My best wishes to Tina and John.

Now that's dedication!

Cool, the Supreme Court will soon be the Supreme Court. They'll be opening their own web site (if that sentance seemed a bit wierd).

I don't know how much the Chinese paid Mr. Clinton to ignore them, no matter what they do, but I sure hope it was a hefty sum. Ironically, for a man so concerned about his legacy in history, he's virtually guaranteed that he will be reviled by future generations for ignoring every threat posed by China, which composes what, 1/5th of the world population? Frankly, we don't need to be helping them militarily.

The Clinton Administration, too, is very worried about cyber-warfare, but inexplicably not at all worried about the People's Liberation Army.

Digital signatures a threat to privacy?: "The problem for anonymous users is the amount of personal information that is encoded with the signature. For example, a site selling beer online may ask for proof of age. Current digital certificates would not provide that information but would identify the user by name or an ID ... [much later]Currently, two congressional bills will put consumers in the hot seat if their digital signature is used improperly. [National Consumer Law Center?s] Saunders said such laws can only hurt consumers and online businesses both."

Update: Wesley Felter points out the the article incorrectly states what a digital signiture is. *D'oh* should have noticed that myself. Still, I was too busy being in a holy rage about holding the consumers responsible for all screw-ups... yeah, that's it...

Well... it would like to be a boundary breaker...

New "Boundary Breaker": FreeNet.