to justify the war too, huh Nick?
Wow, there's a real unique fall-back position: blame Clinton.
Isn't that hairshirt wearing thin yet?
I
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
On 7/26/06, William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 26 Jul 2006, at 11:15PM, Matt Grimaldi wrote: Wasn't there a Sci-fi book about that? Yes, there was. The main character had to go find out what happened to his planet's shipment of artificial wombs that hadn't arrived, so his adventure took him into the great wide galaxy... _Ethan of Athos_ by Lois McMaster Bujold. Bujold is an excellent writer. That is one of her lighter tales. Artificial wombs are a background thread through out the Miles Vorkosigan series. -- Gary Denton OddsEnds - http://elemming.blogspot.com Easter Lemming Liberal News -http://elemming2.blogspot.com http://www.apollocon.org June 22-24, 2007 I ncompetence M oney Laundering P ropaganda E lectronic surveillance A bu Ghraib C ronyism H ad enough? ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Schools and libraries must block social networking sites?
On Jul 28, 2006, at 9:01 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: What is this philosophy that allows Iraqi children to be killed, maimed and starved in the name of freedom while denying American children intellectual freedom in the name of safety? Banning just doesn't work. Never has, never will. The Stern Father accepts that the price of America's security is high. Better to fight the terrorists in Baghdad than here. Should we just let the terrorists kill our children in their beds? It's plain selfishness to insist that one child should be spared when the world is so full of evil. The Stern Father is not afraid to take away privileges to protect his kids. It is not the government's job to make it possible for kids to post their home addresses and phone numbers and when they'll be home alone so that sick bastards can attack them. It's ridiculous to insist that our taxes be used to provide free access to sites that predators prowl to find fresh blood. Thank God that someone finally knows what to do and is not afraid to do it. Dave Lingua in Letifico Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
David Hobby wrote: Welcome back. I think you're missing Charlie's point. To me, his argument is that it is VERY hard to draw a clear line between things that can turn into adult humans and things that can't. I advise conceding the point, unless you just like to argue for the fun of it. : ) May I propose that you reply: Anything produced by combining a human egg and sperm certainly counts as HUMAN. Other things might also; we'll decide about clones later. ---David (Must--not--argue--with--John... No, it's no use, I can't help but gang up on you: Personally, I think you ARE a long ways down a slippery slope to every sperm is sacred. Sorry.) Perhaps it is an overstatement to say that every sperm is sacred, but human life most definitely is. And if our popular culture no longer values the sacred, or even understands the meaning of the term sacred, we have lost a big part of what makes our own lives valuable. I mean, we think nothing of stepping on ants. But if human life has no especial meaning, why should it be any greater wrong to step on humans in the same fashion? Are not ants just as alive as we are? But if there is some special value to a human life, why draw a line anywhere and say it is unimportant and without value? Certainly there have been men and tyrants throughout human history that would as soon kill as preserve human life. With them killing men was no more than stepping on ants. Maybe they have the right attitude, do you think? If not, maybe we should treasure every human life at every stage of development. And if some sperm, ova and zygotes get the ax, then let it be for some very important reason, not just as a convenience or because we think no more of it than of sterilizing a bacteria colony or, squashing bugs under our feet. We don't need to think of a sperm or zygote as sacred. But we should consider what we do when we cultivate a sentiment among us that babies don't matter and are no more worthy to live than germs, and less worthy to live convicted murderers. Abortion may not be murder, but it is certainly a form of child abuse, a rather terminal one. I'd be willing to bet anything that the hard-hearted men and women who abort unborn children don't love those that are born very much either. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: FEMA disaster for free speech
Nick Arnett wrote: I've read about this before, but it still just astonishes me that Katrina survivors have lost civil rights as a result. They end up living in a community where they are not free to talk to the press unless there is a FEMA representative present. They can't have a landline telephone or cable television. No decorations outside. Our government has done better and can do better, much better. What's really awful about this, to me, is that it works against accountability. Intimidate the people and the media so that the story isn't told. It's not going to work in the long run, but in the short run it is a disaster on top of a disaster. http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2924 When we consistently vote for a police state in this country, why should we be surprised when one rises up in our midst? --JWR ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Good Lord, it's hot
Ronn!Blankenship wrote: At 09:53 PM Sunday 7/23/2006, Nick Arnett wrote: On 7/23/06, Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 08:33 PM Sunday 7/23/2006, Nick Arnett wrote: The last two days, my little indoor/outdoor thermometer has recorded a high temp of 117 degrees. I suppose I should clarify that that was the maximum recorded outsidetemperature. The maximum inside temp was ... good heavens, 97 degrees. In my office! But I think it has mostly been 77-82 in here, with A/C and ceiling fans working all too hard. Now I'm wondering when it hit 97... I suspect it was while the thermometer was on top of my display, which, despite being a flat panel, puts out some heat. Allow me to clarify also: I was talking about glancing at the thermometer part of the clock display that is about a foot or two from my head when I am lying down on numerous occasions during the past couple of weeks or so and noticing it read 94.5°F it's down to 95 now, at 8 pm... .and we still don't care to walk the dog. Nor does the dog seem especially inclined to keep moving much. During the day the cat is similarly disinclined to move much. He has taken to lying on top of things with all four legs, his tail, and most of his head hanging over the edge putting them more in line with the output of the fan. On occasion he shifts position a bit and finds that in the new position enough of his mass is hanging over the edge to make him unstable, so Clunk! he goes to the floor and then jumps back up to try to get into the artificial breeze again. It was nicer today. It rained pretty hard for awhile about lunchtime, although according to the news that plus the 2.5 we got over the weekend (according to my rain gauge) is not enough to get the water use restrictions lifted . . . It is nice and cool here in southeast Alaska. Enjoy your sun bathing. --JWR ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Wealthy couples travel to U.S. to choose baby's sex
Julia Thompson wrote: Gary Denton wrote: He reasoned that the Supreme Court could not make it fertilization as that would make most Americans guilty of murder as birth control pills work by preventing fertilized eggs from attaching to the uterine wall. It would not be the attachment to the uterine wall as that would leave the status of humans born from artificial wombs in doubt, although that technology was not yet perfected. Um, birth control pills are designed to prevent ovulation, not prevent implantation. IUDs are designed to prevent implantation. Some people BELIEVE birth control pills prevent implantation and are hence abortifacients. At a significantly higher dose than normal, that can be the case, but they are designed to prevent ovulation so the whole implantation thing never comes up in the first place. Why would any adult not want to have children? Are they not a source of almost infinite joy in the lives of those who have them? Are they not great treasures? To pass up a chance for a child is like walking by a 100 dollar bill on the sidewalk and not leaning down to pick it up. Only the barren and lonely do not have children. It is a sad situation for any person to be in. Of course this is just my personal feeling, but there was a time when it was shared by a great many others in our nation. That was back when we were reproducing rapidly enough to BE the illegal alien problem instead of HAVING an illegal alien problem. --JWR ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Good Lord, it's hot
At 10:00 PM Friday 7/28/2006, Brother John wrote: It is nice and cool here in southeast Alaska. Enjoy your sun bathing. Enjoy your Christmas. --Ronn! :) I always knew that I would see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed that I would see the last. --Dr. Jerry Pournelle ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
(no subject)
On 29/07/2006, at 12:52 PM, Brother John wrote: Perhaps it is an overstatement to say that every sperm is sacred, but human life most definitely is. And if our popular culture no longer values the sacred, or even understands the meaning of the term sacred, we have lost a big part of what makes our own lives valuable. Totally disagree. The value of humans is in what we do and who we are and our individuality, not in the fact that we're of the same species. And sacred has a religious component that is utterly meaningless to those who are not religious. I mean, we think nothing of stepping on ants. You may not. I do. We don't need to think of a sperm or zygote as sacred. But we should consider what we do when we cultivate a sentiment among us that babies don't matter and are no more worthy to live than germs, and less worthy to live convicted murderers. Again, the constant equating of zygotes to babies. Why can you not see that it's possible to value them both, but differently? Even if you disagree. Abortion may not be murder, but it is certainly a form of child abuse, a rather terminal one. An embryo doesn't seem to be a child. I'd be willing to bet anything that the hard-hearted men and women who abort unborn children don't love those that are born very much either. What utter utter bullshit. Hard-hearted??? It's often the hardest decision someone has to make. A couple with 3 kids who love those kids very much might have a contraception failure. If she becomes pregnant, they might decide to abort for the sake of the kids they already have. They don't love their kids any less. This whole if you loved children, you couldn't consider abortion and if you abort you must not value human life is nasty, insidious and untrue, and it's the worst kind of polarising of the viewpoints that I was talking about earlier. It seems to me that most of the atheists I know are just as ethical as anyone else, and spend a lot of time thinking about social responsibility and equality issues. Charlie ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
