« Car parking made easy | Main

The Official Date Files

FROM: Stein von Reusch

What NEED does this meet?
Everybody wants to contribute to the world of science, I guess, if they can. Not everybody has all the credentials, contacts, energies and so on available to go through the entire process of getting something formally published in a paperbased scientific journal, or even an electronic scientific journal. They may hesitate to put it out on their own website in an electronic format for one BIG reason: that they have no obvious way of providing an official date to their document; they may write the date themselves but this is hardly official as it may be just made up. We need to give electronic publication an official status which includes an official date approach.

What is the APPROACH?
The plan is radically simple, and radically efficient: Offer the possibility of anyone anywhere to freely register themselves with full name and other contact information, alongside an electronic publically readable file. They can themselves describe the content of this file in terms of keywords and a descriptive heading. They may even be granted the possibility of keeping the file at least temporarily secret. The file will be stored in a vast archieve that is also backed up on permanent media reguarly, with a date provided by the server; this date cannot be changed by anyone, although the file perhaps can be marked for deletion.

This is distinctive in that anyone may provide any type of file and get an official "backup", which can be searched by others, without having to do it in the context of, say, exchange of programs or whatever; it is distinctive from, let's say, the eminent SourceForge.Net, in that the date cannot be set nor changed by the user. It should also be incredibly simple to use.

I say that it is 'distinctive' in these senses because I have not heard of this solution as yet, but if it exists already, please tell me; I have much use for it myself also...

What are the BENEFITS to people?
We would get an even freer world in that electronic website (even home website) publication can get a far more official status; we would get a sense of permance to the electronic world at those spots which we deliberately seek it (rather than merely taking an overall 'backup of Internet', which seems to be of somewhat dubvious value to my mind...). We will elevate that nature friendly and rather anarchistic approach of exchanging documents without chopping trees for paper, into something that can have a value in terms of providing references when one is doing research; if Mrs Smith, Arizona, solves David Hilbert's last unsolved mathematical problems and publishes it on MrsSmithArizona.com, she can simultaneously supply this document to FreeDateStamping.Com or whatever it is called, and make a link to this place so as to tell the world: "I did this, and I did it just at the date that I say I did it; and so perhaps I'll get credit for this in some decade, meanwhile I'll go on tending to my other activities."

The benefits of this may be to enhance what is really good about the Internet so that many aspects of the hierarchical dense structure of the academic world of publishing may have a healthy competition from a great diversity of fantastically creative individuals who has less official credentials than needed to get the works properly through the old systems. It may in fact contribute to changing the world and our societies just a little bit, if not even more...

What is the COMPETITION?
I'd love to hear of similar services; the closest thing to my mind is SourceForge.Net but you need to be a programmer (like I am, fortunately) to put files to this network and you can change the date yourself; and it is not something that you really should use for other publications than those involve software.

When we make the Official Date Stamp Archieves, or whatever we call them -- The Internet Free and Open Electronic Publishing Archieve -- we must have a certain sense of integrity to the organisation or assocation or network running it; so that the programmers so to speak control each other so that they do not change anything behind the scenes. Ideally, a state committee or something should overlook it; perhaps even a United Nations office or something; and the making of permanent backups would help enhance the security aspect of it.

What BUDGET & LOGISTICS are required?
It will be no more expensive than running an archieve like CPAN.ORG or SOURCEFORGE.NET, in fact less expensive because there is no obligation to provide additional facilities; perhaps a search engine at most. The file type can be any of a number of preselected standard alternatives, like Adobe Acrobat and even Ascii .txt. It may get so widely popular that a great deal of servers will have to be set up and so sponsoring in form of hardware should be acquired from a big hardware vendor; the computer software companies, like Sun Microsystems, might want to give money; this can also be the case for Open Society Foundation by George Soros. The most expensive part will be the official security element -- that the programmers are indeed having full integrity in running these servers. There is no difficult apart from just getting together and doing it. The programming takes nothing more than a week; setting up all the servers in terms of physical space and so on is the thing that together with providing organsational facilities for overlooking it what takes most time and therefore also budget money.

I'd say $100.000 would get it beautifully started, and then there will be a portion of this money devoted to getting time and resources to contact a large number of big organisations and companies to get sustainable funding. But experiments of this nature could be made, of course, without hardly any funding. The fun is if it is official, though, not just nearly official!

December 10, 2003 | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Official Date Files:

» gomez article from gomes blog
it's my opinion on that theme [Read More]

Tracked on Apr 27, 2006 5:55:46 AM


How does this differ from http://xxx.lanl.gov/, the internet preprint server?

Posted by: Thomas Barnet-Lamb at Dec 12, 2003 11:30:08 AM

Thank you, Thomas Barnet-Lamb, for your excellent question. Yes, it is important to mention this service. Just like SourceForge.Net it has a certain amount of openness for contribution from anyone; unlike it, it does not have to be programs; but they are alike in that they both restrict the type of contributions allowed far more than in my proposed idea of The Offical Date Files. Please, let me quote from their website as it is today:
"...xxx.lanl.gov is a fully automated electronic archive and distribution server for research papers. Covered areas include physics and related disciplines, mathematics, nonlinear sciences, computational linguistics, and neuroscience. ...We reserve the right to reject any inappropriate submissions."

My suggestion is that we need something like World Library, or two or three such, in which every submitted file is accepted solely on the basis that (1) one has oneself made it, and (2) it does not encourage criminal actions, and (3) the weekly amount of kilobytes submitted does not exceed a certain (generous) amount, set by the limitations of the technology used by any time. Today, we can get an ISBN number for printed books and an ISSN number (or whatever it is called) for printed magazines; this could be an 'ISDF' number, International Standard Date File number.

The judgement as to whether an article should be restricted should be performed through an open dialogue among a group of very different people, selected, for instance, by UNESCO, and changed for every year, on the basis that these people have the quality of integrity and open-mindedness and care for other people's opinions. Nobody should rule over such a library or have dynasty-like capacities to linger over it; it should not be too close to military installations like Los Alamos nor subject to political censorship in any direction.

The object is the encouragement of world-wide dialogue and a natural basis for cross-reference of texts that the authors of these texts, or images, or other kind of self-created material, are willing to submit as something official. More important than search engines over the whole lot of articles is the fact that each submitted file gets a reference or registration token or number, which is a ticket to view this particular file and ascertain that the 'world library' in fact does say that it has the date that the author claims. Thank you for the question. Any further questions or comments? I'd love to hear of links to sites that are even closer to my own proposal, because I cannot wait myself to begin to submit files if such a site exists already!

Stein von Reusch, editor of Wintuition:Net,
Oslo and New York

Posted by: Stein von Reusch at Dec 12, 2003 10:51:58 PM

YET ONE MORE COMMENT from the author of the Official Date File proposal to the last question:

I forgot to mention that while SourceForge.Net allows full user control over the dates set by each supplier of files (thus opening for cheating), the preprint files of xxx.lanl.gov appears to give a reasonable amount of protection over the dates, in that the date of the supplied file is given by the server; however -- and this is an important point -- they do not emphasize this fact, and, in its present form, they do not comment this, as far as I can see, within their Frequently Asked Questions or Help file systems, except this: "...Dates in the paper are supplied by the submitter and we have no control over them..."

What I seek is to make the date Official, so that we can forget about the dates, and keep on being creative as much as we want, knowing that there is a record somewhere that indicates a proper time history for each of our contributions. The existing Internet approach works fantastically well as to searching, one could say, and the only thing it lacks is some sense of permancy -- so I would say, let us be careful not to overemphasize the searching aspect of a International Date File site, and rather just emphasize the fact that something is stored there, somewhere. The link to it can be given at ordinary websites and the ordinary search engines like AllTheWeb.com, Yahoo.com, Ask.com and Google.com perform excellently on them, it appears. We should not changes the rules of the game when it already works; but we do not have the clear-cut possibility of making a digital document have the same historical clarity as to time as an analogue or substance-based document.

I would also say that a drawing of a Perpetum Mobile as a .jpg-file, the photograph of the sketch on blackboard of a mathematical solution, a poem; a little Lisp or Yoga5d function to solve an old issue, even compiled; a book; the photograph of a painting -- all these things should be of the innumerable things that can be considered a File to be Dated.

I guess the last question made me think through several issues and refine the proposal in several key ways. I have no doubt that in some way, some time soon, there will be somewhere created something exactly along the lines I here propose. It is so obvious a need once you think of it; how many people who refrain from using Internet for first-time publishing because they do not want it tossed around without any possibility of going back to point out who came with what. It is important to be able to relax about these things and have a vehicle that is open and not tighly controlled by an undemocratic system for official registration of everybody's contribution... Well, enough said from me about this proposal until I get more questions. I am fully willing to initiate a project group by contacting people in UNESCO and UNDP and so on if somebody prompts me to do so and pays at least all initial expenses.

S.V.R., [email protected]

Posted by: Stein von Reusch at Dec 13, 2003 12:12:55 AM

Great idea to make the academic world more open to original thinkers, or at least to inspire intelligent people to think more freely. Do you see this primarily as a storage system or a user-friendly library? To give it the proper status it would require something like Yahoo's classification of sites/documents and perhaps a quality check before the entry is included (not on scientific terms but just to avoid things that obviously do not deserve the space) -- or maybe just user's reviews.

Posted by: Kari at Dec 15, 2003 11:15:36 AM

Stein: Thank you for your clarification. I was not aware of xxx.lanl.gov's restrictive policy regarding submissions, which clearly means that they don't fill the niche your "date files" would. This further idea came to me when I was reading your last post. Why is there any requirement that the server host files? All one really needs is a server which will do the following: recieve uploaded files together with an email address, calculate some relatively long cryptographically secure checksum of the file, and reply to email address given with a message like "File with checksum XXXXXXX...XXX recieved at [date] [time] UTC", with the whole message signed with a GPG/PGP key.

The user could then make the file available on his/her website or similar, together with hosting the email recieved from the "date files" server. The email from the server would provide proof that the author had created the file they were hosting before the date given in the email, and its PGP signature would be a guarantee of authenticity.

This will probably make the server cheaper to run (I know storage space is cheap, but storing gigabytes of data is quite a hassle, and not storing it is easier). It also has the advantage that, since you never host the material you sign, you might not need to worry about any censorship *at all*.

Posted by: Thomas Barnet-Lamb at Dec 16, 2003 10:04:15 AM

Stein: Thank you for your clarification. I was not aware of xxx.lanl.gov's restrictive policy regarding submissions, which clearly means that they don't fill the niche your "date files" would. This further idea came to me when I was reading your last post. Why is there any requirement that the server host files? All one really needs is a server which will do the following: recieve uploaded files together with an email address, calculate some relatively long cryptographically secure checksum of the file, and reply to email address given with a message like "File with checksum XXXXXXX...XXX recieved at [date] [time] UTC", with the whole message signed with a GPG/PGP key.

The user could then make the file available on his/her website or similar, together with hosting the email recieved from the "date files" server. The email from the server would provide proof that the author had created the file they were hosting before the date given in the email, and its PGP signature would be a guarantee of authenticity.

This will probably make the server cheaper to run (I know storage space is cheap, but storing gigabytes of data is quite a hassle, and not storing it is easier). It also has the advantage that, since you never host the material you sign, you might not need to worry about any censorship *at all*.

Posted by: Thomas Barnet-Lamb at Dec 16, 2003 10:05:21 AM

THANKS FOR COMMENTS. They deserve more thought, here are my first preliminary remarks.
To Kari, at www.flux.no/kari:
You ask whether it is more a storage system or a user-friendly library. My gut feeling is to say, given these two alternatives, 'library' does always have a good feeling to it. Perhaps in a decade or two then it is possible to download a fascinating amount of gigabytes on some plastic strip; this may be useful for those who would like to have a library with them rather than having to connect to it electronically, for instance (cfr Douglas Adams travel item in Hitchhiker's Guide...!). And, of course, the initial idea was merely to provide a date to a file so that we can relax about it. I don't know, let us explore more!

To Thomas, at www.rescogitans.org:
Your proposal opens up for an incredibly inexpensive start: to provide a key ID number which is stored rather than the file itself, so that the responsibility of storage is with the file-provider, but the key ID is kept both by the file-provider (and file-holder) and by this (or these) central date files. It is imaginative, it would certainly work, and it would spare us for that work which is no doubt demanding and not always pleasant, namely to leave certain items out because of unethical content -- if we do not store the file, and not even provide a link to it through an official list of items, we do not have to take responsibility for its content; then other parts of Internet can look to what items are presentable where. However, my gut feeling again: we would, after a few years run, have provided a large number of key IDs that no longer refer to anything at all; perhaps a great percentage of the files will simply have been deleted by the original file holders, for any number of reasons. If there is an actual storage somewhere other than the file provider's own sites, then it has an additional stamp of the official to it; and while I feel we should not emphasize the search engine aspect of this storage, I think it should be at least a resyme of it or something which is at least listed in some sequence and searched over a little (rather like in a card based traditional paper library).

And while we must then deal with the issue of looking a little at the content, we would be able to have this and similar libraries (no reason why there should be only one) to serve as central backup centres for times far ahead. Yet, there is something about a key ID that has a good and proper feeling about it, and so my sense of it right now is to say: Yes, certainly, a most important contribution to the construction of it, perhaps at least in addition to storage, perhaps as an opportunity for those who do not want to submit their file but only want a key. Both-and.

Posted by: Stein von Reusch at Dec 17, 2003 8:14:12 PM

Apart from personal vanity/hopes for cyber-immortality, the main reason anyone would want this service is because they hope there might be a future chance to capitalise on having been "first" with some idea that was later brought to commercial (or other) viability by A.N.Other - who would of course claim not to have known of our amateur pioneer's earlier unfinished work.

The people who actually take the pig to market (or should that be the PGI - Pretty Good Idea? :o) will normally be backed by the courts if Joe "Ideas Fountain" Bloggs asserts a prior claim. In my opinion that's as it should be, because everyone can have great ideas at the level of "why don't they...?". The guy who deserves the "credit" (read, "profit") is the guy who has the energy & ability to actually DO it.

I have a few Pretty Good Ideas myself, that I wouldn't wish to publicise in case someone else got inspired by my outline proposals and implemented them before I got around to it. The kind of PGI's I WOULD publicise are those that I don't expect I personally could or would take further, but which I'd like to see implemented.

I don't feel hard-done-by every week when I don't win the Lottery, because I don't buy tickets for what I see as a regressive tax on the aspirations of the downtrodden masses. Equally, I wouldn't expect the credit for suggesting that someone else should sort a problem that I can't (be bothered?) to deal with fully. In essence, I don't exactly endorse the morality of a service that's mostly intended to encourage (or at least, allow) lazy or incompetent people to benefit from the more practical endeavours of others.

With that in mind it seems likely to me that - to the extent that they'd use this service at all - "professional" realisers of PGI's would seek to lodge the "first claim" documents in as inaccesible a format as possible. They'd be trying to get the benefits of being first, without the risk that A.N.Other might pick up their idea and run with it faster they could.

Unlike our amateur Joe, professional "ideas people" know you have to use patents & copyrights to stake claims, and Patents Offices expect something a bit more fully-formed than just "I propose that (x) would be a good way of solving problem (y)". Especially if there's a tacit implication that the (earliest) submitter of this particular proposal would like some/all of the proceeds even if A.N.Other actually does all/some of the donkey work.

If I were a professional using such a service, I'd learn a REALLY obscure language - or maybe even make one up if I thought I could cover my tracks. And use it to publicise an "undecipherable" version of my proposal. Maybe I could get my spouse to charge the database administrators for a translation of the proposal into standard english so they could understand it enough to accept it! Naturally the administrators would be expected to respect the commercial confidentiality of the translation and destroy all copies once they'd used it for the necessary purpose, since my spouse would NOT be seeking to lodge HER document in the system - any more than J.K.Rowling would be publishing the first (or indeed any) draft of Harry Potter's next adventures, on the grounds that she'd rather sell it separately to EVERY person that might want to read it now and for ever - or at least, as long as [inter]national copyright laws allow.

I feel a bit uncomfortable with the sense that I'm pissing on Stein von Reusch's fireworks here, but I'd probably be even more uncomfortable if it was a truly electrifying suggestion (I'm sure I've read somewhere that urine is a pretty good conductor, and it would certainly be carrying the current to a pretty sensitive part of the corporeal component all current inhabitants of the blogosphere possess.

In the final analysis, the "value judgement" system that interacts with this "I was first and I want to benefit from that being acknowledged" position simply doesn't correlate usefully with the "let's all pool our thinking so we come up with the answer quicker" approach. If there's any correlation at all, it's probably that the individuals who stand to gain by one tend to lose out according to the other, so most people will favour to one perspective or the other, but not both. Stein von Reusch's thinking only really looks good up if you can use both perspectives at the same time - which is only possible if you don't try to stitch the two images into a composite image with real "depth". You can continue the analogy re the benefits of stereoscopic vision and the drawbacks of having your eyes so far apart it's impossible for the brain to stitch both images into a single coherent world-view.

Personally, I'll think (privately) about how this "uber-perspective" might lead to a re-assessment of how the dinosaurs bombed out on account of their legendary two brains being too far apart both physically & conceptually. And if Stephen J Gould (or indeed Stephen Pinker) scores a best-seller by taking my half-baked thoughts further, I will quote this text as evidence that I'm entitled to a share of his royalties for having got there first!

Posted by: FumbleFingers at Jan 31, 2004 4:49:47 AM

Comment to FumbleFingers from author of the above proposal, Stein von Reusch, posted March 2005

Thank you for the criticism of the proposal.
I am not a stranger to such views as the ones you propagate, and, I guess, in some phases, I could easily have said something similar in response to such a proposal. Who cares who said first anyway and all that. The important thing is content, not WhoIsWho in this world; the important thing is to do something which accords to one's heart, not whether it has been done before or whether it has been half-way done before or almost that way before.

Yet, my dear FumbleFingers -- and please consider this in a playful mood: do you really feel that what goes on with an electronic, dateless publishing, such as on one's website, involves the kind of expression that it is to have published a book? I mean, on paper? I mean, one that gets yellow on its pages, and its cover get light from sunlight? A book which can have coffee stains and all that?

Let me guess what you MIGHT answer: a book is different, sure, but that hasn't got to do with the date in which it is made or whether anybody recorded that date. It has got to do with substance, that it is not merely digital.

So let me then reply to this imagined answer of yours: don't you sometimes feel, when there is a hefty quarrel, or a great good dialogue, that you somehow enhance your consciousness over what has indeed been said if you know something of its sequence?

Now, what has that got to do with books?

Because, when something is published with substance, it gets into a discourse; and discourse involves duration, and, as Henri Bergson perhaps would agree, duration involves consciousness.

So one type of motivation is this: I want to publish, say, a string-theory-free version of quantum gravity and I would like to get it published without a board of professors censoring it away for twenty years in a way that can be looked into later on, for the sake of getting the respect and all that. That is a pretty shallow motivation -- I agree.

But there is a deeper motivation, that of feeling that something has been DELIEVERED somewhere -- AT SOME TIME -- so that one can GO BEYOND that which was published. Rather than keeping on the incessant change. It is a comittment to give a datum to the future. Or?

Posted by: Stein von Reusch at Mar 23, 2005 9:20:51 PM

This is a fresh comment from the author of this proposal, Stein von Reusch, www.yoga4d.com, from April 2005:

I would like to deepen a little the answer to the last criticism. I am an author, and I know many authors, and, it seems, we all share a feeling that publishing something like a book is quite an event. It is a psychological strong thing to do -- because it involves generating something which is (1) official (2) not correctable and (3) it has a date, so you move on.

If you, like me, maintain one or two websites (I maintain only two, thank God!), you have probably encountered the sense in which it is a grand responsibility: for the simple reason, that electronic material is assumed to be 'up to date', BECAUSE IT IS ALTERABLE, changeable, modifiable, like an unpublished text.

Like many others, I have an inclination towards compassionate anarchism (see my text, The Compassionate Anarchist, at www.yoga4d.com/compass.txt, related to the license for distribution, YOGA4d CFDL, at www.yoga4d.com/cfdl.txt, that I use in connection for the free texts and programs for the YOGA4d programming language and OAC), and this inclination takes the form of loving what Internet opens up for people outside of hierarchical institutions, people who, like myself, perhaps, in fact regard hierarchies as something resembling the ancient slave-civilisations of the past and something which we can, in many areas, if not in all areas, do without.

But for Internet to give to free individuals the possibility to express themselves in a way which provides a sense of evolution to their expressions, they need to get a feel, a sense, of something similar to that which (the far more expensive, and, when one goes through a big publisher, regulated) question of publishing something like a book involves -- let alone, publishing in a big scientific journal or something else, which typically has a censoring committee dominating it, like a large nasty spider on its web.

Even the socalled free search engines, like Google, tend to become hierarchies and tend to have commitees which do undemocratic censorship for obscure or petty-minded reasons, in addition to letting money come in so as to give preference to the rich. Even something as clearly liberal-minded as SourceForge.net has now swapped their completely free search engine approach with an approach in which it is now all the time, as far as I can tell, given 'sponsored listing' as heading on top, after which follows Yahoo. And we all know that Yahoo, even though connected to the anarchistic Alltheweb.com, is a sponsored search engine itself (for instance, there is a censored version of Yahoo in which the government of China has paid Yahoo to filter out critical information against itself on its Chinese portals; Yahoo could have said 'no', and earned some less money; but they said 'yes' and to me, that speaks of an element of corruption).

In all these areas, we see that the quest of the democratic right of free expression of the individual requires that there is an absence of censorship, an absence of hiearchies, and a presence of an official willingness to preserve that which has been published. I still regard The Official Date Files as one of the most important proposals for Internet. I have, since writing this proposal, been made aware of the fact that ISBN numbers are now available for electronic documents. This is clearly a step in the right direction. But unless there are official agencies willing to represent these documents for the posterity it is not much more than lip-service of a new area of environmental-friendly, open-minded and compassionately anarchistic publishing.

I wellcome more criticism and I am pleasantly surprised that mysociety.blogs.com are still functional and receiving comments, though I have not seen a clear summary as to which projects are to be funded. I could sure appreciate some funding for my free undertakings, which are all done in a spirit of seeking freer expressions for all.

Stein von Reusch,
www.yoga4d.com and www.yoga6d.com

Posted by: Stein von Reusch at Apr 3, 2005 2:46:18 PM

This is a follow-up comment from the author of the above proposal, SteinVR, [email protected]:

Since the relatively long time since the proposal was listed, there have been several developments along the lines I suggested. In particular, Google has, after telling Microsoft to back off, decided to go 'hacker-friendly' -- which is an innovative way to speak of being open rather than control-maniac. They have also started to invite text files to be listed at them, in which they give the date (at least when it is cached) in a way which provides a semi-officiality to the delievery of the date.

SourceForge is again more freshly anarchistic, the notion of listing sponsored things first seems to have been clarified.

While Google sensors according to their republican right christian ethics ideas without any possibilities of a preference-section-decision of taking the filter away, Yahoo.com continues to sustain a very broad range of sensual listings, also together with Alltheweb.com, which easily provides an opportunity to take away filter.

I have a tips to Google and other people: If you really want to be hacker-friendly, make your PageRanker formula (or whatever you call it) not just open and public, but make it something people can vote over, so that it regularly changes. Because, like it or not, Google has a monopoly, and the decision of any committee inside Google affects all of Internet strongly and deeply -- and undemocratically.

Another tips: Take away the counting of how many people who has been into a page at listers such as SourceForge, and take away also the sorting according to quantity. Put the rare flowers -- if you can find them -- on top, rather than the 'most trodden path'.

The importance of the proposal of The Offical Date Files lies also in this: that we avoid reliance on cutting down forests to save our proposals; an issue which is now more potent than ever (since the pollution of air with CO2 and the cutting away of Amazon and so on leads to stronger storms and hurricanes and so a radical change must happen -- see the text http://www.yoga4d.com/radio.txt for more about this).

Yet: We still lack that simple way of just storing a text WITHOUT A COMMITEE hanging over it. We have the Wiki-type of dictionaries, but see what happens if somebody puts in something which is not liked by those who use Wiki-dictionaries hyperactively: they sensor it, quietly. So if there is criticism of a big monopolistic company, then it might be the case that they have a 'Wiki-watch' which strongly takes it away again. Nevertheless, the popularity of Wiki shows why The Offical Date Files is a good proposal. In The Offical Date Files there would be no Wiki-watch-dog comittee, there would be no over-riding of the proposals by individuals. They would stay. They would be as the 'weblogs' or 'blogs', only that they are truly officlal. For Internet, I must repeat, has NOT YET offered a true alternative to paper-publishing. It must come, soon. S.v.R.

Posted by: Stein von Reusch at Sep 18, 2005 6:39:16 PM

asian massage oceanside ca

Posted by: hmoiqdwdpt at Jul 18, 2007 2:40:07 AM

It is right that every one wants to contribute to the world of science,and great thing you told about the China has paid Yahoo to filter out critical information against itself on its Chinese portals,so the things you share are really good and great and specially they are right and absolutely true.Good to tell.

Posted by: Dissertation Writing at Feb 28, 2011 11:16:53 AM