> i don't get it. A fiber optic line carries data, it doesn't actually detect anything, which means it needs a boatload of stuff to detect everything you say it's gonna detect - - cameras, magnetic sensors, ambient CO detectors, temp probes (to measure the temps of the cats to make sure people haven't gutted them, etc). . . . .it sounds to me like he's just laying out line to hook up to cameras to watch the traffic flow- - -if that's all, then it's not such a bad system . They have it here in the Twin Cities, and it really helps traffic management keep on top of where the slowdowns are. They tell the radio stations, who tell us, and tell us alternate routes.

Are you folks taking me seriously? Naw, couldn't happen. As you may have guessed, the Gov and I are on opposite sides of the political fence. His fiber optic proposal is probably a sound idea. However, like everything else, it will be subject to cost overruns and possible misuse. State and national governments have been known to misrepresent the intended goal of various projects.

I was thinking of possibilites. Yes, with the proper sensing equipment, such a fiber optic network could become Big Brother, but I don't expect it to happen. It would be nice if the highway patrol could do a better job of enforcing the speed limits, and I think we are at a technilogical stage where that is possible. The present system of spot checking with inaccurate radar guns and lasers is not doing the job. But that won't happen either.

And I still think it's a funny name.
Howard