the spacebase:I'm with Dery here because, as he points out towards the end of his post, much of American evangelical Christianity is truly extrabiblical. [...] The thing about 'Evangelical Atheism' is that it blindly relies on some vague idea about 'science' as much as evangelical Christianity relies on vague ideas about what adherents are told about scripture (which, in my experience, is largely out of context, cherry-picked, and manipulated to fit a sermon on a single narrow topic).

I think Troglodyte is pretty much on the right track; in that line, I'd recommend David Sloan Wilson's "Darwin's Cathedral".

WWEBoing: The attacker is in uniform, and the target is military. That you can compare this to the vicious thugs targeting discos, coffee shops, trains, building, and school is evidence of moral blindness.

You just compared it as well. The distinction being, you highlighted some key differences: the clearly military nature of target and that it's done by a formal (uniformed) combatant. I'd also say one should highlight that the objective -- stopping the enemy advance -- is clearly military as well.

However, all three might vary. This highlights that problem with "suicide attacks" perhaps isn't so much the certain fatality of such operations, but that those doing so are not "formal" combatants, that the targets often include civilians, and the objective is more political than military in character (though that gets very fuzzy, as both Clausewitz and Chou En Lai can assure you).

So, from this standpoint, the WTC attacks were obviously a gross violation. However, the attack on the Pentagon, while still violating the rules of war due to the civilan garb and mechanism, was less egregious, due to the Military character of the target (but not the operation; Al Q'aeda gained at best minimal advantage to any other aspect of their military actions against the west by the temporary disruption of Pentagon Operations, making it more Politically symbolic in character).

Is the offense comparable for only a single missing element? Perhaps a uniformed officer targeting a civilian-run food packaging plant to disrupt logistic supplies? Or a false-uniformed spy setting off an explosion in one of the Nimitz's main munitions depots? (Err.. I can't imagine an example of how a military actor could attack a military target for a colorably non-military purpose, aside from a personal squabble.)

Of course, one of these old monsters had a slightly better upbringing, overcame his humble beginnings, and continues as a hero today: the Hulk.

Jeff: Hopefully we'll still have an election in 2016.

Just seconding the thought by Samurai Gratz about the mappings; it was my first reaction. But still, seriously cool.

A quick Google Image search turns up a Peanuts Justice League pic here.

They've jacked the price from $50 to $60 since being BoingBoing-ed, and B&H carries at least one of the filters mentioned at Eustace's link for under $10 shipped. Perhaps not pseudoscience, but still possibly a rip-off.

So much for the hopes of the people obtaining Justice within the Rule of Law

Interesting for fans of Fallout, with its BeatCo. "Big Frigger" Power Fist.

adrian: Perhaps I´m misunderstanding something here (I´ve just pulled an all-nighter so that may very well be the case) but since the iTunes store has already sold a gazillion DRMed tunes, are they not obliged to prevent these tracks from being unlocked? I understand that crippled debugging tools must be a pain for programmers, but providing the tools to crack files that were purchased would certanly put Apple in very legal hot water with the record companies yes/no? How could they possibly justify it?

IAmNotALawyer, but I believe "no", "no", and "via Sony v. Universal (aka the Betamax case) and MGM v. Grokster". DTrace is capable of substantial non-infringing uses as per Betamax; ergo, unless Apple can be shown as distributing it "with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, going beyond mere distribution with knowledge of third-party action", they're clear... at least via case law.

However, Apple may have signed contracts which create a larger obligation in order to get the distribution rights from the various parts of the M(afi)AA. If the contract really requires buggering up a debugger tool, it's a stupid one, and sloppily done.

A more clever way would be an implementation that merely notes the presence of the "DRM-flag" on a scanned process, and throws up a pop-up message that trying to circumvent DRM to commit copyright piracy is a violation of the US code title and chapter yada yada, punishable by yadayadayda, and keeps it open while the scan runs. However, I don't run Apple.... so blame Steve.

Hopefully, someone will re-port the application without Apple's little DRM-protecting/malware-facilitating addition.

I get a craptacular cable modem connection free with my lease; it is sufficiently unreliable that I use my DSL for my home machines. Being a geek, I've a vast amount of minor networking crap about. So, I hooked up a spare Wireless AP to it, and it sits there, open and free to the world.

Skep: It is much funnier if you note that "his details were used to set up a £500 direct debit payable from his account to the British Diabetic Association."

So, "Revenge is Sweet"? I believe the word we're looking for here isn't ironic, but "poetic".

I used to own a 1st edition of STB, but to my complete lack of surprise someone "borrowed" it and never returned it.

I think Abbie would have approved of Cohen's playing his role. A new movie to look forward to (my last was "Stardust").

While I've had three glasses of wine too many to think this all the way through, I'm reminded of the Zenger trial in the 1700's, the basis for the American principle that Truth is perfect defense against claim of libel. I think there may be an analogous principle lurking in potentia here... conservative SCOTUS notwithstanding.

Oink: there was some question about Relativity and the MM experiment for quite some time, especially in pre-WWII Germany where it was dismissed as "Jew Science". The debate on relativity had a very loud period put at the end by the Little Boy detonation over Hiroshima, and the MM experiment was run mainly to confirm "yep, still zero within limits of measurement".

"What a man dislikes in his superiors, let him not display in the treatment of his inferiors; what he dislikes in inferiors, let him not display in the service of his superiors."

Hiro Protagonist has left the building....

elver: This thing has "years of therapy" written all over it. Or, at the very least, a mild case of amputee fetish.

No, but I think a hand fetish (like the classic foot fetish) might be plausible. After all, babies start recognizing faces very young... but what if there's no face there? On the other hand (so to speak), it's probably a lot less damaging than using the boob tube as a babysitter. Worst case, hand kissing becomes a lot more popular again (and a bit more creepy).

Assassination begins to sound more and more appealing.

loftwyr: Oh sure, release the book for free months after 've bought it hard cover and read it.

Actually, it's been quietly available since at least early June. I've pointed five local university faculty at it on-line; one ignored my recommendation outright (bastard!), two bought copies, one just read it online. The last... is worried; she does not understand that world, but also sees far too much of it growing around her. She's still debating whether to buy it or not.

The "preview" button for comments seems to be broken (Mac X.2 FF 2.0.0.9); there's no link to post after previewing. I thought I'd mention this in my last post, but... I forgot.

Absentmindedness, Blocking, Transience, Bias, Misattribution, Persistence, and Suggestibility. Interesting. A search for "the seven sins of memory" turned up this further piece from Psychology Today. I'll have to commit those sins to... hm, memory.

It's actually a hair more complicated. Indie producers work with small budgets; torrents of the trailer and movie act as publicity, leading people who might not otherwise encounter the movie to consider buying it. It's thus good for the little guy; thus, little guys like them.

On the other side, the big guys can assume that by the time their PR machines get done, everyone who might consider seeing or buying the film knows it exists. Therefore, the only effect pirate torrents have is to cut into ticket sales (by reducing the number of people who would cough up money once to see it) and into DVD sales (because some people who download the torrent as a substitute for buying it).

What does this mean? Long run, probably bad things for Big Cinema. Torrents are here to stay, one way or another. I suspect the Lord of The Rings trilogy will be the Apex for the era of Big Cinema, with scale, budget, and profits that will never again happen.

Megastars will find the new ecology more difficult; they'll need to have outstanding looks, acting ability, and work ethic in order to continue to command megabucks; Hollywood won't be able to afford them otherwise. They'll have to balance earning a living, not touching obvious disasters for any price tag while competing for roles of genius. They won't go extinct, since serious names will get fan attention regardless. But they'll be in trouble. But less well known actors and actresses who work well may be able to make a better living than now working on smaller scale, and the rest of us many have a lot more quality entertainment to choose from.

Or maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part.

New unHollywood nitche for someone with time and talent: a film reviewer/distributor. Indies (or deeps) can send DVDs to a snail mail address (still one of the best high bit throughput channels for the buck). The reviewer watches it, rips at least a trailer and whatever excerpts he sees fit — up to and including the whole durn thing! — and puts it up with his remarks and recommendations to buy or not. Companies don't get a voice in what he puts up, what he says, or which way he recommends; they do get a guarantee that he will honestly review whatever he gets sent and the right to quote from his review for publicity purposes, in exchange for his getting one original and a non-revokable license to distribute what parts he sees fit. If he provides quality reviews, he'll markedly impact sales, and companies who want people to learn (as opposed to merely believe) that they have good stuff will provide the source.

Hmmm... which sounds better, "Filmbeard" or "The Dread Pirate Reviewer"?

Sounds similar to Jet from Fallout 2.

I'll strongly disagree with one of the suggested strategy points. While the ROI time is best at three houses, there is a major strategic advantage to building four houses (and stopping there). There are only thirty-two houses and twelve hotels; if the bank doesn't have any of one or the other, players can't build. By building to four houses on all of three sets (plus, perhaps, one hotel), a player may thereby artificially force a building shortage, restricting the ability of other players to develop their properties. The "instant hotel" house rule will reduce the impact of a building shortage, but not entirely remove it.

Of course, a shortage also eventually restricts your own ability to improve, but that can be handled by eventually putting up hotels — only when you're in a position to out-bid everyone else for the four houses about to go up for auction... which generally doesn't take long if you have more buildings than everyone else.

I've never lost any of the games where I had three improvable property sets, was able to force a building shortage by controlling majority of the houses, and where no other players had "imminent" hotels (one property in a set at four houses, the others at the same or a hotel). The only time anyone ever came close was when one player had Boardwalk, Park Place, and nine houses scattered on his various properties; he was able to successfully shift six of the nine to those two properties without getting outbid for "his" houses.

There's a solid analysis of Monopoly's probabilities here.

I wonder what pressures this is creating behind the Hollywood writers strike. Competition from these sources is reducing demand for mainstream media dreck, and thus impacting what the MM can afford to pay. On the other hand, while there are more outlets for creativity than ever, few pay so well as Hollywood.

On the gripping hand, Hollywood Accounting is already so screwy that the whole place should be burned to the ground — and the insurance companies pay using Hollywood's own formulae for determining the insurance check.

It's not IMPOSSIBLE, it's merely an AI Complete problem.

Presumably, a true Turing-test AI could qualify as a peer to humanity (though the courts would have a field day). So, any time there's a question, assemble twelve AIs for an automated Jury, an automated judge, and automated lawyers for the Plaintiff and Defense (possibly identical save for the position they are serving). Presume one has been able to get the "court" Congressionally established, convinced the US President to nominate the "judge", and gotten Senate approval (although "life tenure" on the federal bench becomes tricky when dealing with an AI). Voila, one ruling, which may stand as valid until appealed through conventional channels, until the law is changed, or until either the humans or AIs get fed up with the idiocy of modern society and revolt.

Not possible with the current state-of-the-art, certainly, but not inherently impossible.

Teresa Nielsen Hayden: Sorry to say, none of those circumstances make it fair use.

Err... sorta, but as I(AmNotALawyer) understand it, they certainly contribute strongly in that direction. That "it doesn't hurt their product" would be "effect of the use on the market or potential market for the original work"; that Flying Squid "do[es]n't make a dime off of it" indicates the "purpose and character of the use" is noncommercial, and possibly parody.

This does, however, leave the problem of "the nature of the work" (fictional works get a higher degree of protection, due to the higher level of creativity theoretically involved), and "the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the work as a whole". Redubbing the soundtrack completely (not using any of the original voices, theme, incidental music, etc.) would probably help, as would not using an entire episode for a remix. Nonetheless, ER PLC could doubtless sic lawyers on poor Flying Squid at any time.

Were I a juror in such a case, I'd look really unfriendly if ER PLC didn't send a cease-and-desist before heading to court, and would like to hear what the lawyers have to say about their failure to respond to his attempts to initiate contact. But that's just a question of collecting damages; even I can't see that they wouldn't have grounds (if they disprove fair use) to demand a injunction against the production or distribution of The Skeletor Show for the remaining duration of the He-Man copyright.

LJP: Would you want to watch a movie that had been inverted, time shifted, and played backwards?

I dunno. The full six in Star Wars Epic might be interesting that way. Now, where did I put those boxed sets....

I believe the "Underlying Principle For Forcing An Uncaring And Adversarial Company Fix Your Problem" is better considered as an elaboration on a more general principle.

If you want the attention of any organism, be it an elephant or a corporation, all you need to know is "How Does It Feel Pain"... and be absolutely certain you are willing to risk its full and undivided attention.

Note to Self: henceforth, open all merchandise from Best Buy before leaving the store.

edgore: Oh great. Now LARPers are our last line of defense against terror.

Err, no; rather, part of the front line in terrorism counterintelligence. You may or may not find that prospect more reassuring.

Myself, I'm happy with the idea. I think we should start actively recruiting juvenile delinquent geeks to train for this sort of thing; it's a much more socially useful outlet for their impulses to be creatively annoying than playing Script Kiddie.

Cory Doctorow: So, your problem with the short fiction markets is that you don't like the novels they publish?

My point was that there were other novels of similar caliber to the two examples you objected to, that had indeed been published in a magazine (Analog). Not a problem with the market, merely with your counterargument.

I believe the position that TWG is trying to establish is that the overall caliber of Analog's writers — at whatever length — has dropped, and that he's finding more Sturgeon's Law examples than he prefers. My quick glance at the Hugos gave me the impression that Analog's share of first publications had dropped, so there may be a long-term worry. For myself, I'm still satisfied with Analog, and just renewed my subscription last month; new serious Hugo contenders don't show up every day. I can be patient for a few more years, especially since the $30 or so a year I pay is such a minute fraction of my dead tree budget.

beerzie: Speaking as a person who has had to use it for almost ten years, I think that if Comcast killed Lotus Notes, it would be a good thing.

Comparable to the Nazi death camps also killing one or two people who had otherwise gotten away with murder....

(Yes, I have just Godwinned the thread.)

Cory Doctorow: Um, neither of those *novels* were ever published in a *magazine.*

True, but unfair. Try instead: Frank Herbert's Dune; Vernor Vinge's The Peace War and Across Realtime; Lois McMaster Bujold's "Weatherman" (the novella that grew into the Hugo-award winning Vor Game), Barrayar, and Cetaganda.

I've had an Analog SF subscription of my own since I encountered Across Realtime back in high school; I have a complete run of back issues back to the first issue serializing Dune (and sporadic issues before that). While the size change they had a few years back irritated me (as my old plastic mini-crates no longer work), the new size is usefully close to standard DVD-case.

I grant you, in the last few years Analog doesn't seem to have thrown up new titans of talent with frequency on par with Ye Good Olde Dayz. However, I plan to keep my subscription going for at least another half decade before seriously worrying. (It probably helps that I seldom move.) Perhaps I'll also start moving one of the copies of Analog over to the SF section each time I visit the local B&N, to see if I can help the circulation. =)

A wider face and more expressive smile?

Err, no offense to any other senior bachelors out there, but it seemed rather likely to me. He's over a hundred, world-famous, respectably employed, and there's no hint of any female love interest having ever been in his life since his sister died?

To quote PvP's Francis Ottoman, "Gaayyyy...."

Tom: This is important because Bayesian reasoning makes it clear that "faith" is synonymous with "incoherent" in a precise sense.

Depends on how you view faith. Faith can also apply to acting 100% certain, when you're merely dealing with the most likely of a set of possibilities. This trait has demonstrated survival value. I grant that Invisible Sky Wizard does not strike me as the most likely of the set; the principle remains.

Uncle Eccoli: Science has become too ready to dictate to the world what is and is not real, what is and is not possible.

You mistake an assessment of what is probable for what is possible, and an assessment of being uninteresting (such as possibilities that lack observed consequences) for being unreal.

Heck, I'd register Republican to support him in the caucuses. He's way better than their other clowns; at least he's funny.

As for a solution to the problem of the Colbert Report, have guest hosts in charge for the duration. Perhaps Robin Williams could be persuaded to pry loose an opening in his schedule to take over....

I believe it's time we start petitioning Congress to make attempts at including such blatantly unlawful and unconscionable terms in unnegotiated license "agreements" civilly actionable. If one could start a class action suit against such idiots, corporate lawyers might pay more attention to making sure such agreements are equitable.

I think "Go Call Mom" might be seasonally appreciated in May.

In most places, you should give the bank some lead time for $2s, since they don't usually carry a lot. One exception is in Charlottesville, Virginia; Monticello routinely gives them out as part of the change (or did, the last time I paid to go), and the banks generally have no trouble giving out a hundred dollars or so.

When I was working at a restaurant in town, it regularly went through a couple grand in $1s over the course of a weekend. One surprisingly busy Saturday night, we ran so low on $1s we would have been out by the end of the night shift. Since I happened to have (from odd alone knows what whim) a hundred bucks in Susan-Bs and two hundred in $2s lying about at home, I brought them in to trade them to the night shift cashier for some large bills, so he could use my oddities for making change. This resulted in some fun for him and the five hundred customers that shift. Some of the customers hadn't encountered them before either; however, they were generally willing to take his (and the other customers') assurances that they were legal tender... especially when he offered to let them get their three or four dollars of change all in quarters instead.

While the $100 is the largest currently in active circulation, bills up to the $10000 were active at one point. Ebay currently has at least some Five Hundred and Thousand dollar notes up in the collectibles.

I'm sure if you could get an Ask Slashdot posted, and find an image host that would be willing and able to host the pictures about to be Slashdotted, in under an hour you'd know everything about where the pictures came from (including model names, photographer, distributing company, hosts licensed to post them, a complete list of unlicensed mirrors, and the dates the pictures were taken). =)

Come to that, I suspect if I got an Ask Slashdot posted without the pictures, it would take less than a day before all of the above are obtained. Hmm....

johen: So what Cory? Because they spend more on music it somehow makes it o.k. for them to download stuff they should be paying for? One simply has nothing to do with the other.

Depends what you mean by "one", "the other", and "should".

First: no, that they spend more on music doesn't make it legal, moral, or even non-fattening to make copies against the will of the copyright holder. I don't think Cory's trying to defend that. What I think he would defend is the idea that it may be in the copyright holder's interest to allow for some copying. That is to say, some of the copies that the RIAA is trying to discourage, it would be in the best interest of consumers, RIAA members, and music artists alike to allow; IE, that people should be able to do it.

"People who download lots of music (legally or not)" and "people who buy lots of music" have in common is they both enjoy music. To repeat something I said above: "if the RIAA want people to buy music, they first must have people who value music". If people don't encounter music, they won't know to value it; if they don't value it, they won't be willing to cough up their dough for it. Demand price curve drops to around zero, because no-one perceives any value to the product.

Of course, if everyone expects music to be free, then price expectations again force the price curve to drop to about zero. Oops.

The RIAA needs to find a middle ground. They are failing badly. My suspicion is it's because they have lost too many people with the talent to judge musical quality, and hired on too many dumb hack MBAs.

Nick D. gets my point, Dave X. Multiple price points with artificially established distinctions allows for sales to differing price levels along the demand curve, increasing net profits. However, you're right to some extent. The labels need to realize that they need to not merely direct demand in the direction of THEIR product, but work to increase overall demand for music. Which means better music, more widely available.

And, yes, Artists will be able to work without labels. Business and Biology call it competition; it leads to evolution. That means the labels will have to get back in the business of identifying quality to promote as they used to in the 50's and 60's, rather than presuming whatever they promote must ipso facto be quality. If that happens, music fans may begin to associate real prestige to an artist good enough to be put out under the Rhino Records (TM) label brand, similar to how Tor Books is recognized in the SF Book publishing arena. This may make fans more likely to consider the product, and more willing to pay a little more, since the Brand will be associated with a known level of Quality.

Right now, the only reason I'm thinking of listening to Radiohead is I like their political direction... but that won't last long. Once everyone is just taking whatever is willingly given, it leads to a cut-throat competitive pricing in the marketplace that won't let many of the real talents out there make an honest living. And that would be as bad for the culture as the RIAA parasites.

There needs to be a real middle ground. Producers will probably no longer make a shitload of money, and have to work a lot harder, but they'll still have a role. Probably fewer artists will have chances to be Megastars, but more of them will have a chance to make at least a 9-5 middle class income off their talent. And music may diversify... and stop sucking so much.

And then again, pigs may fly out of my ass... but that doesn't mean I plan to invest in pork futures on that basis.

Forlain: Music labels and the bands should start seeing downloaded music as cheap marketing, at least partially.

No, they shouldn't. It's not. For many potential consumers, a downloaded-for-free 128kbps MP3 is a perfect substitute good for any higher quality version on CD. If I could get Jimmy Rogers recording of "Kisses Sweeter Than Wine" for free, and perhaps his version of "Windmills Of Your Mind", I'd have no interest in getting the rest of his work; it's just not that appealing for me on the whole. It's only "marketing" if it induces people to pay for something.

On the other hand, I'll agree they may have to seriously revise their business models if they want to make money. Turn a blind eye to 64 kbps and lower MP3s, and any "internet radio" station who uses them. Cut or remove the royalties charged for radio broadcasts of complete songs. Routinely release multiple editions of albums -- one bargain bin with just the band, album, year, and label printed on the CD; one with decent cover art on the CD; and one "premium" edition in a DVD-size case including the mix tracks, a flyer with individual art for each song, and/or whatnot -- priced to different levels of audiophile. Provide substantial discounts in prices to public libraries for buying CDs. And, yes, kill the idiocy of DRM. The labels need to get more people listening to music again, and rethink where they're adding the value to the transaction.

They need creative thinkers, who are generally worth their weight in Osmium-- if not their volume. As Heinlein put it, they're competing for the Beer money, which says a lot about how hard the problem really is for marketing to their ideal college audience. And instead of hiring brains, they're hiring lawyers, who merely scrabble for a bigger piece of a shrinking pie-- and, of course, want a slice of their own.

Maybe the dodos will be willing to share an apartment with their cousins the dinosaurs in order to make some room for the RIAA on the other side....

Mark Frauenfelder: Does something have to be legal to be considered art? Or can some things be illegal and art at the same time?

The latter; you should explore the BoingBoing Archives some time.

Charlie Wade: That mall's 'security' personnel will have some big questions to answer and probably a bit of explaining to do to their employers.

That does raise an interesting notion: could terrorists do something like that as a method to circumvent Airport security in some way? To what benefit?

Y'see, this is why I don't worry too much about terrorists. Anything really creatively crazy they think of, American Citizens will have dreamed it up first. (Yes, I include 9/11; see Tom Clancy's 1997 "Executive Orders" and L. E. Modesitt Jr.'s 1998 "The Ecolitan Enigma". We just didn't test it.)

Spoon: The only people I've ever heard talk about not buying albums because of the RIAA are techies who don't actually own any CDs and never have.

Hi. I'm a techie, although I still use my old Archos Jukebox 20 rather than buy an iPod, and my shelf of CDs has only on the order of 100 on it. It's not so much the DRM I attribute to my limited purchases as the lousy business model the RIAA pushes. The business model of "We can make money selling it this way, whatever it is" has led not only to DRM, but the widespread degree that much of the modern pop scene is an insipidly uninspired homogenized mixture of mayonnaise and crap. The last album I bought on CD was the complete works of Tom Lehrer, who hasn't produced anything new since about 1974.

The further problem with DRM isn't so much that it's evil, as that it's inconvenient to work with, since it's trying to achieve an impossible design goal. It's the inconvenience that keeps me from buying music that way. The political statement (such as contemplating buying a copy of Radiohead's new release) is mostly incidental.

The Invisible Hand of the marketplace is ruthless (perhaps oft stupid) in its pursuit of improved efficiency, and will readily Smite novice and venerable idiots alike. The RIAA has lost sight of some underlying preconditions they depend on to exist. If they want people to buy music, they first must have people who value music. And if they don't contribute to that, but actively obstruct people from doing so, they become a niche parasite in a decaying ecology... which is now starting to adapt to remove their niche. "Say hello to the Multituberculates when ya meet 'em."

I'll also note that I spend a lot more of my money on books than music. And, gee, I've had five friends go out and buy copies of Rainbow's End since I was able to point it out to them on-line. One even tracked down a hardcover copy. Perhaps the music publishing industry could learn something from the book business.

The rest of Molleindustria's games look interesting too... although not all are entirely SFW.

So, is it ignorance, paranoia, or willful deception from a desire to save souls even at the cost of lives?

Big Al should give it to the Hensel Twins.

I think there may be an underlying assumption here as to the meaning of "society". Consider this substitution on one of Kyle's arguments:

Only Americans have rights, because they are granted by Americans for the sake of America's shared wellbeing. What American benefits from bestowing personhood on a foreigner? It's patently ridiculous.

It's doubtless my background in mathematical theory, but I think Kyle ought to re-examine his preconceptions of the "obvious".

Humans have more than one society; for example, Iranian and American societies are quite different. However, most modern societies grant at least some rights to someone from another society, if not necessarily all of the rights its members may have. While perhaps more different than most human societies are from each other, the great apes (and elephants, BTW) seem to have at least as much a "society" as humans do.

The question is, what rights should human society recognize for these outsiders?

Confucius advised "What a man dislikes in his superiors, let him not display in the treatment of his inferiors;" it's not a bad principle. Even if humanity has no evident superiors, we should try to treat our inferiors as we would hope to be treated, should we someday encounter them — or perhaps, manage to create them. While I'm not sure the full rights of a citizen are appropriate, I feel that failing to grant any rights is the wrong decision.

In addition to the earlier reference to Heinlein's "Jerry Was a Man", I'd like to suggest David Brin's short story Lungfish as presenting another interesting scenario about "human" rights.

Crosius: Even in its current incarnation, this is a weapon designed for use against civilians. Any military worth the name will develop faraday-cage-based technologies to block or diffuse the energies this device emits.

Military combatants not only include "Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict" but "Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements"... the latter of which tend to be less formally equipped. And it's that sort that our military is at present under-equipped to handle appropriately.

Which is not to say your concern of the potential misuses is misplaced; merely that there may be potential legitimate uses as well.

Publicize the prize (BoingBoinged -- so far so good). Sell small rock samples for home experimenters via an Ebay "Buy-it-now" Store, at (pre-shipping) $1 per ~100g sample, or $5 for 10 -- this is about 1000 times the value of the silver. Wait for some budding mad scientist to get clever; break even meanwhile.

Extracting the silver is less important than extracting the value of the silver. =)