Slashdot Mirror

George Washington ran a spy ring that spied on other colonists as part of his fight to obtain and maintain freedom for the colonies. Benjamin Franklin was head of a committee that opened other colonist's mail for intelligence information for the same reason. I'm pretty certain you aren't a bigger patriot than they were, nor do you have their wisdom. Your proclamation is in fact either demagoguery, or the statement of someone that is uninformed about the history of how the US become free, and maintained its freedom.

War of Secrets; Spy History 101: America's Intelligence Quotient

America's history of spying began in the beginning, with George Washington, who famously declared ''the necessity of procuring good intelligence is apparent and need not be further urged.'' Washington warned that the process depended on secrecy, ''for upon secrecy, success depends in most enterprises of the kind, and for want of it, they are generally defeated, however well planned and promising a favorable issue.''

Notwithstanding the hanging of Nathan Hale before he could hand off his assessment of enemy troops, America often succeeded at divining British military maneuvers and at manufacturing misinformation. Returning to England after the Revolutionary War, Maj. George Beckwith, London's spymaster in the colonies, remarked bitterly that ''Washington did not really outfight the British; he simply outspied us!''

The NSA may need better oversight for some of its operations, but it plays a vital role in the defense of the US and its allies. It both should and will continue to exist. Any other outcome would be folly of the highest order.

Look, nobody is saying that progress has to stop but not all progress is good. In this case it's very dangerous for us to assume that Google has everybody's well being in mind, remember the wifi mapping (snooping) that went on with their street view cars? That class action suit is still moving forward and it shows now insidious these privacy breaches can be in the name of innovation. Society in general is losing privacy in small and sometimes in very large ways
all in the name of progress or government snooping every day and the rate at which technology enables this to happen shouldn't mean that we start allowing our
personal habits or preferences to become open for public inspection. Unfortunately for us, our leaders have no interest in protecting our rights when it comes to their own retarded interests led by people who have Star Trek fetishes; that needs to be disassembled as well. Sure, there's public information that I don't mind people knowing but there's other information that nobody should know nor have an interest in knowing because it's not any of their concern. When we start trading some technological achievement for privacy then there should be a corresponding assessment to the benefits of what we're getting. Google gives away "free" services but really they're not free at all. They mine your information, your e-mails, where you go (if you use maps) etc. Facebook does the same thing and also links your information against other sources, like your buying preferences. There are other companies with names you may not be familiar with but they're out there digging and mining around for information about you, how much you make, what you buy, where you go and they dig far deeper than you may realize. What all of this does is allows others whether they're commercial or government entities to classify you, to put you into a box with a label on it and those labels can be dangerous to your liberty and how you work and live. Want that new job? Well now your future employer can just look at your social network behaviors to see how you'd fit with their organization, or to look for reasons not to hire you.

  So while the article is proposing that Google would be more trusted say than Ford or GM to come up with a self-driving vehicle, there's no fucking way that I will ever purchase a vehicle with a ToS that would allow somebody else to grab more information about me and my habits or preferences because that's part of the driving experience in this country, to get away without somebody looking over your shoulder on where you go and why. Is that naive? No because I know there are speed cameras, license plate readers, toll tag scanners and cameras and GPS trackers in my phone already or in my car and while I am still opposed to all of that, I do what I can to minimize that exposure to it and I still fight against it and will continue to do so.

Are you sure that cross checking is impossible?

https://panopticlick.eff.org/

And that's just one example. Truly big data will be essentially impossible to hide from completely. It doesn't need to reach a 100% positive result before people start treating it like it is, and that's only one possible problem that we should fully expect to arise from this.

Here's another that could make your idea less effective as well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/15/business/attention-shopper-stores-are-tracking-your-cell.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Republicans, as they stand today, are not conservative. As you pointed out, under Bush, they grew the government and increased funding even to things that they profess to hate.

Bush was then-massively deficit spending before Obama ever took office (granted, there were two wars going on). It wasn't until Obama took office that "massive" took on a different meaning.

I will say though that Bush is at least documented stating the the home loans were rapidly approaching a bursting bubble, and the Democrats completely stopped him. It's his fault because, unlike Obama, he proved unwilling to stonewall the other side until he gets his way, and the Republicans (who controlled both the House and Senate) refused to fix the problem without Democrats. Political correctness killed the Bush-led effort that would have regulated and saved us from the housing crisis.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

On the other hand, not only did Bush add Medicare obligations, but he also wasted billions on farming subsidies (which, scarily, Democrats have increased substantially).

It would sure be nice if Republicans were conservatives. That's why I hope the party collapses because the current choice is a Republican that claims small government priorities, but then throws them away or completely lacks a backbone. Or, you get the Democrat that wants to grow the government to take care of us, or claims some middle-right leaning dribble to get into office.

It's pretty obvious that no one in Congress gives a crap given that they aren't feeling any of the pain of the government shutdown. Their own internal tram system and gym (of all things) is still completely operational. But, it's a good thing that the government side of the parks, Amber Alert system and border control were shutdown. They have to make us feel it.

Too bad they didn't catch this fucker sooner.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/11/us/cia-warning-on-snowden-in-09-said-to-slip-through-the-cracks.html?_r=2&

Then nobody would be the wiser.

Um, yeah. It's China.... If you say things that the government doesn't like, they lock you up. (If they find out and get around to it - for run of the mill stuff, they will have people with the drive and efficiency of your average telephone sanitizer on the job.)

You seem to be under the impression that sort of behavior is exclusive to the Chinese government.

They don't have freedom of the press.

Neither does 'Murica, apparently:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/06/politics/06cnd-leak.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/209539/fox-news-reporter-who-wont-reveal-sources-threatened-with-jail/

good comment, definitely we should all make a point to seek out different points of view in news...

however, having worked in news (Fox affilitate in Iowa a century ago) I can tell you this is not going to get you 'diversity'

I would recommend reading diverse viewpoints. I read fox news, huffington post, bbc....

It's the Fox News thing...

See it's a false dichotomy and drastic oversimplification to say 'MSNBC is for liberals, Fox is for conservatives, therefor to have balance I must watch both'

The premise is wrong, based on an oversimplification...

Fox is not a news organization. It **resembles** a news organization, and sometimes what they do could be termed 'reporting' but it is not a news organization. When you watch Fox, you are seeing not 'news' but propaganda for a certain position presented as news. It is not fit to be compared to other news organizations.

It is a publicity company that leverages the need for 'news' to carve out a market for itself. Sure they wiill claim in their ads and promotions that Fox News is 'Fair and Balanced'...that doesn't make it true.

To falsify my point, take the Washington Post...it has a conservative bent (and their opinion page is open to the highest bidder) but they proudly and rightly claim that they are not like Fox, and other journalists defend them.

Diversity in your news is going to take more work. True value-added, objective reporting is difficult even when you are part of a **real** news organization.

You need to start thinking mainstream/non-mainstream...that's where you will find stories that others do not report. Look at the NFL concussion story as an example:

ESPN pulled a documentary that exposed the NFL's negligence in dealing with concussions. The documentary presented damning evidence...and ESPN decided not to air it...instead the documentary ran on PBS's 'Frontline'

Here's an article explaining the whole mess w/ link to the Frontline report: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/10/sports/football/by-shunning-concussion-documentary-espn-gives-it-a-lift.html

Watching another sports network won't get you "diversity" in that situation...you have to seek it out through a non-sport independent non-profit or you'd miss it!

Also, the BBC should be watched with caution regarding U.S. news...I've yet to see them demonstrate a true understanding of how our 2-party, 3-branch system works...maybe b/c they are still a monarchy?

http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/e/eller-myth.html

Most of the people who will see the film can tell the difference between fact and fiction, including being able to generally identify the wide swath in between.

I don't know about that and think it depends on the facts and fictions involved. After seeing Gravity, I'm sure there will be many, many people that think the ISS and Hubble are just a jet-pack ride apart, when, in fact, they are not - Astronaut and a Writer at the Movies. Unless one actually knows (or is willing/able to research) the facts, the fictions can be rather compelling...

Heavy aircraft as well. Though it is unclear if this plane was using autopilot.

And for anyone who is still ignorant of this fact this has a great story about it.

right, because people use their phones for PHONEcalls...owait, no they don't generally. . Data overtakes voice use: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/technology/personaltech/14talk.html .. Smart-phones outnumber feature phones in US: http://techland.time.com/2012/03/01/smartphones-outnumber-feature-phones-in-u-s-for-first-time/ .. Smartphones Finally Overtook Dumbphone Sales Globally: http://techcrunch.com/2013/08/14/gartner-q2-smartphone/ .. Smartphones to outnumber feature phones in Kenya by end of 2013: http://www.humanipo.com/news/32204/smartphones-to-outnumber-feature-phones-in-kenya-by-end-of-2013/ .. So basically, the planet is evolving towards using smartphones more than featurephones, and Voice is being overtaken by data on these devices, even in 3rd-Word countries. .. So why do we need to prioritize a curved phone for phone-calls again ?

And they don't pay much taxes here.

When you say "they" do you mean Samsung or Apple because Apple pays more in corporate taxes than any other American corporation.

Apple's effective tax rate: 14%

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/05/25/sunday-review/corporate-taxes.html?_r=1&

just thought I'd like to toss that out there... those tosspots have got some 400 plus nukes at hand...

Among the causes of action against Saddam in Iraq was that he was a ruthless dictator that used chemical weapons to attack his own people.

Among the causes of action against Assad in Syria is that he is a ruthless dictator that used chemical weapons to attack his own people.

Israel is a parliamentary democracy that isn't nuking their own people.

Maybe I'll just toss this out there. If the shoe fits ...

Except Apple aren't king of the hill any more, they have less than 20% of the smartphone market.

Hmm... your strawman is compelling, but it is difficult to ignore that Apple is the king of the stock market by value, the most valuable brand in the world, and with more than $150B in cash and about that much in projected annual revenue, if they're not yet richer than New Zealand (GDP ~$170B), they will be soon. So even if it is perhaps arguable that they lost some specific market battle, if, the point is overshadowed by the fact that Apple decisively won the war.

Sure thing hoss http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/29/technology/29phones.html

The notion of human rights seems quite foreign to Russia's leaders today. This follows the incredible state-sponsored persecution of LGBT people, which taps into (and caters to) the already fairly widespread homophobia in large parts of the population.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/opinion/russias-anti-gay-crackdown.html?_r=0

Innovation has gone somewhere else and all you've got left is what once was, and bullshit about how great you guys really think you are.

I flamed you out in another thread, but since you've tipped your hand I have to ask a borderline metaquestion: honestly, why do you care about this? Really? Why do you read this site?

It's like a mix of frustration and schadenfreude with you.

And, while I agree the ban is ham-handed, don't forget the Chinese stole our warhead designs and thanks to Clinton managed to get a lot of dual-use technology (thanks Loral and Hughes, you fucking assholes!) that improved their imaging satellites (e.g. spy sats).

More bullshit superpower propaganda lies, from the United Snakes.

Two Failed U.S. Raids

Yesterday two U.S. raids attempted to abduct a man in Libya and a man in Somalia. The raid in Libya did get the target but already has some bad impacts for the Libyan government. The raid in Somalia, by so called elite SEAL forces, failed completely.

The raid in Libya caught one Abu Anas Al-Libi, accused in connection with the bombing of a U.S. embassy in Kenia some 15 years ago. It also killed some 15 Libyan soldiers. The man, one Abu Anas Al-Libi, has lived away from Libya and came back after U.S. and NATO forces waged war against the Libyan government under Ghaddafi. He seems to have lived quite openly in the capitol Tripoli:

His brother Nabih told The Associated Press that just after dawn prayers on Saturday, three vehicles full of armed men approached Abu Anas’s home and surrounded him as he parked his car. The men smashed his window, seized his gun and sped away with him, the brother said.

The raid will surely lead to some controversies:

CNN said that the Libyan government knew the raid was being carried out. This has been denied today by the government, which has posted a statement on its Facebook page, saying it knows nothing about the reported seizure. It went to to say that it had contacted the US “for clarification”.

The various gangs that are the now the major powers in Libya will see this raid as (another) attack on Libya's sovereignty. Some major blowback against the interim government and other targets can be expected. There was already a tribal response against the government but the only mentioning of it is buried deep in the 25th paragraph of the NYT version of the story:

The capture of Abu Anas also coincided with a fierce gunfight that killed 15 Libyan soldiers at a checkpoint in a neighborhood southeast of Tripoli, near the traditional home of Abu Anas’s clan.

Some "coincidence" ...

The botched raid in Somalia was on a beach house allegedly used by the local Al Shaabab jihadists. The raid was first reported by locals and then by the Al Shaabab itself:

Sheikh Abdulaziz Abu Musab, spokesman for Al Shabaab’s military wing, confirmed the raid and disclosed in a recorded press statement that the militants “repelled a midnight raid by white infidel soldiers”.

Abu Musab said: "We fought back against the white infidel soldiers with bombs and bullets, and they ran back to their boats. One member of Al Shabaab was killed and the white infidel soldiers failed their mission. We found blood and equipment near the coast in the morning,” he added in a recorded press statement posted on militant websites.

There was a lot of confusion about this raid and it took nearly a day until the U.S. confirmed that it forces had been beaten back. At one time the NYT and Fox News said that a senior Shabaab boss was killed while NBC said he was captured and AP said he was not found. This reminds one of all the propaganda claims made about the Bin Laden raid. This time though we will immediately know for sure as the book about this SEAL raid

More bullshit superpower propaganda lies, from the United Snakes.

Two Failed U.S. Raids

Yesterday two U.S. raids attempted to abduct a man in Libya and a man in Somalia. The raid in Libya did get the target but already has some bad impacts for the Libyan government. The raid in Somalia, by so called elite SEAL forces, failed completely.

The raid in Libya caught one Abu Anas Al-Libi, accused in connection with the bombing of a U.S. embassy in Kenia some 15 years ago. It also killed some 15 Libyan soldiers. The man, one Abu Anas Al-Libi, has lived away from Libya and came back after U.S. and NATO forces waged war against the Libyan government under Ghaddafi. He seems to have lived quite openly in the capitol Tripoli:

His brother Nabih told The Associated Press that just after dawn prayers on Saturday, three vehicles full of armed men approached Abu Anas’s home and surrounded him as he parked his car. The men smashed his window, seized his gun and sped away with him, the brother said.

The raid will surely lead to some controversies:

CNN said that the Libyan government knew the raid was being carried out. This has been denied today by the government, which has posted a statement on its Facebook page, saying it knows nothing about the reported seizure. It went to to say that it had contacted the US “for clarification”.

The various gangs that are the now the major powers in Libya will see this raid as (another) attack on Libya's sovereignty. Some major blowback against the interim government and other targets can be expected. There was already a tribal response against the government but the only mentioning of it is buried deep in the 25th paragraph of the NYT version of the story:

The capture of Abu Anas also coincided with a fierce gunfight that killed 15 Libyan soldiers at a checkpoint in a neighborhood southeast of Tripoli, near the traditional home of Abu Anas’s clan.

Some "coincidence" ...

The botched raid in Somalia was on a beach house allegedly used by the local Al Shaabab jihadists. The raid was first reported by locals and then by the Al Shaabab itself:

Sheikh Abdulaziz Abu Musab, spokesman for Al Shabaab’s military wing, confirmed the raid and disclosed in a recorded press statement that the militants “repelled a midnight raid by white infidel soldiers”.

Abu Musab said: "We fought back against the white infidel soldiers with bombs and bullets, and they ran back to their boats. One member of Al Shabaab was killed and the white infidel soldiers failed their mission. We found blood and equipment near the coast in the morning,” he added in a recorded press statement posted on militant websites.

There was a lot of confusion about this raid and it took nearly a day until the U.S. confirmed that it forces had been beaten back. At one time the NYT and Fox News said that a senior Shabaab boss was killed while NBC said he was captured and AP said he was not found. This reminds one of all the propaganda claims made about the Bin Laden raid. This time though we will immediately know for sure as the book about this SEAL raid

so will this result in a theocratic christian government run by the bible belt?

Europe is in a much bigger danger of something like that than the US. It might take 50 years, but trouble is brewing.

European 'No-Go' Zones for Non-Muslims Proliferating - "Occupation Without Tanks or Soldiers"
Muslim Gangs Enforce Sharia Law in London

France's Less Joyous New Year's Tradition

The overall number of vehicles burned was in line with the 1,147 on the night of Dec. 31, 2009, the last time the government announced the figures. More than 40,000 vehicles are burned each year in France, Mr. Valls said Monday on RTL radio, calling it “an intolerable form of violence against property.” ...

During the autumn 2005 riots that rocked some of Paris’s more volatile suburbs, more than 8,800 cars were burned. At the time, French television censored images of the car-burning so as not to encourage the practice

Losing Malmo

Large percentages of immigrants to Europe reject traditional European values even though they share the land which may eventually be theirs. Native European are on the self-chosen path to extinction, and they will take their values with them.

No Babies?

In the 1990s, European demographers began noticing a downward trend in population across the Continent and behind it a sharply falling birthrate. Non-number-crunchers largely ignored the information until a 2002 study by Italian, German and Spanish social scientists focused the data and gave policy makers across the European Union something to ponder. The figure of 2.1 is widely considered to be the “replacement rate” — the average number of births per woman that will maintain a country’s current population level. At various times in modern history — during war or famine — birthrates have fallen below the replacement rate, to “low” or “very low” levels. But Hans-Peter Kohler, José Antonio Ortega and Francesco Billari — the authors of the 2002 report — saw something new in the data. For the first time on record, birthrates in southern and Eastern Europe had dropped below 1.3. For the demographers, this number had a special mathematical portent. At that rate, a country’s population would be cut in half in 45 years, creating a falling-off-a-cliff effect from which it would be nearly impossible to recover. Kohler and his colleagues invented an ominous new term for the phenomenon: “lowest-low fertility.” ...

In Germany, where the births-to-deaths ratio now results in an annual population loss of roughly 100,000, Ursula von der Leyen, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s family minister (and a mother of seven), declared two years ago that if her country didn’t reverse its plummeting birthrate, “We will have to turn out the light.” Last March, André Rouvoet, the leader of the Christian Union Party in the Netherlands (and a father of five), urged the government to get proactive and spur Dutch women to have more babies. The Canadian conservative Mark Steyn, author of the 2006 best seller “America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It,” has warned his fellow North Americans, whose birthrates are relatively high, that, regarding their European allies, “These countries are going out of business,” and that while at the end of the 21st century there may “still be a geographical area on t

so will this result in a theocratic christian government run by the bible belt?

Europe is in a much bigger danger of something like that than the US. It might take 50 years, but trouble is brewing.

European 'No-Go' Zones for Non-Muslims Proliferating - "Occupation Without Tanks or Soldiers"
Muslim Gangs Enforce Sharia Law in London

France's Less Joyous New Year's Tradition

The overall number of vehicles burned was in line with the 1,147 on the night of Dec. 31, 2009, the last time the government announced the figures. More than 40,000 vehicles are burned each year in France, Mr. Valls said Monday on RTL radio, calling it “an intolerable form of violence against property.” ...

During the autumn 2005 riots that rocked some of Paris’s more volatile suburbs, more than 8,800 cars were burned. At the time, French television censored images of the car-burning so as not to encourage the practice

Losing Malmo

Large percentages of immigrants to Europe reject traditional European values even though they share the land which may eventually be theirs. Native European are on the self-chosen path to extinction, and they will take their values with them.

No Babies?

In the 1990s, European demographers began noticing a downward trend in population across the Continent and behind it a sharply falling birthrate. Non-number-crunchers largely ignored the information until a 2002 study by Italian, German and Spanish social scientists focused the data and gave policy makers across the European Union something to ponder. The figure of 2.1 is widely considered to be the “replacement rate” — the average number of births per woman that will maintain a country’s current population level. At various times in modern history — during war or famine — birthrates have fallen below the replacement rate, to “low” or “very low” levels. But Hans-Peter Kohler, José Antonio Ortega and Francesco Billari — the authors of the 2002 report — saw something new in the data. For the first time on record, birthrates in southern and Eastern Europe had dropped below 1.3. For the demographers, this number had a special mathematical portent. At that rate, a country’s population would be cut in half in 45 years, creating a falling-off-a-cliff effect from which it would be nearly impossible to recover. Kohler and his colleagues invented an ominous new term for the phenomenon: “lowest-low fertility.” ...

In Germany, where the births-to-deaths ratio now results in an annual population loss of roughly 100,000, Ursula von der Leyen, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s family minister (and a mother of seven), declared two years ago that if her country didn’t reverse its plummeting birthrate, “We will have to turn out the light.” Last March, André Rouvoet, the leader of the Christian Union Party in the Netherlands (and a father of five), urged the government to get proactive and spur Dutch women to have more babies. The Canadian conservative Mark Steyn, author of the 2006 best seller “America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It,” has warned his fellow North Americans, whose birthrates are relatively high, that, regarding their European allies, “These countries are going out of business,” and that while at the end of the 21st century there may “still be a geographical area on t

Has China banned Android phones, or are you simply making up hypothetical situations that are absurd in practice?

Ya, its not like China has ever blocked iTunes over providing access to undesirable content..
But really, doing something to hurt Apple's business in China? Like, building a replacement? No, they would never do that.

And like you, I recall China's response to Google no longer censoring search results to be entirely positive. They don't disconnect you if you try to search for a blocked term, right?

The Chinese government has absolutely no problem taking very drastic steps that can be financially devastating to a company. You play ball, or you have problems doing business in China.

> Being larger makes boys better at sports.

No, it doesn't. It gives them a potential advantage at sports.

This is exactly the problem with making such a big fuss about the differences between the sexes, whatever they may be. My Y chromosome did not make me particularly athletic (like many Slashdot readers, I suspect), and my girlfriend can out-wrestle me. But your casual phrasing suggests that this should be impossible, because it paints both of us with an extremely broad brush.

It gets worse with fuzzier aptitudes like math, which is stereotypically believed to be a male discipline for... some reason or another. But today's NYT article suggests that perhaps there are fewer women in math and sciences because we tell women they can't do math and sciences.

So yes, all else being an equal, a man will probably be stronger than a woman who's done the same training. But a woman who's done any training at all will be stronger than the vast majority of men who haven't, and insisting that "men are better at sports" will discourage women from bothering at all (and earn scorn towards both men and women who don't fit the mold).

What is the use in such a distinction between potential advantage and just plain old advantage? A larger size really does seem to be a plain old advantage in many sports and a disadvantage in others.

Why can't it be a little from column A and a little from column B? Or a lot from one and a little from the other? Of course the golem effect is probably discouraging women from science, but on average, they may also just be worse at it, simultaneously. If that is the case, then is it in our best interests to acknowledge that fact? I'm not saying we shouldn't have female scientists, but it does impact the discussion on what, if anything, we should do about the numbers imbalance.

Horseshit.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/us/harder-for-americans-to-rise-from-lower-rungs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

> Being larger makes boys better at sports.

No, it doesn't. It gives them a potential advantage at sports.

This is exactly the problem with making such a big fuss about the differences between the sexes, whatever they may be. My Y chromosome did not make me particularly athletic (like many Slashdot readers, I suspect), and my girlfriend can out-wrestle me. But your casual phrasing suggests that this should be impossible, because it paints both of us with an extremely broad brush.

It gets worse with fuzzier aptitudes like math, which is stereotypically believed to be a male discipline for... some reason or another. But today's NYT article suggests that perhaps there are fewer women in math and sciences because we tell women they can't do math and sciences.

So yes, all else being an equal, a man will probably be stronger than a woman who's done the same training. But a woman who's done any training at all will be stronger than the vast majority of men who haven't, and insisting that "men are better at sports" will discourage women from bothering at all (and earn scorn towards both men and women who don't fit the mold).

It does. You implied (I said asserted, and I stand by that) that we disrupt the communication channels of other market participants. This is a lie that you made up. You have no evidence whatsoever for it, yet you keep asserting it.

Where is your evidence? I called you an idiot, not for honest questions, but for ridiculous false accusations.

Here is a diagram showing all the evidence we need that HFT disrupt communication channels
30 milisecond advantage

And now a bonus section

The "liquidity" you provide is often fake, and withdrawn in times of most need.

A bigger problem, says Paul Squires, the head of trading for AXA Investment Managers, is that increased liquidity can be illusory. “You can press the button to buy Vodafone, say, and have it executed in a second but in that period 75% of the liquidity has disappeared and the price has moved.”

Big institutional investors also accuse HFTs of front-running their orders.

HFT also disrupt communication by spamming orders and cancells

It is certainly true that HFTs are constantly sending and cancelling orders. Some of that activity may be tied to a manipulative technique called “quote-stuffing”, in which a flood of orders and cancellations causes congestion on networks and thereby a fleeting trading advantage

Even when they are market making its not all as rosy as you claim

HFTs, like all market-makers, also earn money by positioning themselves between directional traders and capturing the spread. In principle, directional traders could trade with each other directly and (on average) meet at the midpoint of the bid-ask spread. The more directional traders trade through intermediaries instead of directly with each other, the more that bid-ask spread (along with the fees exchanges charge for taking liquidity) is siphoned away from investors and into the pockets of those market-makers.

Although competition among market-makers narrows spreads, the research note shows that reduction in spread is more than offset by the fact that market participants are effectively forced to trade through unwanted intermediaries, resulting in inferior execution prices.

Which is why we as a society need to come up with a way of offering training and education to those displaced workers, at no cost to the displaced workers.

We do. It's called job retraining and is touted, mainly, by the Republicans who offer it up every time the other side talks about shipping jobs overseas and what about the workers who won't have jobs. Guess what, it doesn't work. And still doesn't.

Which is why we as a society need to come up with a way of offering training and education to those displaced workers, at no cost to the displaced workers.

We do. It's called job retraining and is touted, mainly, by the Republicans who offer it up every time the other side talks about shipping jobs overseas and what about the workers who won't have jobs. Guess what, it doesn't work. And still doesn't.

In my mind, where this will have the largest impact, is by reducing local housing pressures; especially local housing inflation.

Amazon is basically doing the same thing using prime real estate in Downtown Seattle. These companies have such a large workforce that comprises such a large part of the surrounding community, stressing daily transportation, or local bandwidth, etc., these same companies have got to be taking the daily lifestyles of their employees, along with the impact onto the community, into consideration as part of the overall plan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/26/us/as-amazon-stretches-seattles-downtown-is-reshaped.html

For those who haven't read it yet, the NYT Magazine has an excerpt from a new Dave Eggers book named Circles . It captures this sort of thing eerily well.

Is douchebag really the right adjective for their behavior?

A quick list of recent scandals:
Obama/Biden: kill list, not closing guantanamo bay, many more
You have Romney and Ryan: Romneys tax scandal, Ryans insane economic plan.
McCain/Palin: McCain political positions I'll just point out his support of the Iraq war/ resistence to minimum wage, her lack of experience.
Bush/Cheney Iraq War/torture/etc apparently it's quite a list
Kerry/Edwards Kerry's initial support of the Iraq war, although it can't be stressed enough that it was Bush's group that initiated this war Kerry, having actually been in Vietnam, and part of the antiwar protests afterwards surely was well aware the invasion of Iraq was unjustified (hell I was and I was 15 at the time).

Esteemed recent presidents:
Clinton/Gore Kosovo
Reagan/Bush Iran Contra

All of them have supported changes that did some good too, but these acts are inexcusable.
Looking at the consistency and scope of these scandals its clear, and I think all reasonable people would agree that structural change is needed to our government. Not just the next politician not just another party (its not like dems and GOP weren't third party at one point).

There needs to be some better way of electing representatives than our current two party system. The little I know of other governments suggest politics isn't fundamentally different in other countries, the variance seems more to do with the excessively unequal distribution of wealth in america. Since modern technology seems to have made communication essentially free and practical to anyone in the same culture I suspect alternative voting methods should be more seriously considered, apparently there are many well known already. I think these could (in theory) be applied in business (risky but useful data) or MMO games (much less risky, much less useful data).

If anyone else is interested I found the book "Governing the Firm: Workers' Control in Theory and Practice" to be interesting and very down to earth, it takes an economists approach to evaluating worker controlled vs traditional top down management of firms that have historically existed and essentially concludes they are about the same economically with each type being a bit more practical in certain industries.

Does anyone know of practical ideas that might bring some structural change to government more useful than ramming a car into a reinforced gate?

they struggle to reach the nearby International Space Station (ISS)

In this NY Times review, Astronaut and a Writer at the Movies, Dennis Overbye and astronaut Michael J. Massimino watched and discussed the movie together... "There is a hole in the plot: a gaping orbital impossibility big enough to drive the Starship Enterprise through."

Plot *SPOILER* or orbital physics lesson, take your pick:

... Michael J. Massimino, who flew missions in 2002 and 2009 to service the Hubble Space Telescope — the same telescope the astronauts in “Gravity” were sent to repair. ... there is a hole in the plot: a gaping orbital impossibility big enough to drive the Starship Enterprise through.

After they stop tumbling and find the shuttle destroyed and their colleagues all dead, Mr. Clooney tells Ms. Bullock that their only hope for rescue is to use his jetpack to travel to the space station, seen as a glowing light over the horizon. “It’s a long hike, but we can make it,” he says.

... the Hubble and the space station are in vastly different orbits. Getting from one to the other requires so much energy that not even space shuttles had enough fuel to do it. The telescope is 353 miles high, in an orbit that keeps it near the Equator; the space station is about 100 miles lower, in an orbit that takes it far north, over Russia.

To have the movie astronauts Matt Kowalski (Mr. Clooney) and Ryan Stone (Ms. Bullock) zip over to the space station would be like having a pirate tossed overboard in the Caribbean swim to London.

I am not about to try and find an actual law that states it.

He's referring to http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html cases like that which clearly say the police in fact are not under any obligation whatsoever to prevent a murder.

Here's an article that might upset you then:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/us/monitoring-of-snail-mail.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

If Rockstar can't do it smoothly, what did you expect from the other major rollout?

Cold you may like some more background into the US policy of killing its own citizens:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/us/us-acknowledges-killing-4-americans-in-drone-strikes.html

Sorry, you're just deluded about Krugman:
"That’s not to say that high debt can’t cause problems — it certainly can. But these are problems of distribution and incentives, not the burden of debt as is commonly understood. And as Dean says, talking about leaving a burden to our children is especially nonsensical; what we are leaving behind is promises that some of our children will pay money to other children, which is a very different kettle of fish."

He's referring to defaulting, or at the very least, disingenuous repayment terms of government debt. If you need further clarification, then look to other guy who Krugman quoted/cheered in the article:
"As a country we cannot impose huge debt burdens on our children. It is impossible, at least if we are referring to government debt. The reason is simple: at one point we will all be dead."

Either the debt burden is real, or it is arbitrary/optional by way of dishonest (non)repayment.

"Each participant were faced with 320 decisions: for example, choosing between gaining $5 and the chance to win $20 in a lottery."

After a few dozen questions like that, I'd be so bored that I'd start choosing randomly without thinking about it just to get it over with. There's no way in hell I would seriously think about each and every question out of a list of 320.

Sounds like someone's running low on blood sugar. Seriously, though, I wonder if they considered having to correct for that effect.

Sorry, you're just lying about Krugman. He only says long term budget issues should not affect our short term policy goals.

This Is Not A Crisis
 
 

The point is not that we should completely ignore issues of fiscal responsibility. It is that we are nowhere near fiscal crisis; we aren’t even looking at anything like a fiscal crisis 15 or 20 years from now. So budget deficits, entitlement reform, and all that simply don’t deserve to be policy priorities, let alone dominate the national discussion the way they did for the past few years.

The government shutdown is simply a way for the Republicans to show that they are serious. It is an annoyance, but it is not an economic calamity. But the debt ceiling is. If the government defaults, everything is going to hell. So far the Republicans have just shot one hostage. Now they are threatening to kill them all.

Here's a few articles by Paul Krugman which go into those ideas in more detail.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/krugman-rebels-without-a-clue.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/opinion/krugman-the-crazy-party.html

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/default-notes/

by quoting paul krugman -the most partisan economist out there- (and one that thinks if we were attacked by aliens it would help the economy) you lose all credibility!

The government shutdown is simply a way for the Republicans to show that they are serious. It is an annoyance, but it is not an economic calamity. But the debt ceiling is. If the government defaults, everything is going to hell. So far the Republicans have just shot one hostage. Now they are threatening to kill them all.

Here's a few articles by Paul Krugman which go into those ideas in more detail.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/krugman-rebels-without-a-clue.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/opinion/krugman-the-crazy-party.html

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/default-notes/

by quoting paul krugman -the most partisan economist out there- (and one that thinks if we were attacked by aliens it would help the economy) you lose all credibility!

The government shutdown is simply a way for the Republicans to show that they are serious. It is an annoyance, but it is not an economic calamity. But the debt ceiling is. If the government defaults, everything is going to hell. So far the Republicans have just shot one hostage. Now they are threatening to kill them all.

Here's a few articles by Paul Krugman which go into those ideas in more detail.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/krugman-rebels-without-a-clue.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/opinion/krugman-the-crazy-party.html

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/default-notes/

by quoting paul krugman -the most partisan economist out there- (and one that thinks if we were attacked by aliens it would help the economy) you lose all credibility!

Uh, how about Italy? You have a former PM, convicted of Tax Evasion threatening to break the coalition government because he wants to throw a tantrum.

I'm not trying to deflect from the current situation in the US but we don't have a lock on stupid. Also you'll find out as well that usually members of Congress will still get paid or will have their back pay paid in any deal that goes forward.

also, on the bit about employers that drop coverage and cease providing a contribution: Its your own fault if you dont in turn demand higher wages as a result.

Because thats what those benefits are: health benefits in lieu of wages. IE, they cost the employer nearly nothing, because they dont pay for it, YOU DO, in the form of lower wages.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/22/is-employer-based-health-insurance-worth-saving/

The government shutdown is simply a way for the Republicans to show that they are serious. It is an annoyance, but it is not an economic calamity. But the debt ceiling is. If the government defaults, everything is going to hell. So far the Republicans have just shot one hostage. Now they are threatening to kill them all.

Here's a few articles by Paul Krugman which go into those ideas in more detail.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/krugman-rebels-without-a-clue.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/opinion/krugman-the-crazy-party.html

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/default-notes/

The government shutdown is simply a way for the Republicans to show that they are serious. It is an annoyance, but it is not an economic calamity. But the debt ceiling is. If the government defaults, everything is going to hell. So far the Republicans have just shot one hostage. Now they are threatening to kill them all.

Here's a few articles by Paul Krugman which go into those ideas in more detail.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/krugman-rebels-without-a-clue.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/opinion/krugman-the-crazy-party.html

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/default-notes/

The government shutdown is simply a way for the Republicans to show that they are serious. It is an annoyance, but it is not an economic calamity. But the debt ceiling is. If the government defaults, everything is going to hell. So far the Republicans have just shot one hostage. Now they are threatening to kill them all.

Here's a few articles by Paul Krugman which go into those ideas in more detail.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/krugman-rebels-without-a-clue.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/opinion/krugman-the-crazy-party.html

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/default-notes/

Blaming both parties means blaming nobody. Open your damn eyes.

That's what Paul Krugman, the Nobel laureate and NYT columnist says. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/30/opinion/krugman-rebels-without-a-clue.html He calls it "false equivalence."

Its purpose is to make people feel cynical and hopeless, so that they won't participate in politics and the plutocrats with the big money can take over.

The Democrats are pretty bad. The Republicans are fucking lunatics who are willing to destroy the country in order to serve their Koch brothers billionaires. They're even willing to destroy themselves, because they don't understand what they're doing. They're like the guy who saws off the tree limb he's sitting on.

Citations:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/03/22/alcohol-obesity-and-smoking-do-not-cost-health-care-systems-money/

In the forbes study, here were the lifetime costs (in euros, the study was EU)

Healthy: 281,000

Obese: 250,000

Smokers: 220,000