I think the one thing those executive understand better than most is market trends. Their lives are immersed in it looking at graphs, tables and projects. They're just a wee bit smarter and knowledgeable than you make them out to be. An interesting book to read that spends a lot of time in the tech world would be The Innovators Dilema.
The word "privacy" isn't used but please reread the 4th Amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Tell me if this isn't a more exact definition of privacy than simply stating: "People have a right to privacy."
I drink Starbucks black. I like good coffee, go to a local roaster, have a burr grinder but have no problem with Starbucks dark roast as a pick me up. But then again I also luv spicy food (jalapenos are a green vegetable to me) and I'm a hop-head (that's hoppy beer folks).
This is one of the reasons I've been more than a little hesitant to use cloud computing. As hard drive space gets smaller and cheaper I will simply have physical hard drivess. For now an exabyte flash drive should do just fine.:')
OTOH in this case I am NOT convinced that the fifth amendment is relevant in cases of encrypted data!
I tend to agree with you. I see encrypted data more as a Fourth A issue as opposed to a Fifth A issue.
[4th Amendment] The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
But even there the key clauses are "unreasonable searches" and "upon probably cause" and "describing the place to be searched." In this particular case it was court ordered (hence not an unreasonable search and with probable cause). The only issue in question is "describing the place to be searched." I, for one, agree that saying the hard drive and storage drives are acceptable "papers and effects". The only question would be "place."
I'm not up-to-date on how fast the US and the USSR / Russia have dismantled their nuclear arsenal but its gone down fast over the last 20 years and, by all indications, the stockpile is dropping. I've seen all sorts of different figures for the stockpiles of different nations. I would guess that the US and Russia are 1-2 and fairly close while everyone else, including China, are distant players.
Re the codes - the area code example wasn't a good one. Imagine the series of drop-down lists needed to comply. There is huge push-back among doctors and nurses with the existing "paper work." Do you think that adding bureaucratic complexity makes sense?
The point of the flat tax is simplicity. Complexity leads to all sorts of problems including mistrust and the belief (true or not) that some are getting unfair advantages.
Of course a 100% tax rate is "so commie", as you put it.But simplicity and transparency have its benefits.
Not for outside vendors. Try creating a piece of software for hospital use, even if you have an existing contract, and see how difficult it is to get testing done. Sure large entities such as GE (IDX) and Cerner have workarounds but smaller companies which cannot do the inexpensive testing such as I described above have a great deal of problem in pre-build tests.
Yes. Words / labels change. Just look at the word / label "liberal." Today it means socialism-lite. In the 18th and 19th C the word liberal stood for individualism and restraint of government action. Liberals then were promoters of "negative" rights (restrictions on govt action), today they champion "positive" rights (what government can do for you - health care, etc...).
WWII was a particularly devastating war. You do realize that more people were killed in the firebombing of Tokyo and Dresdan than Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
And the solution to please buy me is to reduce the congressman's power so as not to add the power of the government to the already powerful corporate interest.
Flat taxes would go a long way to this; drastically reducing government involvement in picking winners and losers in the market (from CFLs to Solyndra) would also help; as would less micromanagement of the economy (example 100,000+ new diagnostic codes for doctors to enter in the ObamaCare law. Want to guess on the compliance rate for all these codes, guess the cost in time and patience entering said codes, want to guess the enforcement and legal costs due to faulty compliance. What a nightmare. The end result of micromanagement is a failed system. Anybody who's for Agile methodology, lean UX, iterative testing should be appalled by the ObamaCare fiasco.)
Oh, an aside: do you know that health care software providers find it close to impossible to do iterative testing for new software due to government interference. You see the standard solution: invite doctors to lunch or dinner and have them test your software is AGAINST THE LAW. And you'll never get the bureaucracy to approve doctors taking time off from work to iteratively test your software pre-build. So. No testing, just guessing. Aren't these regulations great?
No. Somalia is not a test case for libertarianism at all. Libertarians are not anarchists; nor are they for mob rule, nor even for caveat emptor. The rule of law, of a constitutional republic != Somalian mob rule.
Well, that's why libertarians were against over-regulating in the first place. Once you start pushing winners and losers via regulatory system you should expect that corporations would come into the process like gang-busters. The whole premise behind flat-taxes and simpler regulation is to stop this in the first place.
Flatter taxes, streamlined regulation removes corporate power. More involved, highly complex tax and regulatory schemes helps entrenched, connected businesses at the expense of the rest.
Maybe you should look at the flat-tax and simpler regulation arguments again instead of simply dismissing them out of hand.
The free-market does allow for damages and protections that modern liberals should take a look at. It's not an "anything goes" perspective. As a matter of fact big business (ie railroads and cattle barons) were against free-market protections for small farmers. You might find that you like those protections better than the top-down, micro-managed system we currently have in place.
No. In planned economies there are lines for toilet paper. In "unplanned" (ie free markets) amazing things get done. Come Thanksgiving stores make certain that they have ordered enough turkeys, take them out of the freezer (most are frozen) a few days early and when people come to the store voila, defrosted turkeys.
How does one enforce rules and deal with rule breaking on a nation-state level where you can't expel the individual from the commons? (Simple example: traffic laws).
Most anarchist societies seem to be commonly held properties with internal rules and should people refuse to comply can be removed from the entity.
Yes, you're absolutely correct which is why I called it the "variation of Moore's Law:" in other words what people generally think of it. I guess it wasn't too clear.:' )
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously governments always do what is good and rational, and corporations are always evil.
I think the one thing those executive understand better than most is market trends. Their lives are immersed in it looking at graphs, tables and projects. They're just a wee bit smarter and knowledgeable than you make them out to be. An interesting book to read that spends a lot of time in the tech world would be The Innovators Dilema.
Tell me if this isn't a more exact definition of privacy than simply stating: "People have a right to privacy."
I drink Starbucks black. I like good coffee, go to a local roaster, have a burr grinder but have no problem with Starbucks dark roast as a pick me up. But then again I also luv spicy food (jalapenos are a green vegetable to me) and I'm a hop-head (that's hoppy beer folks).
Why is building a canal an example of corporate rule? Why on earth is this bad?
This is one of the reasons I've been more than a little hesitant to use cloud computing. As hard drive space gets smaller and cheaper I will simply have physical hard drivess. For now an exabyte flash drive should do just fine. :')
If I had mod points I would mod you up. Too others: it's not simply his statements it's that his name is attached to it as well.
I tend to agree with you. I see encrypted data more as a Fourth A issue as opposed to a Fifth A issue.
[4th Amendment] The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
But even there the key clauses are "unreasonable searches" and "upon probably cause" and "describing the place to be searched." In this particular case it was court ordered (hence not an unreasonable search and with probable cause). The only issue in question is "describing the place to be searched." I, for one, agree that saying the hard drive and storage drives are acceptable "papers and effects". The only question would be "place."
thanks guys. Good to know.
I'm not up-to-date on how fast the US and the USSR / Russia have dismantled their nuclear arsenal but its gone down fast over the last 20 years and, by all indications, the stockpile is dropping. I've seen all sorts of different figures for the stockpiles of different nations. I would guess that the US and Russia are 1-2 and fairly close while everyone else, including China, are distant players.
Re the codes - the area code example wasn't a good one. Imagine the series of drop-down lists needed to comply. There is huge push-back among doctors and nurses with the existing "paper work." Do you think that adding bureaucratic complexity makes sense?
The point of the flat tax is simplicity. Complexity leads to all sorts of problems including mistrust and the belief (true or not) that some are getting unfair advantages.
Of course a 100% tax rate is "so commie", as you put it.But simplicity and transparency have its benefits.
Not for outside vendors. Try creating a piece of software for hospital use, even if you have an existing contract, and see how difficult it is to get testing done. Sure large entities such as GE (IDX) and Cerner have workarounds but smaller companies which cannot do the inexpensive testing such as I described above have a great deal of problem in pre-build tests.
And yes. I have first hand knowledge of this.
Yes. Words / labels change. Just look at the word / label "liberal." Today it means socialism-lite. In the 18th and 19th C the word liberal stood for individualism and restraint of government action. Liberals then were promoters of "negative" rights (restrictions on govt action), today they champion "positive" rights (what government can do for you - health care, etc...).
You might find this article interesting: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/05/29/the_bomb_didnt_beat_japan_nuclear_world_war_ii
Take a look at the number of warheads in the US from 1970 to the present and tell me the US hasn't reduced its stock pile dramatically
see graph
WWII was a particularly devastating war. You do realize that more people were killed in the firebombing of Tokyo and Dresdan than Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
And the solution to please buy me is to reduce the congressman's power so as not to add the power of the government to the already powerful corporate interest.
Flat taxes would go a long way to this; drastically reducing government involvement in picking winners and losers in the market (from CFLs to Solyndra) would also help; as would less micromanagement of the economy (example 100,000+ new diagnostic codes for doctors to enter in the ObamaCare law. Want to guess on the compliance rate for all these codes, guess the cost in time and patience entering said codes, want to guess the enforcement and legal costs due to faulty compliance. What a nightmare. The end result of micromanagement is a failed system. Anybody who's for Agile methodology, lean UX, iterative testing should be appalled by the ObamaCare fiasco.)
Oh, an aside: do you know that health care software providers find it close to impossible to do iterative testing for new software due to government interference. You see the standard solution: invite doctors to lunch or dinner and have them test your software is AGAINST THE LAW. And you'll never get the bureaucracy to approve doctors taking time off from work to iteratively test your software pre-build. So. No testing, just guessing. Aren't these regulations great?
No. Somalia is not a test case for libertarianism at all. Libertarians are not anarchists; nor are they for mob rule, nor even for caveat emptor. The rule of law, of a constitutional republic != Somalian mob rule.
Well, that's why libertarians were against over-regulating in the first place. Once you start pushing winners and losers via regulatory system you should expect that corporations would come into the process like gang-busters. The whole premise behind flat-taxes and simpler regulation is to stop this in the first place.
Flatter taxes, streamlined regulation removes corporate power. More involved, highly complex tax and regulatory schemes helps entrenched, connected businesses at the expense of the rest.
Maybe you should look at the flat-tax and simpler regulation arguments again instead of simply dismissing them out of hand.
The free-market does allow for damages and protections that modern liberals should take a look at. It's not an "anything goes" perspective. As a matter of fact big business (ie railroads and cattle barons) were against free-market protections for small farmers. You might find that you like those protections better than the top-down, micro-managed system we currently have in place.
No. In planned economies there are lines for toilet paper. In "unplanned" (ie free markets) amazing things get done. Come Thanksgiving stores make certain that they have ordered enough turkeys, take them out of the freezer (most are frozen) a few days early and when people come to the store voila, defrosted turkeys.
Yes. Even there Libertarians are comfortable with fee-based access and the owner of the property being able to set the rules.
How does one enforce rules and deal with rule breaking on a nation-state level where you can't expel the individual from the commons? (Simple example: traffic laws).
Most anarchist societies seem to be commonly held properties with internal rules and should people refuse to comply can be removed from the entity.
Yes, you're absolutely correct which is why I called it the "variation of Moore's Law:" in other words what people generally think of it. I guess it wasn't too clear. :' )