[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Indexes: Main | Date | Thread | Author

Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Continuation of Doug's Colloquium (NewFrontiers in Collective Problem Solving?)

Hi John.    (01)

The short answer to the "why" in your first sentence is that I am
incompetent to effectively digest, evaluate and sort the information
(all of which needs to be done before writing can begin) and do so on
top of other things I have to do.     (02)

I do appreciate your contributions, but I have a bandwidth problem that
prevents me from making good use of them - at this time. I am looking
for solutions while in the meantime giving priority to Doug's Bootstrap
site and the digesting of his colloquium lectures.     (03)

Henry    (04)

On Sat, 2003-01-25 at 19:58, John J. Deneen wrote:
>   Henry,
> I agree, but why was there no interest concerning the following pointer?
>         * [ba-unrev-talk] Converging Technologies for Improving Human
>           Performance & The Human Cognome Project
>            <http://www.bootstrap.org/lists/ba-unrev-talk/0209/msg00092.html#nid01>
> Nevertheless, I believe we need to "improve to improve" our collective 
> problem-solving capabilities (i.e., CODIAK - the COncurrent Design, 
> Integration, and Applied Knowledge), since journalists 
> covering crime-based news and politics are already Weblogging or 
> Blogging "urgent and complex problems" online and syndicating the info 
> in XML to others.
> For instance:
>         1) TalkLeft <Syndicate this site (XML)
>         <http://www.talkleft.com/index.rdf>>, the on-line source for
>         liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news. 
>         TalkLeft was developed by Denver-based criminal defense attorney
>         Jeralyn Merritt <http://www.lawyers.com/merritt/> as a companion
>         site to CrimeLynx® <http://www.crimelynx.com/>, the Internet's
>         premier criminal law resource.  TalkLeft is not a neutral site.
>         Our mission is to intelligently and thoroughly examine issues,
>         candidates and legislative initiatives as they pertain to
>         constitutional rights, particularly those of persons accused of
>         crime. Talkleft is intended for the public, journalists covering
>         crime-based news and politics, policy makers and of course, the
>         criminal defense community. <http://www.talkleft.com/about.html>
>         2) EBlogging At Altercation Today
>         <http://www.msnbc.com/news/752664.asp?cp1=1>
>         3) Posting URL's In the Comments, etc.
>         <http://www.talkleft.com/archives/001974.html#001974> 
> More specifically, a pointer to 
> <http://www.talkleft.com/archives/002001.html#002001> shows how people 
> are using Internet to expose how the IRS commits fraud, but needs OHS 
> technology or at least UC Berkeley's Multivalent Document technology 
> (see: Robust Intra-document Locations 
> <http://www9.org/w9cdrom/312/312.html>) for collaborating on the actual 
> court opinion and factual evidence, including other case studies that 
> are publicly available in the adobe postscript format (.pdf).
>         "A federal appeals court has ruled the Internal Revenue Service
>         committed fraud and acted deceptively
>         <http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20030119_1305.html> after
>         giving secret deals to two pilots in return for their testimony
>         against 1,300 other pilots who had bought into the same tax
>         shelters."
>         "The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday overturned a
>         previous ruling against the pilots who were found guilty of tax
>         evasion and were ordered to pay more than $2 billion in penalties.
>         In order to remedy the IRS misconduct, the court ordered that
>         all the pilots should receive the same deal that one of the
>         pilots received."
>         The case is CIR v. Dixon and you can access the opinion here.
>         <http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/294160FF1751D1B888256CB10004A899/$file/0070858.pdf?openelement>
>         Posted Sunday :: January 19, 2003 | TrackBack
>         <http://www.talkleft.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi?__mode=view&entry_id=2001>
>         <http://www.talkleft.com/archives/002001.html#002001>
> In addition, are saying:
>         1) "Internet scrambles the political deck by giving capable
>         people who wouldn't otherwise have access to audiences a
>         viable communications medium and by giving people who have
>         common interests and ideology a forum for association."
>          2) These kinds of undertakings have the potential for
>         simultaneously making the political process more transparent and
>         holding politicians accountable.
>         3) Internet also has the potential for making mainline media
>         more accountable."
>         Thus:
>         "Beginning at the first conference, participating researchers
>         have pooled authorities, working papers and the like in
>         electronic format. By May 2002 we had approximately 600
>         megabytes of material that was in subject, type and contributor
>         folders. I concluded that for it to be usable, the material had
>         to be organized in a usable form. Consequently, since October
>         I've dedicated considerable time to the project.
>         I began by establishing classifications: Privately produced
>         memoranda, court decisions (particularly U.S. Supreme Court),
>         Statutes at Large, United States Code, Code of Federal
>         Regulations, etc. The key utilization instrument is an annotated
>         Table of Contents that briefly explains the reason for each item
>         included in the authorities. Once we get far enough along with
>         that aspect of the project we will generate a comprehensive
>         subject index.
>         While it will be impossible to generally distribute the compiled
>         research, we can post the table of contents and index plus a
>         considerable amount of privately generated memoranda. Those
>         doing work in any given area can then download most authorities
>         listed in the table of contents from Internet sources that don't
>         copyright material. For example, recent editions of the Statutes
>         at Large, the United States Code, the Code of Federal
>         Regulations and the Federal Register are available on the
>         Government Printing Office web page. The Internal Revenue
>         Manual, IRS publications and the like are available from the IRS
>         web page; the Treasury Financial Manual is available on the
>         Financial Management Services web page; the Department of
>         Justice web page has the United States Attorney's Manual and
>         sundry other important manuals and publications; the General
>         Accounting Office, the Office of Management and Budget, the
>         Office of Personnel Management and others make other important
>         resources available. There are several free and/or inexpensive
>         sources for court decisions.
>         The index will be constructed to address what is important to
>         the constitutional restoration & tax honesty movements. What is
>         important to us? ...Enduring loss, humiliation and injustice is
>         a trial that tests character; surviving and having to put life
>         back together after traumatic loss is yet another test. But we
>         need survivors rather than casualties as survivors will
>         eventually stem the tide."
> Similarly, in context with ba-unrev-talk, I was hoping someone would 
> make comments about the following assertions and conclusion by Prof. Horn:
>         How knowledge maps can improve public policy discussions
>         "Very preliminary evaluations show that knowledge maps can
>         contribute significantly to better knowledge management in
>         complex policy discussion and decisions. They:
>         . show the logical and visual structure of the emerging
>         arguments, viewpoints, empirical data, scenarios, trends, policy
>         options (making communication more effective) and help keep the
>         big picture from being obscured by the details.
>         . enable presuppositions to surface and be carried along with
>         the debate or made a subject of the debate (enabling a richer
>         discourse to take place without getting off track).
>         . allow more rapid analysis of the subject matter by committees
>         and policy makers
>         . help structure the flow of complex discussions (so that
>         meetings are more productive and less time consuming), enabling
>         rapid integration of diverse points of view.
>         . increase an appreciation for the complexity of the issues the
>         group is addressing, permitting faster learning by experts and
>         the general public.
>         . are visually appealing, colorful, and incorporate useful
>         metaphors and images that encapsulate values and attitudes.
>         . enable participants who have missed meetings to catch up quickly.
>         . increase the chance of participants talking to each other, not
>         past each other, bringing faster consensus in meetings.
>         . help participants to keep working on the problems using the
>         Web while separated by geographical distance."
>         Conclusion
>         "I am convinced that the knowledge maps I've described can make
>         a substantial contribution to a worrying condition of present
>         day America -- the fact that more and more people feel left out
>         of democratic public debate to the point of giving up on it. Too
>         many people lack the ability to follow what are often highly
>         arcane and complex discussions.
>         The life of our republic would be very different if, for the
>         next generation, some foundations use the knowledge map
>         methodology to make informed deliberation available to all
>         Americans."
> If you missed the pointer, then please review some of these interesting 
> (CODIAK) topics at the following URLs:
>         Knowledge Mapping for Complex Social Messes ( A presentation to
>         the "Foundations in the Knowledge Economy" at the David and
>         Lucile Packard Foundation, July 16, 2001)
>         Social Messes
>         "They've been called "wicked problems." (by Horst Rittle)
>         They've been called "ill-structured problems." (by Ian Mitroff)
>         I call them "social messes." (after Russell Ackoff, who simply
>         refers to them as "messes") What they are not is merely
>         problems. Problems have solutions. Messes do not have
>         straightforward solutions. Social messes
>         . are more than complicated and complex. They are ambiguous.
>         . contain considerable uncertainty - even as to what the
>         conditions are, let alone what the appropriate actions might be
>         . are bounded by great constraints and are tightly
>         interconnected, economically, socially, politically,
>         technologically
>         . are seen differently from different points of view, and quite
>         different worldviews
>         . contain many value conflicts
>         . are often a-logical or illogical
>         They are the messes of drugs and gangs and ethnic conflict and
>         international crime syndicates, messes that have strong links to
>         civil wars in Columbia and the international small arms trade
>         and globalization and the rapid advance of technology. They are
>         also the more local messes, such as a couple I have been working
>         on."
>         They will be visual. Here are some examples.
>         < http://www.macrovu.com/CCTHowItWork1.html >
>         Think Link, Invent, Implement, and Collaborate! Think Open!
>         Think Change! Think Big! (Keynote Speech Honoring Douglas
>         Engelbart on Doug Engelbart Day in the state of Oregon, at
>         Oregon State University, January 24, 2002)
>         Beginning to Conceptualize the Human Cognome Project
>         <http://www.stanford.edu/~rhorn/index.html>
>         TO AVOID THEM
>         < http://www.stanford.edu/~rhorn/artclTrapsOfFormalLogic.html
>         <http://www.stanford.edu/%7Erhorn/artclTrapsOfFormalLogic.html> >
>         Using Argumentation Analysis to Examine History and Status of a
>         Major Debate in Artificial Intelligence and Philosophy
>         (Downloadable Figure 1 .
>         <http://www.stanford.edu/%7Erhorn/images/ArtclISSAConf/Figure1.pdf>)
>         (Downloadable Figure 2.
>         <http://www.stanford.edu/%7Erhorn/images/ArtclISSAConf/Figure2.pdf>)
>         <http://www.stanford.edu/~rhorn/images/ArtclISSAConf/ARTLCISSAConf.pdf>
>         "Our project has been designing and developing highly visual
>         "cognitive maps" that facilitate the management and navigation
>         through major public policy issues. These maps have benefits for
>         policy analysts and decision makers similar to those of
>         geographic maps. They provide patterned abstractions of policy
>         landscapes that permit the decision makers and their advisors to
>         consider which roads to take within the wider policy context.
>         Like the hundreds of different projections of maps (e.g. polar
>         or Mercator), they provide different ways of viewing issues and
>         their backgrounds. They enable policy makers to drill down to
>         the appropriate level of detail. In short they provide an
>         invaluable information management tool. These maps can be
>         displayed both on paper and on web browsers."
>         <http://www.stanford.edu/~rhorn/MapPublicPolicyDescript.html>
>         Smart Sensors, Collaborative Sensemaking
> So, instead of calling our effort the "Continuation of Doug's 
> Colloquium", let's just simply call it "New Frontiers in Collective 
> Problem Solving (i.e., CODIAK - the COncurrent Design, Integration, and 
> Applied Knowledge [of Shaping Code])."
> Other examples:
>     * Shaping Code
>         Abstract:
>         "This article addresses how society shapes code. The term
>         "code," as we use it, consists of the hardware and software
>         components of information technologies. Code is increasingly
>         being sought as a regulatory mechanism in conjunction with or as
>         an alternative to law for addressing societal concerns such as
>         crime, privacy, intellectual property protection, and
>         revitalizing democratic discourse. This article analyzes how
>         various societal institutions, that create code differentially,
>         influence the technical and social characteristics of the code
>         that is developed by them. The article also provides
>         recommendations on how society can intervene and proactively
>         shape the development of code to vindicate societal concerns and
>         preferences." ...
>         <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID328920_code020923630.pdf?abstractid=328920>
>     * ``Imagistic Reasoning."
>         "Imagistic reasoning is a new paradigm for understanding sensory
>         data and controlling environment based on the construction,
>         interpretation, and manipulation of image-like, analog
>         representations of physical systems. The reasoning is primarily
>         perceptual and only secondarily symbolic. In the past decade, we
>         have built several imagistic reasoners that perform at an expert
>         level on scientific problems that defy current analytical
>         methods, including helping us solve open problems. We
>         hypothesize that much of scientific reasoning is imagistic and
>         that this reasoning is best automated by imagistic algorithms.
>         The classical artificial intelligence architecture---a central
>         deductive reasoner operating on symbolic predicates delivered by
>         low-level perceptual preprocessors---is unsuitable for these
>         tasks. Imagistic reasoners are faster and more efficient because
>         they trade many inferences for sensing and action. Their
>         behavior is easier to understand and debug because they deal
>         directly with geometric structures and their interactions."
>         <http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/insight/abs.html#acm-survey-95>
>         * Spatial Aggregation: ontologies, algorithms, and programming
>           tools to support reasoning
>         Tutorial:
>         F. Zhao and C. Bailey-Kellogg, ``Intelligent Simulation.'' AAAI
>         Tutorial Forum, 1998. Slides handout (2 per page)
>         <http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/insight/papers/aaai98-tutorial-handout.ps.gz>.
>         "I have been developing ontologies, algorithms, and programming
>         tools to support reasoning about distributed data arising from
>         many data mining and control applications. Together with Chris
>         Bailey-Kellogg, Ken Yip, Xingang Huang, and Ivan Ordonez, I have
>         developed the Spatial Aggregation Language
>         <http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/insight/sa.html> (SAL) and have
>         applied it to applications such as distributed control
>         optimization, weather data analysis, and spatio-temporal
>         diffusion-reaction pattern analysis. SAL 1.2
>         <http://www2.parc.com/spl/members/zhao/sal-code.html>, a
>         MATLAB-like rapid prototyping tool (C++ libs, interpretive
>         environment) for scientific data mining and control
>         applications, is available to the research community and has
>         been used by a group of Stanford students for class projects in
>         CS329
>         <http://www2.parc.com/spl/members/zhao/stanford-cs329/index.html>
>         that I taught in Fall 1998."
>             * SAL: papers
>               <http://www2.parc.com/spl/members/zhao/pubs.html>,
>               applications
>               <http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/insight/research.html>,
>               software
>               <http://www2.parc.com/spl/members/zhao/sal-code.html>, and
>               documentation
>               <http://www2.parc.com/spl/members/zhao/stanford-cs329/sal-doc/index.html>
>             * Automated phase-space analysis and control synthesis
>               <http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/insight/buckling.html>
>             * A maglev nonlinear control prototype
>               <http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/insight/maglev.html>
>             * Intelligent simulation
>               <http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/insight> (Project INSIGHT
>               at Ohio State)
>         UC Berkeley's CITRIS project, including some info on another
>         related wireless SensIT project at UCSD/UCLA, etc.
>         <
>         http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~demmel/CITRIS_FCM_110602/Demmel_FCM_110602_Overview.ppt
>          >
>         < http://dtsn.darpa.mil/ixo/sensit/index.htm >
>         < http://dtsn.darpa.mil/ixo/sensit%2Easp >
>         [ ...]. "Networked micro sensors technology is a key technology
>         for the future. Cheap, smart devices with multiple on-board
>         sensors, networked through wireless links and the Internet,
>         deployable in large numbers, provide unprecedented opportunities
>         for instrumenting and controlling to our advantage homes,
>         cities, the environment, and indeed, the battlefield.
>         For the military, DoD, and national security, networked
>         micro-sensors are a technology opportunity for a broad spectrum
>         of applications and generating new capabilities, for
>         reconnaissance, for surveillance, and for tactical applications.
>         Smart disposable micro sensors can be deployed across the board,
>         on ground and in the air, on bodies and buildings, on vehicles
>         and under water, all networked to detect and track threats,
>         winged and wheeled vehicles, personnel, and chem-bio agents, and
>         for weapons targeting and area denial.
>         The emphasis of the SensIT program is on "Information
>         Technology" that enables these capabilities. That is to develop
>         software that embodies algorithms and information processing for
>         distributed micro-sensor networks. Each sensor node will have
>         embedded processing capability, and will potentially have
>         multiple on board sensors such as acoustic, seismic, IR,
>         magnetic, imaging, micro-radars, etc. There will also be
>         storage, wireless links to neighboring nodes, location and
>         positioning knowledge through GPS or other local positioning
>         algorithms."
>         TinyOS <http://webs.cs.berkeley.edu/tos/> :: Operating System
>         support for sensor tiny networked sensors
>         TOSSIM <http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/%7Epal/research/tossim.html>
>         :: TinyOS mote simulator
>         Mate <http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/%7Epal/research/mate.html> :: A
>         virtual machine for TinyOS motes
>         TinyDB <http://telegraph.cs.berkeley.edu/tinydb/> :: A query
>         processing system designed to extract info from a network of
>         TinyOS sensors
>         NesC <http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/nescc/> :: Custom
>         compiler support for TinyOS
>         Calamari
>         Great Duck Island <http://www.greatduckisland.net/> :: Employing
>         motes for habitat monitoring in sensitive wildlife habitats
>         CITRIS: Closing in on Smart Dust (fine-grain distributed
>         sensorwebs)
>         "Since the inception of the Smart Dust project roughly four
>         years ago, some progress has been made toward the realization of
>         a fully autonomous cubic millimeter sensor node. The smallest
>         mote currently displaces roughly ten cubic millimeters, and
>         contains an oscillator, digital controller, light sensor, analog
>         to digital converter, optical transmitter, optical receiver, and
>         multiple solar power supplies. Details of this sensor node will
>         be presented, as well as the current plans to shrink its size
>         while increasing its capabilities."
>         <http://www.ipam.ucla.edu/publications/cnself2002/cnself2002_kpister.ppt>
> New conference suggestion: " The PARC Smart Matter Diagnostics and 
> Collaborative Sensemaking Project"
>         * The 2nd International Workshop on Information Processing in
>           Sensor Networks (IPSN '03)
>         April 22-23, 2003
>         Palo Alto Research Center (PARC)
>         Palo Alto, California, USA
>         <http://www.parc.com/events/ipsn03/>
>         "Imagine a world in which we live where smart roads would be
>         able to tell us when they need repair and which is the best
>         direction to get to the Giants game, smart factories would stock
>         up just enough inventory, ...  The rapid advances in
>         micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) and lower-power wireless
>         networking have enabled a new generation of tiny, cheap,
>         networked sensors that can be "sprayed" on roads, across
>         machines, and on walls. However, these massively distributed
>         sensor networks must overcome a set of technological hurdles
>         before they become widely deployable.  Keeping up with the
>         constant onslaught of sensory data from say 100,000 sensors is
>         akin to drinking from a fire hose.
>         The PARC Smart Matter Diagnostics and Collaborative Sensemaking
>         Project studies the fundamental problems of distilling
>         high-level, human-interpretable knowledge from distributed
>         heterogeneous sensor signals in a rapid and scalable manner.  We
>         are developing powerful algorithms and software systems to
>         enable a wide range of applications, from sensor-rich health
>         monitoring of electro-mechanical equipment to human-aware
>         environments that leverage sensors to support synergistic
>         interactions with the physical world."
> Coheartedly,
>  - John
> Henry K van Eyken wrote:
> >Peter.
> >
> >Thanks. Besides, as you mentioned, when we talk about extending the
> >colloquium we talk about an activity that is organizationally, legally 
> >unrelated to the Bootstrap/Stanford effort.
> >
> >Maybe we can get back to brass tacks. 
> >
> >One urgent, complex problem is what stance to take with respect to Iraq.
> >And w.r.t. Mugabe. And w.r.t. Kim Jong II. And w.r.t. methods used in
> >interrogating Al Quaeda prisoners. Etc., etc.
> >
> >I believe that, if we wish to maintain a democratic society, the road
> >toward solving this problem is through a better informed public and
> >that, moreover, this public needs standards and means for better
> >evaluating and formulating a stance for action on that information. 
> >
> >While improving public education (through improving instruction and
> >journalism) is an obvious path to follow, mere "meatware" is not enough.
> >We urgently need digital augmentation for individuals and groups. We
> >also need a communal acceptance of standards for conduct, i.e. a great
> >deal of commonality in moral stance. The Iraq situation demonstrates
> >that as does the not unrelated Israel-Palestinian conflict. Moral
> >stance, therefore, is something that bears on digital augmentation.
> >
> >For a period of time, I was looking at programs for conferences, mostly
> >those listed on the site of the ACM. While I found quite a bit about
> >(morally blind, people excluding) artificial intelligence, I can't
> >remember seeing anything about digital augmentation of the human
> >intellect, which from an academic point of view and by its very nature
> >need be a multidisciplinary subject; and from a societal point of view
> >calls for informed citizens fully aware about what may or may not be
> >decided in the digital domain; and what direction science and technology
> >will permit digital augmentation to take.
> >
> >I said, "from an academic point of view." Academe cannot stand apart
> >from the world it functions in; it is merely its servant even when its
> >role is to lead. I see Fleabyte (intended as a continuation of the
> >colloquium) as the public counterpart of academe as well as of
> >governance in the domain of digital augmentation. As a means to
> >stimulate and maintain control. A checking of its contents page will
> >show this is the range we have been working in. 
> >
> >I had hoped that a forum of intellectuals originally dedicated to
> >extending Doug's vision would be responsive to the above issue. The
> >question now is whether this is still the case. And, if so, shouldn't
> >thought be given to how to make digital augmentation a useful instrument
> >for enhancing (saving??) a democratic mode for living together on a
> >small planet? 
> >
> >Henry
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Fri, 2003-01-24 at 03:18, Peter P. Yim wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Ref. Paul's cautionary message of 22-Jan-03
> >>    http://www.bootstrap.org/lists/ba-unrev-talk/0301/msg00048.html
> >>
> >>1. It might be worth revisiting (i) the scope of the colloquium, and (ii)
> >>the intent of the "permission to use" statement.
> >>
> >>(i) The colloquium was offered as a Stanford University professional
> >>education course. The course description says,
> >>     See http://scpd.stanford.edu/SOL/courses/proEd/EC/
> >>//
> >>Course Name:
> >>     Engelbart Colloquium at Stanford
> >>     An In-Depth Look at "The Unfinished Revolution"
> >>
> >>Faculty:  Douglas C. Engelbart, Ph.D.
> >>
> >>This colloquium will offer professionals and executives a rare opportunity
> >>to listen to and learn from visionary Doug Engelbart as he talks about his
> >>life's work, creative process, and his concerns and vision for the future.
> >>//
> >>
> >>To help refresh everyone's memory, I have brought up, from the archives, the
> >>original colloquium page from the Bootstrap website (dated around early
> >>March 2000) where the public information on the colloquium is posted. That
> >>and the course pages on the Stanford would have been the main source of
> >>public information about the colloquium.  I have it, now, at
> >>http://www.cim3.org/tmp/unrev-II_colloquium/
> >>A lots of the links don't work any more, but it clearly explains what the
> >>colloquium was about. I'm going to leave that page there for the next couple
> >>of weeks in case people want to look at it.
> >>
> >>Based on the above descriptions, developing the OHS or any other system,
> >>obviously does not fall within the scope of this Stanford course. I,
> >>therefore, suggest that we stop talking about system development as if it
> >>were a colloquium activity, and even less so, an extended activity (because
> >>it is out of scope.)
> >>
> >>(ii) The intent of putting a "permission to use" statement in place was to
> >>facilitate the boradcast, webcast, taping and the subsequent publication of
> >>the colloquium content into courseware, a book or something in that vein.
> >>The indemnification clause (which, actually is fairly standard) is there to
> >>make sure that participants are responsible for their own acts.
> >>
> >>If someone had spoken during the colloquium (since dialog was a feature)
> >>and, either intentionally or unintentionally, divulged his/her employer's
> >>trade secrets, and the employer sues -- neither Bootstrap Institute nor
> >>Stanford University would want to be (nor should they be) involved. This is
> >>the type of situation the indemnity clause was there for. It does take a
> >>long stretch to get from this to interpreting it as being akin to "asking
> >>volunteers to absorb liability."
> >>
> >>2. All this discussion is interesting, but the real issue is -- is there a
> >>real and appreciable risk and threat, to the extent that we should stop
> >>certain pursuits because of it. I guess each of us will have to answer that
> >>for himself or herself. I don't believe a legal professional, that we pay
> >>some money to, could do it for us.
> >>
> >>-ppy
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
>     (05)