No... the issue is not that they're going to threaten to kill you.
Its that you're going to threaten to kill THEM.
You already did it in a previous post.
What they're going to do is stop needing you and thus ignore you. Your problems... your needs... irrelevant. They'll IGNORE you.
But if you don't have industrial independence, then you'll NEED them. Thus their ignoring of you is a death sentence. Not because they want to kill you. But because they simply lose interest in you.
You will become the Congo in Africa. Notice how much the world cars about how many child soldiers kill each other in that shit show? No one cares. And why? Because it has no relevance to the first world. The reality is that their survival or total death has no logistical relevance to us.
So we don't care.
But in this case, people like you are going to threaten to KILL the people that don't care if they don't give you what you want.
Imagine if those people in the Congo that have possibly killed a couple million of their immediate neighbors came to the first world right now and said "Give me stuff right now or I'll kill you!"
Now what would do about that? Ignore them still because we don't take the threat as credible. What if the threat were credible. You think for example that you can kill the elites... drag them out of their castles and cut off their heads you said. Okay, what if that were a credible threat.
What would first world do to the congo people if there were a credible threat of them being able to kill us? Bad things for them... I can tell you.
You want to do something proactive? Keep up with the tech and when the transition starts adapt to it. That's all you can do.
You keep talking like you're going to solve this with a political rally or getting people all "ra ra ra" riled up. Its not going to work that way. You're looking for weight of numbers when you do the politics. But in what is coming your numbers will count for nothing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
You gain logistical independence or bow before those that can feed you.
I thought we covered that one... they're going to meet your raggedy peasant ass with line of shiny killer robots and blaze away at you with belt fed machine guns supplied by bullet factories under the castle.
The nobles in question might even have the foresight to use non-toxic bullets so they can mulch your body into their compost bins and put your biomass to some use.
THAT is what your attack is going to get you in this scenario. This peasant uprising stuff typically fails in the first place. Even in the old nobility days. For every successful peasant uprising a hundred failed.... horribly. Often with the men slowly tortured and the women savagely raped.
And if you have no industrial leverage when this technological change hits... you're going to be 100,000,000 times more fucked than those peasant were because the nobility in those days actually needed the peasants. A nobility that uses robotic labor instead won't even need to keep ANY of you alive. Not. Fucking. One.
Once you grasp that, you understand that the old dichotomies don't apply. You're looking at a social and economic change that REQUIRES you to gain some industrial independence if only to save your miserable life. If you don't have it... and you depend on the people with it for everything... you have no leverage.
Your threat of violence is meaningless because their ability to fight fire with fire in that situation exceeds yours. What are you going to fight them with when they unleash this on you? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Robotic killer drones are stupid... but only in strategy which humans can do for them. Also they tend to have a collateral damage problem... but the elites won't care about that. They'll say "kill everything in sector 5."
... depends on your definition of "enough"... they earn plenty on their licenses. You can always earn more.
Part of MS's activities are their chess games with Google.
Google is flicking the nipples of both MS and Apple. And that kind to teasing is bound to get people excited in all the wrong places.
I can't hold that against MS. And honestly most of their shit only effects the peasants. I'm one of those cynical shits that can't be bothered to worry about people that make no proactive effort to inform themselves.
Everyone wants people swaddled in cotton and read lullbyes... not how the world works. Best case you get someone ethical to do that for a generation or so and then the new nurse maid turns out to be a fucking vampire or zombie and spends most of their time eating the fucking babies alive.
Its not sustainable. People need to protect themselves or drop like chumps.
I protect my coworkers because I'm paid to do it.
I offer friends friendly advice because that's what friends do.
And I have systematically secured any family member's machine that sought my council.
Best I can do.
The system was never designed to be kind to suckers.
As to abuses, I don't see how abuses relates to revenue. If abuses led to revenue then slave labor would still be economical.
The two don't relate anymore.
You want voluntary workers. they're more productive.
As to unicor: "" UNICOR is economically self-sustaining and is scheduled to receive over $2.7 Million in government funding for FY14, which is $51,000 over FY13.[7] In fiscal year 1996, UNICOR had net sales of $459 million.[8] In fiscal year 2008, UNICOR employed 21,836 inmates: 17% of eligible inmates held in federal prisons. Prisoners make between.23 and $1.15 per hour. The company generated US$765 million in sales. Of these revenues, 74% went toward the purchase of raw material and equipment; 20% went to staff salaries; 6% went to inmate salaries.[7]
UNICOR has 109 factories in federal prisons, producing about 175 different types of products and services, including clothing and textiles, electronics, fleet management and vehicular components, industrial products, office furniture, recycling activities; and services including data entry and encoding. ""
I'm not seeing that pay for the prison system.
"" Overall, the prison system in the United States costs American taxpayers nearly $39 billion. ""
THAT is the hole I'm looking to fill. You're showing what with UNICOR? Half a billion? I need roughly 40 billion annually to fill that hole. UNICOR also has a stated goal of vocational training etc. My goal is revenue. I want the prisoners to not compound their damage to society by inflicting these fees upon our budget.
Now you might say "you can't make 40 billion using the US prison population"... I state that no one has ever tried. I think if I did, I'd get bombarded by morons saying "its slave labor" even when every person working would be doing so consensually.
We'd solve the prison politics issue. A lot of that is because the prisoners are bored. They have nothing to do... so they create bullshit to entertain themselves. I say work them... intensively... consensually... for their entire term. Have the prisons be basic. Boring. The food "okay"... They work, they get better everything. But the price is that they work.
As to convict leasing, this is a baby and bath water situation. Problems with a system do not mean you need to terminate it in general. Just fix the flaws in it.
The first obvious flaw is that the prisoners need to give consent to do it. So the work and work conditions needs to be something they're comfortable with and the rewards for doing... tangible and intangible need to be sufficient to get the body count up.
A chain gang picking cotton is not what I'm looking for here. The is a real hunger in the US for cheap labor. By all means. Lease them out. Deploy them with guards. And let them quit any job whenever they want.
Everyone that finds the prison culture to be toxic can opt out of it by simply spending their time working. We could even have companies subsidize the prison system further by providing block houses for prisoners to bunk in instead of the prison. Thus the prisons themselves could operate more like banks do... very little of the money deposited in a bank is in the bank... its all lent out. The bank retains only a fraction of the total. You could take the existing prison population and lend most of it out. Sure. Anything to lower the costs without breaching ethics.
Note... Without. Breaching. Ethics. In issues like this there is always that insinuation no matter what happens. Its specious. There is either an ethical breach or there isn't. And if there is one... cite it. In concept, I don't see how this leads to an ethical problem.
As to incentives to put people in prison. You're suggesting that the justice system will wrongfully convict someone just to get another body in the system? If there is that problem in the justice system then it has much bigger problems. That is an unacceptable ethical flaw. Anyone that would do such a thing shouldn't be a judge in the fir
... so many legacy programs didn't work. Some databases don't work. Scripts had to be rewritten... so many things.
Let us not pretend... there were APPLICATION compatibility problems that were pretty fucking horrible.
When you say you haven't run into compatibility problems, was your organization only using bog standard MS office applications? Or were you running a lot of proprietary programs custom coded for your organization?
Because THAT is what I am talking about. A lot of those programs that work just fine in XP shit the bed on Vista.
We've shifted a lot of that over to linux just to control what is and is not compatible so we don't deal with that again. But it was a massive shit show.
I'm going to have to channel my inner 15 year old girl... and tell you:
What Evvvah.:-D
Its a dumb argument at this point. Vista is shit and I don't have to put up with it anymore.
I am happily using very heavily modified versions of Windows 7 mostly. Quite happily. And I'll continue to do that until at least Windows 11 when MS will have another chance to not be fucking ridiculous.
MS keeps getting upset that the enterprise users don't adopt their new OS. Buy the license... sure... actually install the shit?... *snicker*... We don't do this early adopter, fad OS, oh look at the pretty graphics, bullshit. Its not our thing. The consumer market is hostage to their ignorance and whatever the OEMs dump on them. We don't have to deal with that.
no budget isn't an argument for no security. It is an argument for fewer features or for adjusting the cost structure.
1. Not enough is done to monetize convicts. I AM NOT talking about slave labor. I'm talking consensual voluntary work taken by the free will of the prisoners. Work they take because there are perks to doing so both tangible and intangible. I believe it is possible to get the prisons to operate on a net zero basis at least.
2. If you can't afford to give the prisoners feature X on budget Y... then you can't afford feature X. The security should be an imperative. That is in fact the whole fucking point of the prison in the first place. Its a meat locker for criminals. If you don't have security... you have nothing. Nada. So if you can't afford to have security with those visitations... then you either need to scale back the number of visitations or do something so that you can have them WHILE maintaining security.
Here is one thing I could do in a DAY at a cost of ZERO dollars. Separate tables. Some kind of separation. I don't need any kind of equipment. I just need them to not touch each other. Might they throw drugs or whatever at each other? Sure. I honestly still don't like it. But it is something I could on DAY ONE for zero dollars. Would people piss and moan about it? Tough and shit. It's prison.
3. As to the price of securing a system... actually the cost of it is mostly a question of discipline. Not money. Aka... you do things THIS way or I will shiv you myself. And if everyone follows the protocol... life is peachy. And what I do... is I make the computers incapable of doing things any other way. People will say "hey how do I install itunes on this"... and patiently explain that I would sooner dump napalm on the machine and set it on fire than I would install itunes on it. Or any other stupid bit of software that doesn't need to be on it and I have neither the resources nor inclination to make secure. The machines will not permit any program to run on them that I have no installed myself. I operate a WHITElist system for all executable code. If the code is not on my whitelist... it will not run.
Black lists are for posers.
4. as to your example of some idiot network that is administered by idiots... I grant that there is no way to fix the problem if the people in charge order things to remain stupid. However, in practice what tends to happen is that those systems tend to burn down on their own. At least in IT. If you have a 10,000 seat system in 2015 and you're not doing anything to manage the security in a really systematic way... the entire thing is going to turn into a viral petri dish in about 5 4 3 2 1... And everyone's infected... yay. And once the whole thing has gone properly to shit, you can generally get whomever to sign off on something to deal with it. The money is really not the issue. I can build a firewall out of an old crap PC and a couple spare nic cards. I can build a router that way too. After that you just need cheap switches... and you've got the BEGINNINGS of some kind of security. I generally don't like full windows workstations just sitting there. I prefer terminals and virtual machines. And before you say "oh that's expensive"... you can run that on shitty workstations. Just install the software on that instead. All the shitty machines limit you to is fewer instances per machine. Fine. Have more of them. what is more the cost of maintaining terminals is LESS than maintaining traditional workstations. And once you have a proper router, proper firewall(S), the operating systems are all physically segrigated in the server room beyond the greasy fingers of the users... you can seriously lock the network down. And then I go farther than that because I like to disable the windows explorer executable for most users. This strikes some people as insane but I replace it with alternative programs that do the same thing only have largely unknown vulnerabilities to the casual user. Users often know things... key combinations... settings windows. T
As to obtaining the independence to break free logistically RIGHT NOW... you're mixing up your time lines.
The issue is not problems we have right this instance but problems we think we'll have in the future. I am saying that the same technology that will create those problems in the future will also liberate you.
So saying "I don't have it now" doesn't make any sense. Neither do the elites have it now so you don't need it yet.
if you haven't seen that movie before, watch from the beginning... great action movie. Can't believe the entire thing is just uploaded onto youtube. The anti piracy people are fucking adorable when they talk about ending that... the black knight from the holy grail if ever there was one.
On topic, I'd seriously prefer something like this for the life sentence people. Exile to some bit of land that is effectively impossible to escape. Let them do whatever they want in there. Skin and eat each other for all I care. Or they can build villages and write poetry. Also fine with me.
on the issue of visitation rooms... I have a very strict notion of what is and is not security. I am a security professional... in IT... but the philosophy is is applicable in other places.
In my world... there is ACTUAL security which is fucking anal, by the book, and offers no opportunity for things to get by me... or there is bullshit security theater which is a waste of everyone's time.
I am quite used to bullshit security being the defacto standard. It being common however does not mean it works, is worthy of any kind of respect, or should be emulated in any regard.
I see bullshit... I roll my eyes... and I say to whomever pays me... "you might as well have nothing if you go with that."
My systems don't get hacked. We do not get viruses. We do not get malware. We do not get people stealing. We do not get people getting more access than they're supposed to have.
I know... bold claims. Unbelievable some might say. But that's coming from cultures where people don't prioritize security. If you take it seriously you can stop this stuff. But you can't break the fucking rules.
If they can TOUCH each other... I have a problem. I mean... do I want to do a full fucking anal cavity search every time on every fucking prisoner every single time they get a visitor? I think not. which means you either dont' let them touch or you accept that drugs are going to flow through the god damn visitor room like crazy.
Fuuuuck Thaaat. Because if they can get drugs in, they can get anything DRUG SIZED into the prison.
This notion of "well it hasn't happened before so it won't happen again" is how 9/11 happened. When you think security... real security... you don't think in terms of what people have done... but what they COULD do. And then you're talking about people getting C4 into the prison or some other explosive. Try a riot with hand grenades.
its only never happened because no one has wanted to do it yet.
They can't touch. If they want to pass objects then they can hand it to an officer and the officer can hand it to whomever after it has been inspected, xrayed, and dog sniffed.
Can you give me a rough idea where you live. I'm not asking for a street address or GPS... tell me what point of the compass you live in whatever area... town, city, county... something.
Because I frankly find your position to either be unbelievable or a sign that your local economy is doing a very poor job of serving your area.
I have lived in a lot of places. Some of them the ass end of no where. And I've never had that problem.
So... I mean do you like at the bottom of the sea?
I am from the US... we have stores that sell common commodities everywhere. Some specialty goods can only be obtained on line or in specialty stores only consistently found in large cities. But for the basic shit that Amazon is using these tags for?... Easy.
And while people love to hate on Walmart... ever bought RAM, a gallon of milk, and a dozen tube socks at 2 AM? Because you can do that at walmart. As surreal as that is...
How many times a week do you go to the store to buy things? You obviously have to go to the store to buy food... no?
And keep in mind, I'm not saying "don't buy things online"... I'm saying "why would you use this button?"
If I'm going to buy something on line, I'll login to the website and order whatever. And as I pointed out, on some goods, amazon's prices are SHIT. Especially anything that they want to sell you with their grocery delivery service. The prices are obviously inflated. They go from being very competitive for anything else... and then suddenly you're looking at 30~200% price increases for some things. And its exclusively in items that are easily obtainable in your local store.
Okay... so your plan is to walk up to the nobles in your rags and tell them "hey you in shining armor, with armies, and castles, and legions of soldiers... why do you get to decide!?
At which point you're raped to death while they laugh at you.
The US prison system operates at a huge loss for the US government at the state and federal levels.
To my knowledge the only people that make money on it are companies that are paid by the US government to warehouse people and that money comes from tax revenue. And the prison staff... also paid ultimately with tax dollars.
You say prisons have operated at a net positive... can you show me where that has happened? Because while you say its dangerous... everything effective is dangerous.
First person to discover fire said "ouch"... that doesn't mean you never have anything to do with fire there after. It means you respect the dangers, harness the power, and accept that every so often you're going to get burned because its worth it.
This has been explained to the linux community with some frequency. They don't listen to the problems with wider adoption of their operating system and so we run into problems.
Even suggesting that there is any legitimacy to this position is derided which shuts down any possibility of meaningful communication.
not really... the economy of that country could use those people. They have value. The politics are just so fucked up that they can't stop killing each other.
What I'm talking about a very different situation.
Imagine 20 percent of the population living well, having everything they need, getting NOTHING from the 80 percent... and not caring about them one way or the other. The 80 percent could all die tomorrow and it wouldn't matter to the economy of the 20 percent. It might be sad... but logistically irrelevant.
that attitude works in times of plenty. In times of scarcity or trouble or chaos... you'll find that as you have no leverage... you'll get little to nothing. And whatever emerges from that will likely be the standard under which you live going forward.
You're presuming a tautology that you're just going to get things because you're living in an area. Historically that isn't how it works.
Consider for a moment the old systems of nobles and kings and warlords.
Why did they care for the welfare of the peasants? Because they needed them to work in the fields and provide bodies in wars.
What gave most people rights in the 19th and 20th centuries was the industrial revolution making old social models uneconomical.
Consider that if you are truly of no value to the elites... as in... they don't need you for anything.... then they can not only go back to the old peasant/noble relationship... they can carry it a step farther and declare everyone outside their clichque as sub human and simply disassociate with you entirely.
What would your response be should they do that?
Protest? Nobility cares little for the protests of peasants. You will be ignored unless you inconvenience them and then you'll just be killed out of hand or beaten bloody for the insult to their time and patience.
Here you might say "I'll rise up and fight!"... will you really though? Will you march with a rifle you got somewhere? Really? Or will you make mean tweets on the internet?
And even if you do march... which is a dubious claim... you are forgetting that you'll have inferior weaponry and the elites will likely have plenty of people willing to fight for them as well... and you'll be dealing with killer robots and all sorts of shit.
Frankly... good luck.
The way out of this is not presuming that elites are going to keep you fed and clothed and burp you at night and tell you what a special boy you are and read you bed time stories... The way out is to gain logistical independence from them.
If you have this independence then sure, the elites will have lots of nifty toys but collectively everyone else will also have a lot of hardware as well. and the industrial potential of EVERYONE with a little micro factory would collectively be very powerful.
That would give you leverage. Actual leverage. the push comes to shove leverage.
Simply saying "but but its mean to not give me things I want"... nope. Get used to getting your face ground into the mud if that's your plan.
There are quite a few such facilities throughout the country. I know one in Los Angeles and there are a couple in Florida that I know of as well.
They're not uncommon.
This notion that it is inhumane if you don't get yard time is odd. It is generally considered inhumane if they don't get recreation time but there is no provision that they need to see the sun at any point.
Yard are provided mostly because it is sufficient and inexpensive. However, there is nothing that says we have to do that to my knowledge. An area where they can recreate? Sure. Does it say anywhere what depth above or below that ground that place is?... not that I've heard. We could put the whole thing a mine shaft if we really wanted.
My personal opinion is widely held amongst IT professionals as well as the corporate and government IT establishment.
The sales vista enjoyed beyond that was largely due to OEM manufactuers just auto installing Vista in machines people bought at wallmart.
So... remove from your statistics OEM installations and recalculate. Its a shitty OS, MS knows it was shitty, and whatever you might think they did their best to not piss off the people that said was shitty for the next iteration of the operating system.
the copter doesn't need to touch down. It can drop things THROUGH the net unless the net is too fine for things for fall through. Marble sized pellets of heroine for example... or C4... or botulism toxin.
The laundry list is a script I update every couple months. On new systems I push the script to the system... it executes the registry changes... which includes settings that need to be tweaked, features that need to be added, features that need to be fixed, features that need to be removed, and where I want a feature to appear to exist to other parts of the computer but to in fact be inoperative... I knee cap the shit out of the bitch.
Its not something I have to police very closely. I just tweak the file every so often.
Its specific to given releases of windows. I have one for XP, 7, 2008, 2012... I was thinking about making one for windows 10 but quickly rolled my eyes and laughed when I saw what they were doing.
the organization can happily use 7 for a long time. We'll see. We'll have a look at version 11. We see no compelling reason to upgrade at this point. MS has been saying "you CAN upgrade to 10 for free with your existing license"... and we smile and say "thanks!"... and then make a point of not doing anything of the kind.
Some of our kiosks are still XP. I know I know... SECURITY... but we firewall the shit out of them so whatever.
And why why couldn't I run my own fiber? Do you know how cheap fiber is?
Look, it is quite obvious what people are trying to say here.
they're saying "because robots are taking our jobs, we must have communism" or something of that nature.
I respond to this... if the industrial complex doesn't need you at all and you offer nothing of value to it... why does it have to support you at all?
here you say "well I'm an angry human and I will pick up rocks and throw them!"... to which I respond... the industrial complex will have 30MM auto cannons loaded with depleted uranium armor penetrating slugs. You have no leverage.
You have two options.
1. be obsolete and ultimately die.
2. gain ENOUGH industrial independence to maintain credible leverage in the system as a class. If you have a hundred million people with micro factories pumping out stuff then you can hold your own. First you have marketable goods which you can actually sell to the old school industries for whatever you want. And beyond that, collectively all those people pumping out all that stuff is a sizable industrial base in its own right. You not only maintain your leverage but increase it beyond what you have now. If the industries say "you must pay me X for Y"... you can respond "I can make X myself so I don't need to pay you anything."
That's your future.
The cities... I don't know. It depends on the politics and on what the economic interests want with the cities. Traditionally the cities were an economical way to pool labor resources.
if you go in for mass automation along with remote tele-presence technology then the cities lose most of their value to the economy.
For one thing, the cities are more expensive in most cases. Just look at what people pay for shitty little apartments, what they pay in taxes, what they pay in mark ups for every good and service.
Its more expensive.
What if you could get everything you care about in a city... anywhere. Then the city becomes inefficient.
Tanks are generally more mobile than infantry. A WW1 tank might not have been fast enough. They were painfully slow as I remember. But from WW2 on the tank can just back up faster than the infantry can run at them.
As to the rest, you've basically gotten angry and irrational. So I can't really continue to talk with you because you're too emotional to sustain your end of the discussion.
I was rejecting the notion that tanks need infantry in general. They don't. This is like saying battleships MUST have destroyers and cruisers and submarines. There are circomstances where a given military unit will profit from support from other forces. But that such forces are generally required is not exactly true.
If you adapt your tactics and doctrine to account for forces you do not have or will not employ... then most of the problems go away.
You run into problems when you engage in tactics that presume you have certain things that you do not.
You can have circumstances where the tanks do need or are strongly benefited by infantry but if you are a tank force that has little to no infantry you avoid such situations... obviously.
You're too upset to carry on your end so I'm just going to say "good day", tip my hat, and remove any further credible justification for you to be agitated on my account.
Why would a future society that has no use for you, pay for you to continue to live when you do nothing but consume resources and offer the society nothing it wants?
You say I am entitled... yet you presume to be entitled to the society's resources despite not contributing anything of value to that society. Why does the society owe YOU anything?
If a few people have robots that can make everything they want so they don't need you. Why must they give up what they have to make you comfortable?
Here you say "because I need it" or "because if they don't, I'll kill them"... okay... come at me, bro. what the fuck do you have? If I have these robots and they can make anything. Then they can make automated machine gun nests, bullet factories, land mines, poison gas, and other horrible shit. How scared do you think I am of you now given that you're attacking me with what? A broom handle?
You're not intimidating to me. You say "but I have lots of people with me"... and assuming I'm aware of that, maybe I won't built my compound in a place where its easy for you to get to me. Maybe I put my compound on an island or in the middle of a desert or on top of a mountain... or possibly in the middle of a frozen tundra. Now march through the fucking ice and get me, shit head. I'll be sitting here getting a foot massage and drinking coco while my terminators prowl through the snow with glowing red eyes making meat pies out of you fucks.
See?
Here is your problem. If you're not of value to the future society... then you are disposable to that society. They can lose you... and it won't matter.
The society will start out trying to help you. But the first time an economic problem hits or there is a war or you get politically feisty and start demanding people give you shit... Well... then you'll see how much leverage you have to demand anything. Aka... none.
Look, I'm not saying you're fucked. I'm saying that if you want to survive, you need to adapt.
Those who do not adapt. Suffer and die.
Suffer.
Death.
Adapt or you suffer and die. That is what I am saying. Why is this rocket science?
my point is that a net won't stop me from dropping explosives into the prison and frankly I think those are a bigger problem. A knife... who cares. They already have shivs. A gun? What does that do? Lets them shoot a guard? Why not stab the guard? They're going to get close enough to do it. The only danger with a gun is maybe being able to shoot the warden himself... getting close enough to shiv him would be hard. But why would a prisoner even want to do that?
A net isn't going to stop drugs. It isn't going to stop explosives. I will stop guns... maybe... and it probably can't stop porn... though I wonder why porn is a problem. I don't understand why prisoners wouldn't be allowed access to all the porn they wanted. Sexually frustrated prisoners is not a good idea. Let them drain their nuts all they want.
As to visitation stuff... we often separate visitors with a pane of glass and they communicate through closed circuit telephones that are often recorded or actively being listened to by someone during the visitation.
So... again... if the contraband is passing at visitation then there is a competence issue.
Slashdot Mirror
No... the issue is not that they're going to threaten to kill you.
Its that you're going to threaten to kill THEM.
You already did it in a previous post.
What they're going to do is stop needing you and thus ignore you. Your problems... your needs... irrelevant. They'll IGNORE you.
But if you don't have industrial independence, then you'll NEED them. Thus their ignoring of you is a death sentence. Not because they want to kill you. But because they simply lose interest in you.
You will become the Congo in Africa. Notice how much the world cars about how many child soldiers kill each other in that shit show? No one cares. And why? Because it has no relevance to the first world. The reality is that their survival or total death has no logistical relevance to us.
So we don't care.
But in this case, people like you are going to threaten to KILL the people that don't care if they don't give you what you want.
Imagine if those people in the Congo that have possibly killed a couple million of their immediate neighbors came to the first world right now and said "Give me stuff right now or I'll kill you!"
Now what would do about that? Ignore them still because we don't take the threat as credible. What if the threat were credible. You think for example that you can kill the elites... drag them out of their castles and cut off their heads you said. Okay, what if that were a credible threat.
What would first world do to the congo people if there were a credible threat of them being able to kill us? Bad things for them... I can tell you.
You want to do something proactive? Keep up with the tech and when the transition starts adapt to it. That's all you can do.
You keep talking like you're going to solve this with a political rally or getting people all "ra ra ra" riled up. Its not going to work that way. You're looking for weight of numbers when you do the politics. But in what is coming your numbers will count for nothing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
You gain logistical independence or bow before those that can feed you.
Choose. Stand or Kneel.
I thought we covered that one... they're going to meet your raggedy peasant ass with line of shiny killer robots and blaze away at you with belt fed machine guns supplied by bullet factories under the castle.
The nobles in question might even have the foresight to use non-toxic bullets so they can mulch your body into their compost bins and put your biomass to some use.
THAT is what your attack is going to get you in this scenario. This peasant uprising stuff typically fails in the first place. Even in the old nobility days. For every successful peasant uprising a hundred failed.... horribly. Often with the men slowly tortured and the women savagely raped.
And if you have no industrial leverage when this technological change hits... you're going to be 100,000,000 times more fucked than those peasant were because the nobility in those days actually needed the peasants. A nobility that uses robotic labor instead won't even need to keep ANY of you alive. Not. Fucking. One.
Once you grasp that, you understand that the old dichotomies don't apply. You're looking at a social and economic change that REQUIRES you to gain some industrial independence if only to save your miserable life. If you don't have it... and you depend on the people with it for everything... you have no leverage.
Your threat of violence is meaningless because their ability to fight fire with fire in that situation exceeds yours. What are you going to fight them with when they unleash this on you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Robotic killer drones are stupid... but only in strategy which humans can do for them. Also they tend to have a collateral damage problem... but the elites won't care about that. They'll say "kill everything in sector 5."
... depends on your definition of "enough"... they earn plenty on their licenses. You can always earn more.
Part of MS's activities are their chess games with Google.
Google is flicking the nipples of both MS and Apple. And that kind to teasing is bound to get people excited in all the wrong places.
I can't hold that against MS. And honestly most of their shit only effects the peasants. I'm one of those cynical shits that can't be bothered to worry about people that make no proactive effort to inform themselves.
Everyone wants people swaddled in cotton and read lullbyes... not how the world works. Best case you get someone ethical to do that for a generation or so and then the new nurse maid turns out to be a fucking vampire or zombie and spends most of their time eating the fucking babies alive.
Its not sustainable. People need to protect themselves or drop like chumps.
I protect my coworkers because I'm paid to do it.
I offer friends friendly advice because that's what friends do.
And I have systematically secured any family member's machine that sought my council.
Best I can do.
The system was never designed to be kind to suckers.
As to abuses, I don't see how abuses relates to revenue. If abuses led to revenue then slave labor would still be economical.
The two don't relate anymore.
You want voluntary workers. they're more productive.
As to unicor: .23 and $1.15 per hour. The company generated US$765 million in sales. Of these revenues, 74% went toward the purchase of raw material and equipment; 20% went to staff salaries; 6% went to inmate salaries.[7]
""
UNICOR is economically self-sustaining and is scheduled to receive over $2.7 Million in government funding for FY14, which is $51,000 over FY13.[7] In fiscal year 1996, UNICOR had net sales of $459 million.[8] In fiscal year 2008, UNICOR employed 21,836 inmates: 17% of eligible inmates held in federal prisons. Prisoners make between
UNICOR has 109 factories in federal prisons, producing about 175 different types of products and services, including clothing and textiles, electronics, fleet management and vehicular components, industrial products, office furniture, recycling activities; and services including data entry and encoding.
""
I'm not seeing that pay for the prison system.
""
Overall, the prison system in the United States costs American taxpayers nearly $39 billion.
""
THAT is the hole I'm looking to fill. You're showing what with UNICOR? Half a billion? I need roughly 40 billion annually to fill that hole. UNICOR also has a stated goal of vocational training etc. My goal is revenue. I want the prisoners to not compound their damage to society by inflicting these fees upon our budget.
Now you might say "you can't make 40 billion using the US prison population"... I state that no one has ever tried. I think if I did, I'd get bombarded by morons saying "its slave labor" even when every person working would be doing so consensually.
We'd solve the prison politics issue. A lot of that is because the prisoners are bored. They have nothing to do... so they create bullshit to entertain themselves. I say work them... intensively... consensually... for their entire term. Have the prisons be basic. Boring. The food "okay"... They work, they get better everything. But the price is that they work.
As to convict leasing, this is a baby and bath water situation. Problems with a system do not mean you need to terminate it in general. Just fix the flaws in it.
The first obvious flaw is that the prisoners need to give consent to do it. So the work and work conditions needs to be something they're comfortable with and the rewards for doing... tangible and intangible need to be sufficient to get the body count up.
A chain gang picking cotton is not what I'm looking for here. The is a real hunger in the US for cheap labor. By all means. Lease them out. Deploy them with guards. And let them quit any job whenever they want.
Everyone that finds the prison culture to be toxic can opt out of it by simply spending their time working. We could even have companies subsidize the prison system further by providing block houses for prisoners to bunk in instead of the prison. Thus the prisons themselves could operate more like banks do... very little of the money deposited in a bank is in the bank... its all lent out. The bank retains only a fraction of the total. You could take the existing prison population and lend most of it out. Sure. Anything to lower the costs without breaching ethics.
Note... Without. Breaching. Ethics. In issues like this there is always that insinuation no matter what happens. Its specious. There is either an ethical breach or there isn't. And if there is one... cite it. In concept, I don't see how this leads to an ethical problem.
As to incentives to put people in prison. You're suggesting that the justice system will wrongfully convict someone just to get another body in the system? If there is that problem in the justice system then it has much bigger problems. That is an unacceptable ethical flaw. Anyone that would do such a thing shouldn't be a judge in the fir
... so many legacy programs didn't work. Some databases don't work. Scripts had to be rewritten... so many things.
Let us not pretend... there were APPLICATION compatibility problems that were pretty fucking horrible.
When you say you haven't run into compatibility problems, was your organization only using bog standard MS office applications? Or were you running a lot of proprietary programs custom coded for your organization?
Because THAT is what I am talking about. A lot of those programs that work just fine in XP shit the bed on Vista.
We've shifted a lot of that over to linux just to control what is and is not compatible so we don't deal with that again. But it was a massive shit show.
I'm going to have to channel my inner 15 year old girl... and tell you:
What Evvvah. :-D
Its a dumb argument at this point. Vista is shit and I don't have to put up with it anymore.
I am happily using very heavily modified versions of Windows 7 mostly. Quite happily. And I'll continue to do that until at least Windows 11 when MS will have another chance to not be fucking ridiculous.
MS keeps getting upset that the enterprise users don't adopt their new OS. Buy the license... sure... actually install the shit?... *snicker*... We don't do this early adopter, fad OS, oh look at the pretty graphics, bullshit. Its not our thing. The consumer market is hostage to their ignorance and whatever the OEMs dump on them. We don't have to deal with that.
And so we don't. End-o-fucking-story.
no budget isn't an argument for no security. It is an argument for fewer features or for adjusting the cost structure.
1. Not enough is done to monetize convicts. I AM NOT talking about slave labor. I'm talking consensual voluntary work taken by the free will of the prisoners. Work they take because there are perks to doing so both tangible and intangible. I believe it is possible to get the prisons to operate on a net zero basis at least.
2. If you can't afford to give the prisoners feature X on budget Y... then you can't afford feature X. The security should be an imperative. That is in fact the whole fucking point of the prison in the first place. Its a meat locker for criminals. If you don't have security... you have nothing. Nada. So if you can't afford to have security with those visitations... then you either need to scale back the number of visitations or do something so that you can have them WHILE maintaining security.
Here is one thing I could do in a DAY at a cost of ZERO dollars. Separate tables. Some kind of separation. I don't need any kind of equipment. I just need them to not touch each other. Might they throw drugs or whatever at each other? Sure. I honestly still don't like it. But it is something I could on DAY ONE for zero dollars. Would people piss and moan about it? Tough and shit. It's prison.
3. As to the price of securing a system... actually the cost of it is mostly a question of discipline. Not money. Aka... you do things THIS way or I will shiv you myself. And if everyone follows the protocol... life is peachy. And what I do... is I make the computers incapable of doing things any other way. People will say "hey how do I install itunes on this"... and patiently explain that I would sooner dump napalm on the machine and set it on fire than I would install itunes on it. Or any other stupid bit of software that doesn't need to be on it and I have neither the resources nor inclination to make secure. The machines will not permit any program to run on them that I have no installed myself. I operate a WHITElist system for all executable code. If the code is not on my whitelist... it will not run.
Black lists are for posers.
4. as to your example of some idiot network that is administered by idiots... I grant that there is no way to fix the problem if the people in charge order things to remain stupid. However, in practice what tends to happen is that those systems tend to burn down on their own. At least in IT. If you have a 10,000 seat system in 2015 and you're not doing anything to manage the security in a really systematic way... the entire thing is going to turn into a viral petri dish in about 5 4 3 2 1... And everyone's infected... yay. And once the whole thing has gone properly to shit, you can generally get whomever to sign off on something to deal with it. The money is really not the issue. I can build a firewall out of an old crap PC and a couple spare nic cards. I can build a router that way too. After that you just need cheap switches... and you've got the BEGINNINGS of some kind of security. I generally don't like full windows workstations just sitting there. I prefer terminals and virtual machines. And before you say "oh that's expensive"... you can run that on shitty workstations. Just install the software on that instead. All the shitty machines limit you to is fewer instances per machine. Fine. Have more of them. what is more the cost of maintaining terminals is LESS than maintaining traditional workstations. And once you have a proper router, proper firewall(S), the operating systems are all physically segrigated in the server room beyond the greasy fingers of the users... you can seriously lock the network down. And then I go farther than that because I like to disable the windows explorer executable for most users. This strikes some people as insane but I replace it with alternative programs that do the same thing only have largely unknown vulnerabilities to the casual user. Users often know things... key combinations... settings windows. T
As to obtaining the independence to break free logistically RIGHT NOW... you're mixing up your time lines.
The issue is not problems we have right this instance but problems we think we'll have in the future. I am saying that the same technology that will create those problems in the future will also liberate you.
So saying "I don't have it now" doesn't make any sense. Neither do the elites have it now so you don't need it yet.
I think I'd prefer to handle it this way:
https://youtu.be/OGvIaX2SaB8?t...
if you haven't seen that movie before, watch from the beginning... great action movie. Can't believe the entire thing is just uploaded onto youtube. The anti piracy people are fucking adorable when they talk about ending that... the black knight from the holy grail if ever there was one.
On topic, I'd seriously prefer something like this for the life sentence people. Exile to some bit of land that is effectively impossible to escape. Let them do whatever they want in there. Skin and eat each other for all I care. Or they can build villages and write poetry. Also fine with me.
on the issue of visitation rooms... I have a very strict notion of what is and is not security. I am a security professional... in IT... but the philosophy is is applicable in other places.
In my world... there is ACTUAL security which is fucking anal, by the book, and offers no opportunity for things to get by me... or there is bullshit security theater which is a waste of everyone's time.
I am quite used to bullshit security being the defacto standard. It being common however does not mean it works, is worthy of any kind of respect, or should be emulated in any regard.
I see bullshit... I roll my eyes... and I say to whomever pays me... "you might as well have nothing if you go with that."
My systems don't get hacked. We do not get viruses. We do not get malware. We do not get people stealing. We do not get people getting more access than they're supposed to have.
I know... bold claims. Unbelievable some might say. But that's coming from cultures where people don't prioritize security. If you take it seriously you can stop this stuff. But you can't break the fucking rules.
If they can TOUCH each other... I have a problem. I mean... do I want to do a full fucking anal cavity search every time on every fucking prisoner every single time they get a visitor? I think not. which means you either dont' let them touch or you accept that drugs are going to flow through the god damn visitor room like crazy.
Fuuuuck Thaaat. Because if they can get drugs in, they can get anything DRUG SIZED into the prison.
This notion of "well it hasn't happened before so it won't happen again" is how 9/11 happened. When you think security... real security... you don't think in terms of what people have done... but what they COULD do. And then you're talking about people getting C4 into the prison or some other explosive. Try a riot with hand grenades.
its only never happened because no one has wanted to do it yet.
They can't touch. If they want to pass objects then they can hand it to an officer and the officer can hand it to whomever after it has been inspected, xrayed, and dog sniffed.
Can you give me a rough idea where you live. I'm not asking for a street address or GPS... tell me what point of the compass you live in whatever area... town, city, county... something.
Because I frankly find your position to either be unbelievable or a sign that your local economy is doing a very poor job of serving your area.
I have lived in a lot of places. Some of them the ass end of no where. And I've never had that problem.
So... I mean do you like at the bottom of the sea?
I am from the US... we have stores that sell common commodities everywhere. Some specialty goods can only be obtained on line or in specialty stores only consistently found in large cities. But for the basic shit that Amazon is using these tags for?... Easy.
And while people love to hate on Walmart... ever bought RAM, a gallon of milk, and a dozen tube socks at 2 AM? Because you can do that at walmart. As surreal as that is...
How many times a week do you go to the store to buy things? You obviously have to go to the store to buy food... no?
And keep in mind, I'm not saying "don't buy things online"... I'm saying "why would you use this button?"
If I'm going to buy something on line, I'll login to the website and order whatever. And as I pointed out, on some goods, amazon's prices are SHIT. Especially anything that they want to sell you with their grocery delivery service. The prices are obviously inflated. They go from being very competitive for anything else... and then suddenly you're looking at 30~200% price increases for some things. And its exclusively in items that are easily obtainable in your local store.
No sale.
Okay... so your plan is to walk up to the nobles in your rags and tell them "hey you in shining armor, with armies, and castles, and legions of soldiers... why do you get to decide!?
At which point you're raped to death while they laugh at you.
The US prison system operates at a huge loss for the US government at the state and federal levels.
To my knowledge the only people that make money on it are companies that are paid by the US government to warehouse people and that money comes from tax revenue. And the prison staff... also paid ultimately with tax dollars.
You say prisons have operated at a net positive... can you show me where that has happened? Because while you say its dangerous... everything effective is dangerous.
First person to discover fire said "ouch"... that doesn't mean you never have anything to do with fire there after. It means you respect the dangers, harness the power, and accept that every so often you're going to get burned because its worth it.
This has been explained to the linux community with some frequency. They don't listen to the problems with wider adoption of their operating system and so we run into problems.
Even suggesting that there is any legitimacy to this position is derided which shuts down any possibility of meaningful communication.
As such... don't ask questions you can't handle the answers to. ;-D
https://youtu.be/9FnO3igOkOk?t...
not really... the economy of that country could use those people. They have value. The politics are just so fucked up that they can't stop killing each other.
What I'm talking about a very different situation.
Imagine 20 percent of the population living well, having everything they need, getting NOTHING from the 80 percent... and not caring about them one way or the other. The 80 percent could all die tomorrow and it wouldn't matter to the economy of the 20 percent. It might be sad... but logistically irrelevant.
that attitude works in times of plenty. In times of scarcity or trouble or chaos... you'll find that as you have no leverage... you'll get little to nothing. And whatever emerges from that will likely be the standard under which you live going forward.
You're presuming a tautology that you're just going to get things because you're living in an area. Historically that isn't how it works.
Consider for a moment the old systems of nobles and kings and warlords.
Why did they care for the welfare of the peasants? Because they needed them to work in the fields and provide bodies in wars.
What gave most people rights in the 19th and 20th centuries was the industrial revolution making old social models uneconomical.
Consider that if you are truly of no value to the elites... as in... they don't need you for anything.... then they can not only go back to the old peasant/noble relationship... they can carry it a step farther and declare everyone outside their clichque as sub human and simply disassociate with you entirely.
What would your response be should they do that?
Protest? Nobility cares little for the protests of peasants. You will be ignored unless you inconvenience them and then you'll just be killed out of hand or beaten bloody for the insult to their time and patience.
Here you might say "I'll rise up and fight!"... will you really though? Will you march with a rifle you got somewhere? Really? Or will you make mean tweets on the internet?
And even if you do march... which is a dubious claim... you are forgetting that you'll have inferior weaponry and the elites will likely have plenty of people willing to fight for them as well... and you'll be dealing with killer robots and all sorts of shit.
Frankly... good luck.
The way out of this is not presuming that elites are going to keep you fed and clothed and burp you at night and tell you what a special boy you are and read you bed time stories... The way out is to gain logistical independence from them.
If you have this independence then sure, the elites will have lots of nifty toys but collectively everyone else will also have a lot of hardware as well. and the industrial potential of EVERYONE with a little micro factory would collectively be very powerful.
That would give you leverage. Actual leverage. the push comes to shove leverage.
Simply saying "but but its mean to not give me things I want"... nope. Get used to getting your face ground into the mud if that's your plan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
There are quite a few such facilities throughout the country. I know one in Los Angeles and there are a couple in Florida that I know of as well.
They're not uncommon.
This notion that it is inhumane if you don't get yard time is odd. It is generally considered inhumane if they don't get recreation time but there is no provision that they need to see the sun at any point.
Yard are provided mostly because it is sufficient and inexpensive. However, there is nothing that says we have to do that to my knowledge. An area where they can recreate? Sure. Does it say anywhere what depth above or below that ground that place is?... not that I've heard. We could put the whole thing a mine shaft if we really wanted.
... Rejected.
*crumples up stupid comment*
*throws it in trash*
Login if you want to discuss this in more detail... lurk as AC and get more of the same.
My personal opinion is widely held amongst IT professionals as well as the corporate and government IT establishment.
The sales vista enjoyed beyond that was largely due to OEM manufactuers just auto installing Vista in machines people bought at wallmart.
So... remove from your statistics OEM installations and recalculate. Its a shitty OS, MS knows it was shitty, and whatever you might think they did their best to not piss off the people that said was shitty for the next iteration of the operating system.
You're conflating vista at launch with vista after a million patches.
*slaps Garbz wrist*
Don't do that.
the copter doesn't need to touch down. It can drop things THROUGH the net unless the net is too fine for things for fall through. Marble sized pellets of heroine for example... or C4... or botulism toxin.
The laundry list is a script I update every couple months. On new systems I push the script to the system... it executes the registry changes... which includes settings that need to be tweaked, features that need to be added, features that need to be fixed, features that need to be removed, and where I want a feature to appear to exist to other parts of the computer but to in fact be inoperative... I knee cap the shit out of the bitch.
Its not something I have to police very closely. I just tweak the file every so often.
Its specific to given releases of windows. I have one for XP, 7, 2008, 2012... I was thinking about making one for windows 10 but quickly rolled my eyes and laughed when I saw what they were doing.
the organization can happily use 7 for a long time. We'll see. We'll have a look at version 11. We see no compelling reason to upgrade at this point. MS has been saying "you CAN upgrade to 10 for free with your existing license"... and we smile and say "thanks!"... and then make a point of not doing anything of the kind.
Some of our kiosks are still XP. I know I know... SECURITY... but we firewall the shit out of them so whatever.
And why why couldn't I run my own fiber? Do you know how cheap fiber is?
Look, it is quite obvious what people are trying to say here.
they're saying "because robots are taking our jobs, we must have communism" or something of that nature.
I respond to this... if the industrial complex doesn't need you at all and you offer nothing of value to it... why does it have to support you at all?
here you say "well I'm an angry human and I will pick up rocks and throw them!"... to which I respond... the industrial complex will have 30MM auto cannons loaded with depleted uranium armor penetrating slugs. You have no leverage.
You have two options.
1. be obsolete and ultimately die.
2. gain ENOUGH industrial independence to maintain credible leverage in the system as a class. If you have a hundred million people with micro factories pumping out stuff then you can hold your own. First you have marketable goods which you can actually sell to the old school industries for whatever you want. And beyond that, collectively all those people pumping out all that stuff is a sizable industrial base in its own right. You not only maintain your leverage but increase it beyond what you have now. If the industries say "you must pay me X for Y"... you can respond "I can make X myself so I don't need to pay you anything."
That's your future.
The cities... I don't know. It depends on the politics and on what the economic interests want with the cities. Traditionally the cities were an economical way to pool labor resources.
if you go in for mass automation along with remote tele-presence technology then the cities lose most of their value to the economy.
For one thing, the cities are more expensive in most cases. Just look at what people pay for shitty little apartments, what they pay in taxes, what they pay in mark ups for every good and service.
Its more expensive.
What if you could get everything you care about in a city... anywhere. Then the city becomes inefficient.
Tanks are generally more mobile than infantry. A WW1 tank might not have been fast enough. They were painfully slow as I remember. But from WW2 on the tank can just back up faster than the infantry can run at them.
As to the rest, you've basically gotten angry and irrational. So I can't really continue to talk with you because you're too emotional to sustain your end of the discussion.
I was rejecting the notion that tanks need infantry in general. They don't. This is like saying battleships MUST have destroyers and cruisers and submarines. There are circomstances where a given military unit will profit from support from other forces. But that such forces are generally required is not exactly true.
If you adapt your tactics and doctrine to account for forces you do not have or will not employ... then most of the problems go away.
You run into problems when you engage in tactics that presume you have certain things that you do not.
You can have circumstances where the tanks do need or are strongly benefited by infantry but if you are a tank force that has little to no infantry you avoid such situations... obviously.
You're too upset to carry on your end so I'm just going to say "good day", tip my hat, and remove any further credible justification for you to be agitated on my account.
Good day, sir.
*tips hat*
That wizzed right over your head.
Lets try again.
Why would a future society that has no use for you, pay for you to continue to live when you do nothing but consume resources and offer the society nothing it wants?
You say I am entitled... yet you presume to be entitled to the society's resources despite not contributing anything of value to that society. Why does the society owe YOU anything?
If a few people have robots that can make everything they want so they don't need you. Why must they give up what they have to make you comfortable?
Here you say "because I need it" or "because if they don't, I'll kill them"... okay... come at me, bro. what the fuck do you have? If I have these robots and they can make anything. Then they can make automated machine gun nests, bullet factories, land mines, poison gas, and other horrible shit. How scared do you think I am of you now given that you're attacking me with what? A broom handle?
You're not intimidating to me. You say "but I have lots of people with me"... and assuming I'm aware of that, maybe I won't built my compound in a place where its easy for you to get to me. Maybe I put my compound on an island or in the middle of a desert or on top of a mountain... or possibly in the middle of a frozen tundra. Now march through the fucking ice and get me, shit head. I'll be sitting here getting a foot massage and drinking coco while my terminators prowl through the snow with glowing red eyes making meat pies out of you fucks.
See?
Here is your problem. If you're not of value to the future society... then you are disposable to that society. They can lose you... and it won't matter.
The society will start out trying to help you. But the first time an economic problem hits or there is a war or you get politically feisty and start demanding people give you shit... Well... then you'll see how much leverage you have to demand anything. Aka... none.
Look, I'm not saying you're fucked. I'm saying that if you want to survive, you need to adapt.
Those who do not adapt. Suffer and die.
Suffer.
Death.
Adapt or you suffer and die. That is what I am saying. Why is this rocket science?
my point is that a net won't stop me from dropping explosives into the prison and frankly I think those are a bigger problem. A knife... who cares. They already have shivs. A gun? What does that do? Lets them shoot a guard? Why not stab the guard? They're going to get close enough to do it. The only danger with a gun is maybe being able to shoot the warden himself... getting close enough to shiv him would be hard. But why would a prisoner even want to do that?
A net isn't going to stop drugs. It isn't going to stop explosives. I will stop guns ... maybe... and it probably can't stop porn... though I wonder why porn is a problem. I don't understand why prisoners wouldn't be allowed access to all the porn they wanted. Sexually frustrated prisoners is not a good idea. Let them drain their nuts all they want.
As to visitation stuff... we often separate visitors with a pane of glass and they communicate through closed circuit telephones that are often recorded or actively being listened to by someone during the visitation.
So... again... if the contraband is passing at visitation then there is a competence issue.