And in a related story, the world's collective IQ just jumped an astounding 2 points, because this idiot is no longer amongst us. While I'm genuinely sorry he died, I regret all of the damage he did.
I would like to correct two mistakes that seem to be common in this discussion:
First, there IS public accountability for the Intelligence Community (IC). Oversight of the IC is the primary responsibility of the House Permenant Select Commitee on Intelligence (HPSCI, pronounced "hip-see") and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI, known to some as "Sissy") In addition, executive branch oversight is done by the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB). SSCI and HPSCI both conduct open as well as closed hearings about IC activities and will respond to public requests for information, subject to classification, of course.
Second, I'm not aware of any case in which the IC has done economic espionage, as I define it. They certainly do (and should) collect economic data on a variety of countries, for example, estimating their GDP, productivity, etc. They also collect information on foreign weapons systems and use that information to develop new US weapons. But there is a high level of consensus in the IC that they are not interested in collecting information on foreign products and giving that information to US companies. For one thing, how does one choose which companies get the data and which do not? More succinctly, as one CIA officer pointed out, "I don't mind risking my life for my country, but I'm not very interested in risking my life for General Motors." (My memory may be faulty in this quote--it might have been Ford...)
Although it's not strictly relevant to the current debate--that is, the merits of this distributed computing effort--I'm troubled by both the original post and many of the replies. The original post gripes that this is for a "for-profit" company as if that is some sort of heinous crime. While I admit that there are legitimate and useful debates about the pros and cons of capitalism, last time I checked, most Western nations are, in fact, more-or-less capitalist.
I shouldn't have to point this out, but it's OK to make a profit...
Secondly, while it is true that some drugs are very expensive, it is useful to look at some of the history. Health care in general has extended lives, has in fact been made accessible to all (OK, there's some debate about how fair it is and how well we are doing, but that's not the point here.) Life spans are increasing, quality of life has increased, and so on. Obviously, we're doing something right. (Maybe we're doing some stuff wrong also, but lets have a little more reasoned debate, please.)
I have no particular position on the merits of this particular screen saver, but I'm not sure that bilious rhetoric in the original post was very well founded.
Slashdot Mirror
And in a related story, the world's collective IQ just jumped an astounding 2 points, because this idiot is no longer amongst us. While I'm genuinely sorry he died, I regret all of the damage he did.
RIP. And good riddance.
I would like to correct two mistakes that seem to be common in this discussion: First, there IS public accountability for the Intelligence Community (IC). Oversight of the IC is the primary responsibility of the House Permenant Select Commitee on Intelligence (HPSCI, pronounced "hip-see") and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI, known to some as "Sissy") In addition, executive branch oversight is done by the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB). SSCI and HPSCI both conduct open as well as closed hearings about IC activities and will respond to public requests for information, subject to classification, of course. Second, I'm not aware of any case in which the IC has done economic espionage, as I define it. They certainly do (and should) collect economic data on a variety of countries, for example, estimating their GDP, productivity, etc. They also collect information on foreign weapons systems and use that information to develop new US weapons. But there is a high level of consensus in the IC that they are not interested in collecting information on foreign products and giving that information to US companies. For one thing, how does one choose which companies get the data and which do not? More succinctly, as one CIA officer pointed out, "I don't mind risking my life for my country, but I'm not very interested in risking my life for General Motors." (My memory may be faulty in this quote--it might have been Ford...)
NSA (and CIA) were founded by the National Security Act of 1947.
Although it's not strictly relevant to the current debate--that is, the merits of this distributed computing effort--I'm troubled by both the original post and many of the replies. The original post gripes that this is for a "for-profit" company as if that is some sort of heinous crime. While I admit that there are legitimate and useful debates about the pros and cons of capitalism, last time I checked, most Western nations are, in fact, more-or-less capitalist. I shouldn't have to point this out, but it's OK to make a profit... Secondly, while it is true that some drugs are very expensive, it is useful to look at some of the history. Health care in general has extended lives, has in fact been made accessible to all (OK, there's some debate about how fair it is and how well we are doing, but that's not the point here.) Life spans are increasing, quality of life has increased, and so on. Obviously, we're doing something right. (Maybe we're doing some stuff wrong also, but lets have a little more reasoned debate, please.) I have no particular position on the merits of this particular screen saver, but I'm not sure that bilious rhetoric in the original post was very well founded.