I can register a domain, get a small server on the internet and serve malware. I can easily get a certification authority to give me a certificate.
All I've ever wanted a certificate for is so that users don't get the freak out security warning saying that "this certificate is not issued by a known certifying authority." I can just as easily self sign a certificate and get the encrypted link, but all the popular browsers will check their internal list of certifying authorities and show the warning.
The only reason I've wanted certificates is so that users can get a strongly encrypted link with the website and use it over wireless/sketchy networks. I really don't see the purpose of having the third party certifying authority in the picture, other than the browser warning.
Fascinating. As Dijkstra said, when learning new concepts, we try to relate the new concept to concepts we already know. Models we already know. Mathematics allows us, to a degree, to break out of that trap, as it can describe almost completely novel phenomena in a manner/model we can understand.
The rich don't have to use subways. Having a car usually* results in greater options, comfort and autonomy.
The rich sit in dachas and wonder how to herd the masses into concrete tenements. I think the goal should be to raise the standards of living of everyone.
* I realize in some high traffic cities, getting around within the city is best done with public transit
If Brin makes this device which could save tens of thousands of lives a year, and cannot bring it to market due to patent issues, it will bring the flawed patent system into the public spotlight.
Right now, the only exposure the average American has to the patent system is from radio ads by patent trolls.
I suggest you do your homework and realize that while neither education system is perfect (public/non-profits have their own set of problems too) they're not all as bad as you want to believe.
It seems to me that non-profit universities peddling non-marketable majors/degrees are just as bad as for-profit institutions peddling non-marketable degrees.
It is not the individuals who are responsible for the debt - it is the business, the logical construct.
People who try to live their financial lives like corporations wind up getting a rude awakening. A corporation can go bankrupt and the individuals on the executive team still make out handsomely. An individual is the most basic element, the atomic element in the financial universe. He racks up debt and he is personally made to pay. The behavior that works for a logical construct (corporation) does not often work out well for an individual.
Individual == actual physical thing. Corporation == logical construct.
You're on to something. In this case, the "flippable" element is the underlying debt. It is bundled into packages which are sold on a huge debt market.
The core problem we have are broken debt markets. And what has broken them is the separation of the lender from repayment risk. Now, all a lender needs to do is get some paperwork saying this logical construct is a loan and it's worth X dollars. Then sell it off. They don't care (they shouldn't care, under the current system) whether it is likely to be repaid.
Until we are able to force lenders to bear repayment risk (like they used to, before securitization started in the 1970s), we cannot fix the problem. It's like someone with an arrow in their chest and we're talking about ways to stanch the bleeding without mentioning the arrow.
Bank A loans out 0.9*deposit_X, which then gets deposited into Bank B. Bank B then loans out 0.9*0.9*deposit_X. Rinse and repeat say 100 times.
Ok. Bank A loans out 0.9*deposit_X, which then gets deposited into bank B. Bank A has 0.1*deposit_X. Bank B loans out 0.9^2*deposit, which then gets deposited into bank C. Bank B has 0.09*deposit_X. Bank C loans out 0.9^3*deposit...
(1 - 0.9^1) + (0.9^1 - 0.9^2) +... + (0.9^99 - 0.9^100) = 0.999973439
The increase in the money supply is is not.9, it is 9.99
I didn't use an equation, I used a spreadsheet to figure this out.
Initial deposit = 1 -> bank loans out 90% =.9
Second deposit = (initial deposit *.9) = 1*.9 =.9
Third deposition = prior deposit (.9) * 90% =.9 *.9 =.81 ...
100th deposit = prior deposit *.9 =.0000215
Net increase in money supply = Sum of Initial depost + second deposition + third deposit +... + 100th deposit = 9.99
This of course assumes all money is deposited. With that assumption, the above is true. If you assume only 80% of the loaned money is deposited, you get a 3.6X multiplier.
I guess the point is that fractional reserve banking increases the money supply by some multiple, it does not decrease it by some fraction.
Then don't create a system where employees are forced to question someone who might be the company CEO or a senior VP.
This is the core issue - security systems are set up where "playing it safe" for the employees means looking the other way.
The solution? Get rid of card reader-only secured doors. You need vertical turnstiles which ONLY allow one person through, and signs which clearly say that if you let someone through, YOU will be fired for that.
They had a cover story dedicated to chronicling the runaway housing boom/runaway debt markets in either 2004 or 2005.
It's not been a secret except to people who fit this description: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair.
You would greatly increase the job market (and raise the median income significantly) in this country with every one burger flipper replaced by technology.
What are the burger flippers going to do then? If they could be automation-design engineers, they wouldn't be flipping the burgers in the first place.
The labor pool is akin to a pyramid. Fewer and more highly skilled as you go the top. It's the bottom that is being eaten away by automation and outsourcing. And they/we need some work if that group is not to slip into poverty.
As you go up the pyramid, labor becomes less and less fungible. So you can't just keep taking people off the lower levels and put them in higher levels.
I'd much prefer a 'boondoggle' like retooling a broken down Chrysler factory, as it puts US citizens to work. And while injecting money in the US economy is like injecting water in a bucket of holes - it goes to other countries - it does increase the water level a little bit.
Basically, the Fed provided loans to a couple of Wall Street executive wives on terms which guaranteed them millions in profit, as part of the bailouts.
Is there a citation for this? I've heard this repeated a few times recently.
You could die from a cut in the pre-antibiotic era. Bacterial diseases were rampant. Yes, there was higher child mortality, but lack of antibiotics would likely have massively reduced lifespan for adults.
Hopefully in the future, cancer and viral diseases will be treated as effectively as bacteria-based diseases are treated.
they cast doubt on the scientific evidence for a connection between tobacco and lung cancer, or between fossil fuels and climate change, or even between humans and our primate ancestors.
There should be a best practices directorate. They come up with best practices for securing and deploying resources. But they don't control everything.
The local folks should be allowed room to experiment - to evolve. This creates innovation. This model avoids the hidebound bureaucracy, and it in this evolving hydra of counterinsurgency, the boots on the ground need flexibility for new stuff, but they also need a central location where they can reliably get top-tier guidance.
Actually, newer windows versions (Vista and later) use Microsoft's online Certificate Trusts Lists which allows exactly this. Microsoft revoked the DigiNotar certificate without issuing a real Windows update:
Slashdot Mirror
I have realized that any article predicting doom and destruction gets a lot of attention. Be it financial, climate, health, diet or otherwise.
Just a data point, unrelated to the accuracy of any particular article.
Follow the money. Big contractors can't contribute TO politicians if they don't get the money FROM the politicians in the first place.
I can register a domain, get a small server on the internet and serve malware. I can easily get a certification authority to give me a certificate.
All I've ever wanted a certificate for is so that users don't get the freak out security warning saying that "this certificate is not issued by a known certifying authority." I can just as easily self sign a certificate and get the encrypted link, but all the popular browsers will check their internal list of certifying authorities and show the warning.
The only reason I've wanted certificates is so that users can get a strongly encrypted link with the website and use it over wireless/sketchy networks. I really don't see the purpose of having the third party certifying authority in the picture, other than the browser warning.
Fascinating. As Dijkstra said, when learning new concepts, we try to relate the new concept to concepts we already know. Models we already know. Mathematics allows us, to a degree, to break out of that trap, as it can describe almost completely novel phenomena in a manner/model we can understand.
The rich don't have to use subways. Having a car usually* results in greater options, comfort and autonomy.
The rich sit in dachas and wonder how to herd the masses into concrete tenements. I think the goal should be to raise the standards of living of everyone.
* I realize in some high traffic cities, getting around within the city is best done with public transit
If Brin makes this device which could save tens of thousands of lives a year, and cannot bring it to market due to patent issues, it will bring the flawed patent system into the public spotlight.
Right now, the only exposure the average American has to the patent system is from radio ads by patent trolls.
It seems to me that non-profit universities peddling non-marketable majors/degrees are just as bad as for-profit institutions peddling non-marketable degrees.
It is not the individuals who are responsible for the debt - it is the business, the logical construct.
People who try to live their financial lives like corporations wind up getting a rude awakening. A corporation can go bankrupt and the individuals on the executive team still make out handsomely. An individual is the most basic element, the atomic element in the financial universe. He racks up debt and he is personally made to pay. The behavior that works for a logical construct (corporation) does not often work out well for an individual.
Individual == actual physical thing. Corporation == logical construct.
You're on to something. In this case, the "flippable" element is the underlying debt. It is bundled into packages which are sold on a huge debt market.
The core problem we have are broken debt markets. And what has broken them is the separation of the lender from repayment risk. Now, all a lender needs to do is get some paperwork saying this logical construct is a loan and it's worth X dollars. Then sell it off. They don't care (they shouldn't care, under the current system) whether it is likely to be repaid.
Until we are able to force lenders to bear repayment risk (like they used to, before securitization started in the 1970s), we cannot fix the problem. It's like someone with an arrow in their chest and we're talking about ways to stanch the bleeding without mentioning the arrow.
Newt Gingrich was asked about this very thing. His response?
When he was asked once why he and his GOP comrades were chomping so much more federal pork than the Democrats ever did, he replied bluntly: "To the victors go the spoils."
Bank A loans out 0.9*deposit_X, which then gets deposited into Bank B. Bank B then loans out 0.9*0.9*deposit_X. Rinse and repeat say 100 times.
Ok. Bank A loans out 0.9*deposit_X, which then gets deposited into bank B. Bank A has 0.1*deposit_X. Bank B loans out 0.9^2*deposit, which then gets deposited into bank C. Bank B has 0.09*deposit_X. Bank C loans out 0.9^3*deposit... (1 - 0.9^1) + (0.9^1 - 0.9^2) + ... + (0.9^99 - 0.9^100) = 0.999973439
The increase in the money supply is is not .9, it is 9.99
.9 .9) = 1* .9 = .9 .9 * .9 = .81
... .9 = .0000215
... + 100th deposit = 9.99
I didn't use an equation, I used a spreadsheet to figure this out.
Initial deposit = 1 -> bank loans out 90% =
Second deposit = (initial deposit *
Third deposition = prior deposit (.9) * 90% =
100th deposit = prior deposit *
Net increase in money supply = Sum of Initial depost + second deposition + third deposit +
This of course assumes all money is deposited. With that assumption, the above is true. If you assume only 80% of the loaned money is deposited, you get a 3.6X multiplier.
I guess the point is that fractional reserve banking increases the money supply by some multiple, it does not decrease it by some fraction.
"An armed society is a polite society." - Socrates
Then don't create a system where employees are forced to question someone who might be the company CEO or a senior VP.
This is the core issue - security systems are set up where "playing it safe" for the employees means looking the other way.
The solution? Get rid of card reader-only secured doors. You need vertical turnstiles which ONLY allow one person through, and signs which clearly say that if you let someone through, YOU will be fired for that.
The Economist magazine had been calling the global property bubble a "house of cards" since 2003
They had a cover story dedicated to chronicling the runaway housing boom/runaway debt markets in either 2004 or 2005.
It's not been a secret except to people who fit this description: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair.
What are the burger flippers going to do then? If they could be automation-design engineers, they wouldn't be flipping the burgers in the first place.
The labor pool is akin to a pyramid. Fewer and more highly skilled as you go the top. It's the bottom that is being eaten away by automation and outsourcing. And they/we need some work if that group is not to slip into poverty.
As you go up the pyramid, labor becomes less and less fungible. So you can't just keep taking people off the lower levels and put them in higher levels.
Isn't the purpose though, to help Americans? It's great to help the world, but not when you've got 9+ percent U3 unemployment (16-some percent U6).
I'd much prefer a 'boondoggle' like retooling a broken down Chrysler factory, as it puts US citizens to work. And while injecting money in the US economy is like injecting water in a bucket of holes - it goes to other countries - it does increase the water level a little bit.
That's what happens when you let politicians near money.
And the damnable thing is, the tax money goes to companies which then turn some of it around and 'donate' it back to the politicians.
Quite a circle jerk.
Y'all don't know the half of it: Keywords: 'Waterfall TALF, Christy Mack, Susan Karches.'
Basically, the Fed provided loans to a couple of Wall Street executive wives on terms which guaranteed them millions in profit, as part of the bailouts.
Human and computer driving both have costs and benefits:
Human costs:
1) Inattentiveness
2) Emotional excitability
3) Lack of ability due to age, intoxication, other
Human benefits:
1) Ability to respond to extremely unusual situations
Computer costs:
1) Electro/Mechanical failures
Computer benefits:
1) Perfect attention to the road.
2) No emotional excitability.
3) Highest level of driving ability attainable.
I'll take the computer. With a manual override just so I can flatter myself.
Is there a citation for this? I've heard this repeated a few times recently.
You could die from a cut in the pre-antibiotic era. Bacterial diseases were rampant. Yes, there was higher child mortality, but lack of antibiotics would likely have massively reduced lifespan for adults.
Hopefully in the future, cancer and viral diseases will be treated as effectively as bacteria-based diseases are treated.
If they were consenting adults, then perhaps.
If they were children who could not give informed consent, then you start to understand the depth of the problem.
This is one time we should be grateful for memory leaks :)
Conflate.
There should be a best practices directorate. They come up with best practices for securing and deploying resources. But they don't control everything.
The local folks should be allowed room to experiment - to evolve. This creates innovation. This model avoids the hidebound bureaucracy, and it in this evolving hydra of counterinsurgency, the boots on the ground need flexibility for new stuff, but they also need a central location where they can reliably get top-tier guidance.
Single point of failure.