Slashdot Mirror

https://market-ticker.org/akcs...

problem with Z-wave "security"
https://market-ticker.org/akcs...

https://market-ticker.org/akcs...

problem with Z-wave "security"
https://market-ticker.org/akcs...

You don't have to be a conservative in order to get censored on these sites. You just need to question the political agendas.

Link to data that disproves a shadow-government talking point? Watch the post get removed for "not meeting community standards"

It's just that conservatives disagree with the current talking points far more often than the neo-liberals that you see in the media lately, who are not to be confused with classical liberals who actually do care about freedoms.

They do. Do you think Netflix doesn't pay for their internet connection and the massive amounts of bandwidth they use?

Netflix is only paying whoever is directly providing them service, and it certainly isn't the small regional ISPs who have to deal with the bandwidth demands.

Here's the actual MATH behind "Net Neutrality", take a look here, before the post rolls off into his non-public archive.

(I'm posting this as Anonymous Coward because the maggots and faggots have modded down enough of my posts to result in my account having Terrible karma, and thus, an automatic -1 on new posts. Fuck those moderators dead. Looks like it's time for a new account. - jp_832)

Karl Denninger covers this as well. In short, it's a laughable offering of "evidence".

It gets much worse than that. $3000 for a vial of snake anti-venom, and needing 16 doses..

Here's Karl Denninger's take on this. I don't agree or disagree. I just want to see what the reaction is: http://market-ticker.org/akcs-...

Open your wallet. All the Netflix viewers and Facebook advertisers are counting on YOU to subsidize them.

You must not get out much:

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-...
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-...

These from a man who actually started and ran an ISP.

I'm "tech-savvy" as well, and I agree with what he writes on the matter.

You must not get out much:

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-...
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-...

These from a man who actually started and ran an ISP.

I'm "tech-savvy" as well, and I agree with what he writes on the matter.

...because a bunch of my neighbors want to watch Netflix?

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?singlepost=3355222

The modern incarnation of tea party groups is basically a lesson in major party co-option and poisoning of a movement to neutralize it. The Democrats certainly don't want to focus on its origins, because those are rooted in an anti-war / anti-coroporate welfare philosophy and Democrats still like to pretend they aren't neo-cons. The GOP certainly didn't want it to spread and disturb its social issue message which it uses to cover its financially wanton behavior.

As for recent history, which has been effectively erased by both parties, there were Ron Paul Tea Party events in 2007 with a major focus on ending the wars in the middle east and protecting civil liberties: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... Check out the tags on the boxes being thrown in the the water for example around 1 minute in: "iraq war" "corporate welfare" "homeland security" etc. Or this video from Nov. 2007: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... which is 80% anti-war (warning, pictures of burned and blown up kids from Iraq or Afghanistan).

Then shortly after Obama's election, Karl Denninger popularized an idea of sending tea bags to Congress. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-... His focus was on the fraud and abuse the Feds winked at during the financial meltdown, and he was livid when the GOP coopted the Tea Party, and turned it into some "Guns, Gays, God" focused BS: http://market-ticker.org/akcs-... Indeed, it took almost no time for the GOP to co-opt the Tea Party: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

And in case you think Denninger is just another Koch brother wannabe, he voted for Obama in 2007: http://voxday.blogspot.com/201...

He also supported the Occupy Movement's focus on banking fraud and interestingly, thought it's lack of centralization good, seeing centralization as the fatal exploitable flaw for tea party groups: http://rt.com/usa/tea-occupy-d...

Anyway, today's Tea Party is a caricature the DNC and GOP created for their own purposes by poisoning the original ideas.

The modern incarnation of tea party groups is basically a lesson in major party co-option and poisoning of a movement to neutralize it. The Democrats certainly don't want to focus on its origins, because those are rooted in an anti-war / anti-coroporate welfare philosophy and Democrats still like to pretend they aren't neo-cons. The GOP certainly didn't want it to spread and disturb its social issue message which it uses to cover its financially wanton behavior.

As for recent history, which has been effectively erased by both parties, there were Ron Paul Tea Party events in 2007 with a major focus on ending the wars in the middle east and protecting civil liberties: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... Check out the tags on the boxes being thrown in the the water for example around 1 minute in: "iraq war" "corporate welfare" "homeland security" etc. Or this video from Nov. 2007: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... which is 80% anti-war (warning, pictures of burned and blown up kids from Iraq or Afghanistan).

Then shortly after Obama's election, Karl Denninger popularized an idea of sending tea bags to Congress. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-... His focus was on the fraud and abuse the Feds winked at during the financial meltdown, and he was livid when the GOP coopted the Tea Party, and turned it into some "Guns, Gays, God" focused BS: http://market-ticker.org/akcs-... Indeed, it took almost no time for the GOP to co-opt the Tea Party: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

And in case you think Denninger is just another Koch brother wannabe, he voted for Obama in 2007: http://voxday.blogspot.com/201...

He also supported the Occupy Movement's focus on banking fraud and interestingly, thought it's lack of centralization good, seeing centralization as the fatal exploitable flaw for tea party groups: http://rt.com/usa/tea-occupy-d...

Anyway, today's Tea Party is a caricature the DNC and GOP created for their own purposes by poisoning the original ideas.

..."skullfucked within an inch of their lives."
In short, if these so-called "doctors" really wanted to improve peoples' health, they would be lobbying to make it so that SNAP benefits could not be used to purchase foods with added sugars and cheap carbohydrates.

Karl Denninger has proven this is utterly false. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=222846

Karl Denninger writes up his experience in attempting to replicate the claim. Karl calls BS:

http://market-ticker.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?singlepost=3242634

Don't Buy The BS Being Run on BB10 Email Security

There's a "report" flying around alleging that BB10 phones send unencrypted email passwords to BlackBerry and additionally that BlackBerry immediately connects back to the email server and signs on (which would, of course, require that it knows the password.)

This is easily tested and since I have a Z10 I decided to do exactly that.

What am doing here is setting up an account called "test" on my IMAP server to receive email and then will enter the credentials into the phone.

To make it interesting I will do it over the Cellular Connection rather than over WiFi, so that if the phone wants to do some sort of DNS lookup that my server might block (if it was using my DNS servers as it was connected via WiFi) it'll work.

Here we go. {full documentation follows}

The reason the medical system is messed up is because of the laws, regulations and monopoly protections enforced on the entire sector by the government. Specifically, EMTALA, which forces the provision of emergency room care to people who have no ability to pay for it, the fact that federal laws and regulations prohibit the re-importation of drugs and medical devices, the fact that hospitals can get away with not quoting prices for common routine procedures, and so on and so forth.

There's reason Americans should fear socialized medicine: look at what the UK's NHS system does to inconvenient elderly people unfortunate enough to get sick (Liverpool care pathway).

My point was that people who advocate the purchase of gold know that in the long term the price of gold in terms of dollars or other fiat currencies has never gone down. Gold is a good means of preserving wealth, but not for deriving income from such wealth.

Excellent point on wealth versus income, I see you know your balance sheet. I was soul-searching to discover why gold-over-time comparisons tickle my funny bone, aside from being generally perverse. Not so savvy as Karl Denninger who has his reasons to be bearish on gold as an investment or plaything. As one who has never owned any gold or even more than a fistful of dollars I don't implicitly trust either, so I find it easy to make light of the choices that people of wealth are facing right now.

While pondering the dollar and gold I grew bored and made a sandwich, and contemplated that instead. Bread you can sink your teeth into, and throughout history love of it has transcended love of fiat money and precious metal.

Looking into bread vs. gold, I found this, "it is said that an ounce of gold bought 350 loaves of bread in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, who died in 562 BC" (cited here)

Fascinating! What if you view bread itself as the exchange pivot plotted against on gold (for the US via the dollar)? A quick search did not reveal anyone who had done it, so I gathered gold fixes and one-pound-loaf statistics for the hundred years of 1913-2012 and created a gold:bread ratio. How many loaves/pounds of bread 'buys' an ounce of gold. Here is my resulting chart and data.

So in 1913 the gold:bread ratio was ~337.9 which is comparable to Nebuchadnezzar's time. It stayed more or less in the same magnitude until the 1971 Nixon Shock when gold heads through the roof. Bread rises steadily but gold's rise is meteoric.

1980 is the worst-ever year for bread, with ~1,281 loaves to purchase an ounce of gold. We're so used to seeing things from the dollar/gold point of view but 1970 and 2001 were really great years for bread, with gold purchasing power twice what it had in Babylon.

Then we went to war and everything went to hell. But the gold:bread chart does offer one surprise: even though gold is massive right now, the actual gold:bread ratio is similar to what it was in 1980 before it started to fall.

So what we need right now is a Reganomics sandwich.

Interesting blog post on the difference between QNX and the other OS offerings.... http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=217190

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=215290

Yes they did. It's called fraud.

The analysis on market-ticker today suggests 5GB is still the approximate upper limit. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=210521

Isn't that impossible? It's trying to prove a negative. So you mean that in order to sell a product I must prove that for the rest of time there will never be an ill consequence from my product, even though the science to determine potentially ill consequences may not yet exist?

You really don't ever want there to be an economic recovery do you?

You might wish such an ideal world could work, but it observably doesn't.

Then we have things like this:

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=209444

But liberals would never get involved in such slime, right? http://classicalvalues.com/2012/08/terrorists-dealing-drugs http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=209934

Side by side, both starting with a 100% charge, the Playbook while idle lasts a workweek with light use before the red light starts flashing at me, telling me I have to plug it in.

The Galaxy tab lost 30% of its charge in 10 hours overnight sitting in a sleeve while asleep with nothing running in the background -- no apps, no push email, nothing.

Now take both on a trip and tell me this doesn't matter. If you whip it out to use it at a customer site and it's dead it sure as hell does matter. And this is exactly the sort of massive advantage that I was talking about when it comes to QNX .vs. Android (and IOS.) [...]

It would be interesting to run this same comparison of the Playbook's battery life versus the Kindle Fire, or perhaps the Nexus 7. But I'm not sure a comparison between the Fire and the Playbook is all that valid, because they're designed and intended for two different purposes (the Fire for E-reading and media consumption, the Playbook for "business" use).

It is possible, however, by rooting the Playbook, to open it up to full GAPPS capability, including the Google Play Store. RIMM needs to do this for BB10...and then they need to promote the hell out of this capability, saying, "BlackBerry runs all your favorite Android apps...and runs them better!" (Which is true; the QNX kernel of BB10 is far more efficient in an embedded environment than Android's Linux kernel is. This translates into increased battery life.) Karl Denninger has argued that this is the only way for RIMM to avoid complete irrelevance in the marketplace...and the company's performance since he wrote that piece in March seems to bear that out.

They could go further, too. One enterprising hacker has gotten (some) unmodified iOS apps to run on the Playbook. And it's perfectly legal, because the developer has just created his own implementations of relevant Apple APIs, and, under the ruling in Oracle v. Google, APIs are not copyrightable and Apple can't stop him. RIMM should acquire or license this technology and extend it to work with more iOS apps, and promote the hell out of this capability, too. Imagine being able to run virtually any popular smart phone app on one phone...with better battery life than either Android phones or the iPhone. (QNX beats the iOS Darwin kernel for efficiency, too.)

If RIMM does these two things, they could go from zero to hero in one fell swoop. If they fail to do either one...well, next stop is probably a bankruptcy court.

The "head" is the government, plain and simple. The fact is that crime has been committed, and the government is committed to ensuring it doesn't get punished. As long as that continues we are a kleptocracy. The OWS morons were whining at the banks. Well who let those banks continue to exist? The free market? A free market would have all the primarly broker dealer's CEOs standing on Wall St. with "will work for food" signs! The ones that didn't get sent to the slammer, that is. This, this, is the truth, if you can handle it: http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=208374

Agencies like the EPA are borderline useless if the federal government is unwilling to prosecute for environmental crimes. Just like existing banking regulations are effectively worthless, because major banks are above them. For instance, Wachovia officials recently admitted in court to laundering drug money, and no one went to jail for it (more examples).

For the record, I'm not even American. I'd just like to point out that the problems surrounding BP and environmental protection can only be addressed by prosecuting individuals and corporations. You can create all the federal agencies you want; without a properly functioning legal system, they're worthless. Do you think BP wouldn't have skipped on maintenance if a disaster like Deepwater Horizon could've bankrupted them?

To be honest, I just realised that you've completely sidestepped the major issue at hand, which is the unsustainable government spending. Americans can't make a quantitative argument to save their lives, and don't realise that the US budget is a train wreck. If you don't balance it with massive cuts, then all government programs will be ultimately gone, including your precious EPA.

My view is that this generic protest against greed would be more effective with better focus. I would support a protest with the goal applying existing laws to Wall Street. Obama claims that Wall Street hasn't done anything illegal, but that is a lie. Unfortunately, it is not widely recognized that the law has been systematically broken, as the mainstream media are owned by the 0.1%. Alternative media and protests are a step in the right direction. If these protests cause people to wonder about the endless cycle of fraud between regulators and bankers, or to wonder whom the existence of the Federal Reserve actually benefits, then they are a success. I generally agree with the following blog post on this topic [market-ticker.org]. http://www.market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=195649

Never mind prosecuting bankers who have openly confessed to committing crimes.

Data mining is the way to go!

Why do I find it so difficult to feel sorry for the Wall Street gamblers who got their precious "intellectual property" stolen?

BTW, speaking of Wall St. gamblers... there's a new bill in Congress to reinstate the Glass-Steagall "wall of separation" between investment and commercial banking. Contact your reps to get them on board.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=184237

You're saying his birth certificate is an obvious forgery? You must be ignoring the truth. http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=185094

I visited his site, and the first entry was on guns, comparing Obama to Hitler, while his site is titled, "Commentary on The Capital Markets". Very relevant and erudite, indeed. And of course, the content and quality of his site went downhill from there.

Here is the problem, and the irony, of such sites (as I see it).

Ever since the crash, you've all these "experts" who have a tenuous grasp at best of fundamental finance or economics, and yet who are perfectly comfortable spewing forth rubbish on the topic. It's no different from the dotcom boom -- everyone pretended to know a little something about technology, and was perfectly happy to spew forth rubbish, without really knowing anything substantial at all.

Just read his junk on the state of the debt, and you realize that the man only talks about the market at a broad, superficial level, peppered with hackneyed hockey-mom aphorisms, without ever touching any of the fundamental drivers. Furthermore, I really wish somebody would give this guy a crash course in fundamental statistics on cross-correlation and causation.

The problem is that armed with half-baked knowledge and strong opinions, these guys are perfectly happy telling the world what's wrong, but offering nothing more than platitudes in fixing the problems without collapsing the economic structure we've built thus far.

Heck, what are the guy's qualifications? He has a Wikipedia entry that states that he is a "stock trader" and a CEO, but how much capital did he trade in? Unless it's hundreds of millions or more, he knows nothing about "capital markets" -- he is just a small fish in the pond. And what was he the "CEO" of? What are his educational qualifications?

The irony of such guys pushing forth their opinions is pretty much the same as creationists pushing their "agenda" to stop teaching evolution.

If you must, read someone like Nassim Nicholas Taleb -- his books The Black Swan or Fooled by Randomness offer a lot more on why we fucked up, than some crazy right wing rhetoric by a chipmunk with half-a-brain (no insults to any chipmunks, of course -- they are perfectly adorable creatures).

Read the Market Ticker. Seriously. It is probably the most insightful site I've seen on the scope of the fraud being waged against the American public. In particular, note the number of times Bank of America or "Bank of America employees" get referenced in behavior that sounds more like it should be happening in Zimbabwe than the US.

Read the Market Ticker. Seriously. It is probably the most insightful site I've seen on the scope of the fraud being waged against the American public. In particular, note the number of times Bank of America or "Bank of America employees" get referenced in behavior that sounds more like it should be happening in Zimbabwe than the US.

Red some posts, he sounds like a tea-party nut in some posts, in others not so much.

Read the Market Ticker. Seriously. It is probably the most insightful site I've seen on the scope of the fraud being waged against the American public. In particular, note the number of times Bank of America or "Bank of America employees" get referenced in behavior that sounds more like it should be happening in Zimbabwe than the US.

Read the Market Ticker. Seriously. It is probably the most insightful site I've seen on the scope of the fraud being waged against the American public. In particular, note the number of times Bank of America or "Bank of America employees" get referenced in behavior that sounds more like it should be happening in Zimbabwe than the US.

Red some posts, he sounds like a tea-party nut in some posts, in others not so much.

Read the Market Ticker. Seriously. It is probably the most insightful site I've seen on the scope of the fraud being waged against the American public. In particular, note the number of times Bank of America or "Bank of America employees" get referenced in behavior that sounds more like it should be happening in Zimbabwe than the US.

Here is a chart of the spending by department.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?get_gallerynr=172

In my post, I may have overstated the size a bit. So I guess we have one additional option -- instead of eliminating two programs, we can eliminate one and then all other government spending. :-)

Here is an article placing the current US deficit at $1.5 trillion:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aNaqecavD9ek

Another interesting site is ShadowStats which shows a more accurate representation of government figures that they have been manipulating over the past three decades.

http://www.shadowstats.com/

There have been a series of articles about this problem on the Market Ticker (Karl Denninger). Read his blog for a couple weeks and you will have nothing but contempt for our financial system -- especially the large banks and our government "regulators". It needs a thorough purging of indictments and prosecutions in order to achieve anything close to reliable for investment.

Unfortunately, every other possible avenue for investment seems to be on just as shaky ground. It is one of those times when I am glad I am not rich (I have less to lose).

There have been a series of articles about this problem on the Market Ticker (Karl Denninger). Read his blog for a couple weeks and you will have nothing but contempt for our financial system -- especially the large banks and our government "regulators". It needs a thorough purging of indictments and prosecutions in order to achieve anything close to reliable for investment.

Unfortunately, every other possible avenue for investment seems to be on just as shaky ground. It is one of those times when I am glad I am not rich (I have less to lose).

There have been a series of articles about this problem on the Market Ticker (Karl Denninger). Read his blog for a couple weeks and you will have nothing but contempt for our financial system -- especially the large banks and our government "regulators". It needs a thorough purging of indictments and prosecutions in order to achieve anything close to reliable for investment.

Unfortunately, every other possible avenue for investment seems to be on just as shaky ground. It is one of those times when I am glad I am not rich (I have less to lose).

The unemployment rate is hideously gamed and massaged with black box models, assumptions and seasonal adjustments.

If you want something that gives you a big-picture view then take the raw number of working adults and divide by the population. That gives you the employment rate.

Wonko, you raise a lot of good points. I don't think anybody actually bothered to read the one comment you linked to:

What happened here is that they moved traffic from Akamai, which was pulling private lines into and/or buying colo space with ISPs at their own expense (to avoid being charged for transport) and was billing that back to Netflix over to Level 3, which was not doing that. This "saved" Netflix lots of money as LVLT agreed to do the distribution for much less money than Akamai was charging.
Level 3 thought they would just shove the bits down a peering connection and force Comcast to carry it on their long haul and regional network at their expense. In short, Netflix tried to poach on Comcast's buildout and got caught.

So, Akamai delivered content to your home by paying big money to pull a private line into your ISP's local POP. From that point your ISP would transport the traffic on the local last mile to your house. Level 3's solution is to dump all of the traffic onto your ISP at a handful of peering points and ask the ISP to transport the traffic across the country for them at no cost.

I'm surprised that Comcast is the only ISP complaining about this. I'll have to do some traceroutes when I get home and see where my Netflix movies are coming from now. Wonder if Time Warner is running into the same issue now? I've looked at traceroutes for Netflix before and they always originated inside the TW network only 4 or 5 hops away from my me. Presumably this was the colo from Akamai. It'll be interesting to see how this has changed.

isn't this more of a peering agreement issue?

Pretty much

I generally respect Karl Denninger's viewpoint on these issues since he was one of the people actually involved in building out the internet.

It's not about content, it's about volume and flows, and who pays for the infrastructure build necessary to handle them.

What amounts to poaching other people's resources works well right up until you drive that other party into the wall and force them to spend a crapload of money for which they receive nothing in return. That is, they don't receive any renumeration for the additional expense - but you do!

This is the base problem with all overcommitted services where the business model is predicated on fractional use of maximum possible resource consumption. When that model is violated costs go up dramatically. This is ok provided the person who has the cost also gets the revenue that is occasioned by the violation of the original model.

But in the case at hand, Netflix and similar get the revenue, but Comcast gets the cost.

I saw this one coming a mile away. If L3 manages to get the FCC involved and Comcast is prohibited from doing this they will be forced instead to either cap-and-charge customers or dramatically raise their prices, which will also blow back on the content folks like Netflix.

Suddenly that $8 "video any time" subscription becomes not $8, but $28 as Comcast adds another $20 to your monthly cable internet bill.

And there goes the pricing model that everyone loves so much about Netflix!

That's not at all what happened in 1929. Hoover ramped government spending and bailed out the banks. That's why we got a decade and half of depression instead of 2 years of panic and a quick rebound like in 1920.

(Posting anonymously since the Slashdot posting limit algorithm decided that I can't participate in this conversation any more).

Apparently you are ignoring the existence of the FDIC and what it does. If anyone wants to know what would actually happen during a bank closure or even a complete banking holiday they can rest assured that there is a plan already written up for it and your ATM cards would still work during the entire process.

There's no denying that banks played a major role in the collapse, largely due to not properly ensuring that borrowers were capable of repaying the loans.

They didn't want the borrowers to repay the loans. The whole thing was a scam from day one.

The sold unpayable loans to generate more fees by forcing borrowers to refinance.

They sold the same mortgage more than once so that when it defaulted the investors would not realize that it had been pledged two, three or four times over and blame the default for their loss. (Think of the plot of The Producers)

The Republicans and Democrats both know this but neither one is willing to throw their benefactors in jail.

Ok genius, tell me how these price increases aren't going to work their way through the supply chain and make the basic necessities of life cost more.

An economy losing 800k jobs monthly vs an economy growing 200k is a gigantic improvement.

It's very simple - if the number of jobs added to the economy is less than the number of people (trying to) enter into the workforce then the employment rate of the population is still going down.

Get your news from a better source. You might learn something.

An economy losing 800k jobs monthly vs an economy growing 200k is a gigantic improvement.

It's very simple - if the number of jobs added to the economy is less than the number of people (trying to) enter into the workforce then the employment rate of the population is still going down.

Get your news from a better source. You might learn something.