<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tech Briefs Insider &#187; 2007 &#187; October</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com</link>
	<description>Questions of the Week</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 15:05:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Is it time to abandon the terrorist watch list and find another means of screening for terrorists?</title>
		<link>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/29/question-of-the-week-21/</link>
		<comments>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/29/question-of-the-week-21/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 13:25:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TechBriefs</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[QotW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/?p=489</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This week&#8217;s question concerns a new report issued by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) that claims the governmentÃ­s terrorist watch list now contains more than 755,000 names. The list, which was created after 9/11 to help government agents prevent terrorists from entering the country, has been growing at a rate of 200,000 names per year [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This week&#8217;s question concerns a new report issued by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) that claims the governmentÃ­s terrorist watch list now contains more than 755,000 names. The list, which was created after 9/11 to help government agents prevent terrorists from entering the country, has been growing at a rate of 200,000 names per year since 2004. In that time only about 53,000 people on the list have been questioned, and it is not known how many were actually denied entry into the country. Some lawmakers and security experts now feel the list is too large to be of any practical use. What do you think? Is it time to abandon the terrorist watch list and find another means of screening for terrorists? </p>
<p><a href="http://link.abpi.net/l.php?20071029A9">Vote here</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/29/question-of-the-week-21/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Should our military be allowed to use non-lethal energy beam weapons?</title>
		<link>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/22/question-of-the-week-20/</link>
		<comments>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/22/question-of-the-week-20/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:21:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TechBriefs</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[QotW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/?p=474</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This week&#8217;s question concerns a report from MSNBC that for the past four years, US military leaders have requested - and been denied - a non-lethal energy beam weapon called the Active Denial System, which is mounted on a Humvee or flatbed truck, and uses directed-energy beams that can penetrate a few millimeters under the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This week&#8217;s question concerns a report from MSNBC that for the past four years, US military leaders have requested - and been denied - a non-lethal energy beam weapon called the Active Denial System, which is mounted on a Humvee or flatbed truck, and uses directed-energy beams that can penetrate a few millimeters under the skin, causing pain. When trained on a crowd, the pain makes them disperse. An Air Force science advisor believes the system should become an immediate priority in Iraq, but the International Red Cross, other non-profit organizations, and other governments are concerned that the use of energy-based weapons breaks the Geneva Convention on torture. What do you think? Should our military be allowed to use non-lethal energy beam weapons? </p>
<p><a href="http://link.abpi.net/l.php?20071022A10">Click here to vote</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/22/question-of-the-week-20/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Has the Internet made it necessary to rethink our copyright laws?</title>
		<link>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/15/question-of-the-week-19/</link>
		<comments>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/15/question-of-the-week-19/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 13:00:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TechBriefs</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[QotW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/?p=463</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This week&#8217;s question concerns a national organization springing up on college campuses that advocates loosening copyright laws so that information such as research can be shared freely. Students for a Free Culture argues that the Internet has made it necessary to rethink copyright laws, and supports a bill that would make it mandatory for government-funded [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This week&#8217;s question concerns a national organization springing up on college campuses that advocates loosening copyright laws so that information such as research can be shared freely. Students for a Free Culture argues that the Internet has made it necessary to rethink copyright laws, and supports a bill that would make it mandatory for government-funded research to be published free to the public in online journals. The group also wants to loosen patent regulations for pharmaceutical drugs. Opponents say changes to the laws could compromise a researcher&#8217;s intellectual property. What do you think? Has the Internet made it necessary to rethink our copyright laws?  </p>
<p><a href="http://link.abpi.net/l.php?20071015A11">Vote here</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/15/question-of-the-week-19/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Should auto manufacturers make hybrid cars noisier?</title>
		<link>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/08/question-of-the-week-18/</link>
		<comments>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/08/question-of-the-week-18/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 13:27:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TechBriefs</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[QotW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/?p=452</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This week&#8217;s question addresses concerns by the National Federation of the Blind that hybrid vehicles pose a safety hazard to the blind because they do not make enough noise. At slower speeds, hybrid vehicles produce almost no noise, which makes it difficult for those relying solely on sound to determine if it&#8217;s safe to cross [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This week&#8217;s question addresses concerns by the National Federation of the Blind that hybrid vehicles pose a safety hazard to the blind because they do not make enough noise. At slower speeds, hybrid vehicles produce almost no noise, which makes it difficult for those relying solely on sound to determine if it&#8217;s safe to cross a street or walk through a parking lot. Car makers argue that the lack of noise pollution is a benefit of the hybrid car, and that making it noisy on purpose would negate that benefit. What do you think? Should auto manufacturers make hybrid cars noisier? </p>
<p><a href="http://link.abpi.net/l.php?20071008A10">Vote here</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/08/question-of-the-week-18/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Have Americans completely lost the excitement we once had over space exploration?</title>
		<link>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/01/question-of-the-week-17/</link>
		<comments>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/01/question-of-the-week-17/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2007 13:10:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TechBriefs</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[QotW]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/?p=445</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This week&#8217;s question concerns the 50th anniversary on Thursday of the launch of Sputnik I by the Soviet Union. A year later, NASA was created and the &#8220;space race&#8221; between the world&#8217;s superpowers began. But since the last manned Apollo mission to the Moon, Americans have adopted a different view of the space program, looking [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This week&#8217;s question concerns the 50th anniversary on Thursday of the launch of Sputnik I by the Soviet Union. A year later, NASA was created and the &#8220;space race&#8221; between the world&#8217;s superpowers began. But since the last manned Apollo mission to the Moon, Americans have adopted a different view of the space program, looking at it from a budgetary viewpoint instead of a scientific one. What do you think? Have Americans completely lost the excitement we once had over space exploration? </p>
<p><a href="http://link.abpi.net/l.php?20071001A16">Click here to vote</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techbriefsinsider.com/2007/10/01/question-of-the-week-17/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
