Deep packet inspection could be useful to ISPs who oversell limited bandwidth to (too) many customers. With Deep Packet Inspection, my ISP could inspect the contents and details of the high-bandwith traffic going to and from my neighbor:

Our ISP could then determine most of it to be peer-2-peer traffic, and then limit exactly that peer-2-peer traffic so that my neighbor ( :-) ) doesn’t hog all the bandwidth that we all have to share. On the surface, that sounds like a great idea? Why should my neighbor ruin the internet experience for the rest of us? There’s a catch…

I have a dream. I want to write structured documentation and source code together in my text editor and version control both together with git, just like the source code. But have it be searchable, viewable and ideally editable within MediaWiki. Is this possible?

Now, do I want to run Xen? Hmm… I’m using it to host morch.com itself, and I think its great.

Compared to VMware workstation, which is my other favorite, I love that it is open source, and I love that it is detachable. That is, I can start it and don’t have any GUI artifacts hanging around. What I do with VMware workstation is start it under a VNC server, so I don’t have to worry about the GUI, but this isn’t about VMware but about Xen. [I’ve since learned that this isn’t true about VMware workstation - it has become detachable]

Isn’t this great?

If you define “church” as an organization that teaches a specific doctrine in a very specific way, and “state” as the institution which is empowered to create and implement the laws which govern your people, it is of benefit for these elements to be separated.

If you define “spirituality” as the sum total of your cultural values and your most sacred beliefs, and “politics” as the process by which you select the people who will write and pass laws, as well as the method by which laws are adopted, then it is not of benefit for these elements to be separated.

It is not the function of the state to promulgate specific religious doctrines. It is therefore not beneficial for a particular church or religion to exert its influence on the mechanisms by which a state governs. No church or religion speaks for the conscience of all of the people, and such influence would thus be unfair to those who do not agree with the doctrines and point of view of the church or religion in question.

Yet it would be beneficial for your cultural values and your most sacred beliefs to influence the process by which you decide who shall propose laws, and how they shall be adopted, because each individual making that choice is presumed to be, and is asked to be, voting his or her conscience.