Watching webs and spheres of influence, sticking in moles to be paid influencers.
It's all marketing and data mining. Maybe a bit of recording youthful indiscretions for future blackmail.
You see, I continually miss that step in my line of attempting to rationalize things like Twitter and Facebook. I always go the route of "people need to feel like they're noticed" and "people who don't like who they were try to reinvent themselves online instead of real life"...
How many Twitter accounts *are* there? How many unique (in the scientific, not cultural way) individuals actually use twitter? What percentage of that 100 million and then the entire population are actually just marketing accounts?
"Hey guys! All the impressionable consumers with disposable income are over here now!!!" *five minutes later* "@JackNormalGuy "Yo dawg dez nue kix are sweet! U shood check there syt, srslyLOL!! bit.ly/4Tju7"
We have a 13" black and white TV and a digital converter box in the garage "just in case" our internet connection goes down and we can't get the news. Or if we still have a connection, but the news is so spectacular that major news outlet sites crash, we can rely on plucky tech communities to shoulder the burden (I'm looking at you, Slashdot of September 11, 2001).
I even have a usb tv adapter that I use from time to time with some rabbit ears just to see local news. No need to pull out the TV!
Otherwise, we consume all our entertainment media online. Netflix, Hulu, station sites (Fox, NBC, etc.), and... other flash-delivered sources.
Why? Because we don't want to pay for media we don't want to watch. We're happy to watch commercials for the TV shows we like (and actually enjoy the 1-2 minute surveys that sometimes pop up en lieu of commercials in Hulu), but we don't want to have to pay an intercessor an additional $50-$70 per month for the opportunity to ignore 99% of their presented content and still watch MORE commercials than we would online.
Not exactly. While everyone *uses* computers, the massive majority of the world still uses paper. That means that desks must have room for computers, writing, books/manuals, stacking papers, a notepad, and paper-related utensils.
I have NO personal items on my desk aside from a mug for tea.
Then again, I also work for a major west coast university system that still does financial, payroll, and purchasing tasks via a dos-emulation black and green screen. They're just starting to *scan* in their purchasing records so that thousands of square feet of real estate don't need to be held aside for filing cabinets. If only they could make the whole process digital...
As much as I silently approve of Anonymous' vengeance tactics here (implicitly by not condemning them), I'm glad they weren't able to crash Amazon simply because of my dedication to Penny Arcade's Child's Play Charity drive. The main vehicle for donations is Amazon and I'd hate to see the kids in Children's Hospitals make due with less because of a vengeance ploy.
It was the 3rd year of undergrad and my roomie and come to me with a problem: his brother's computer goes black on booting up to windows. Safe Mode wouldn't work. Finals was the following week and his brother had 2 papers on the computer, unfinished, which had to be turned in on Monday. I told him to bring the computer down and I'd do what I could.
I hooked his computer up to my KVM (best low-space hobby troubleshooter investment I ever made). I booted up and the diagnosis was definitely correct. The second Windows tried booting, the screen would go black and Safe Mode crashed on each attempt. He didn't have a recovery disc for his factory installation so I just had to wing it... without seeing my actions on screen.
I booted up to XP Pro on my computer (which he was using on his) and wrote down all the keystrokes, tabs, enters, etc. in order to get down a method of setting the display settings to minimum settings (Windows key, up x times, right once, etc.). That didn't change anything. I then set out to uninstall the drivers, again writing down the operation as performed on my computer and then repeating the process blind on his. That still didn't fix it. "Oh!," I thought, "Maybe I'll uninstall the device and reboot... duh!" I did that blind, rebooted, and the desktop was viewable. I spent the next 3 hours removing viruses and malware.
Lesson to the brother: Don't install ATI drivers for their built-in software overclocking when you have an NVidia card.
FTFA JUST below the video: As lithium ions flow from the positively charged cathode into the 200-nanometre diameter wires of tin oxide that make up the negatively charged anode, the nanowires writhe and bulge, causing them to expand up to 2.5 fold. The wires also change structure from a neatly ordered crystal to a disordered glassy material. These distortions may explain why such batteries ultimately wear down, the team reports online today in Science.
It's not that money doesn't motivate them, they *know* there's not money in it to begin with. Thus, they have no money motive AND no money expectation.
It's a fine difference, but it goes a long way. It's the difference between a teacher knowingly being underpaid because of his/her passion for education (s/he isn't motivated by money, but still needs it) and someone who gives up his/her career, goes to a 3rd world country, and serves as a freelance 1-room school teacher to share his/her education (where there would be no *expectation* of money).
File-sharers (the massive portion of them), in fact, actually PAY to share (internet connection, hard drive space, blank media, etc.).
But those distinctions are entirely too honest to use in a politicized court of law.
And let's not forget that Phoenix came before Firebird. Of course, the BIOS company took issue with that once it's beta started gaining momentum...
I still remember the frustration I had when it went from Phoenix to Firebird and Firebird to Firefox. I had been telling people to install the browser (and installing it myself on their computers during troubleshooting sessions), but their name changes kinda hurt their "reliability" in the eyes of new users.
I would love to go see this. I want to see how distant their representation is from the Bible and see if I can walk around without laughing/getting thrown out.
I am always disappointed that with such things, the decision to move one way or the next is left up to people who don't understand the topic. The founding fathers were educated men and philosophers. They wrote books on concepts and engaged in intellectual discourse regarding those concepts.
Congress, in its short history, has been almost entirely a political game, however. Money interests and personal bias determines how important decisions are made.
Have there been congressional debates guest-starring important people on the topic? Have actual academics and their research been given at least equal priority and importance to industry power house CEOs?
Or if they find it in contradiction of other more established laws. It's a common misunderstanding that they can only deal with strictly constitutional issues because, normally, only constitutional issues make it all the way through the appeals.
Their general charter, if you will, is to ensure the development of orderly federal law.
So you think standard education is "Ivory Tower" and "socialist", assume a denigrating usage of "civilization", and yet claim that you value education? If you do, you surely don't demonstrate it in your posts.
The way you suggest "civilization" is being used would also suggest that I wear a top hat and ride in a carriage to the haberdasher on Sundays. Of course, civilization, as any rational person would define it today, is the establishment of complex relationships within a society. It affords for the preservation of the past and expectations of the future through the (written or unwritten) social contract.
When a civilization interacts with other civilizations, it needs to progress (typically quite quickly) to the levels of others to prevent being dominated or exploited. (See: Colonialism)
To progress, a civilization needs knowledge of self and others while creating systems within their own civilization to serve their own peoples' needs. (See: Self-Determination) Math and Writing/Reading is needed for that.
Afghanistan, for example, was well on their road to the advancement of their civilization when the Soviets invaded. Soviet invasion destroyed educational progress. America funded the Taliban which then did a nice double-whammy to education.
America then invaded to take out the Taliban (fail) and the terrorist group they were/are protecting (fail). Now people simply want to survive the Taliban. They need to be re-empowered, but that will only come generationaly (through education) or with the complete and quick obliteration of the Taliban and their allies. (That's not happening)
Americans are not bound together by common cultural roots or heritage. In fact, there's a strong history of the division of culture. (Blacks, Latin immigrants, Asian immigrants, South/North, City/Suburb/Country, religious/non-religious, etc.)
Many Americans see education beyond high school as elitist (not that they don't want their own children to go).
Most Americans have non-controversial sources of income, but they fear losing that income since it's really quite expensive to live at a preferable, what is considered "common", standard in America. They'll do anything to not jeopardize that income... even allow their rights and dignity to be evermore tread upon.
I actually think Haiti will be a future example of the failure of the facade of international cooperation via the UN. Slow response. No follow-through. Very high corporate interest in the readily available labor force.
The whole country was leveled and there is a population willing to rebuild it. The UN and/or the US could have stepped up and helped to rebuild the nation as the first International Nation with hospitals and universities focused on international cooperation and understanding. Those and their support industries alone would have created massive numbers of jobs (likely 95%+ employment) for the Haitians while also giving their children education.
Do you even know what education is? Indoctrination to my culture and values? Math? Reading and Writing? Those aren't cultural values, those are the basis of civilization. Without those there is no progress can happen and no history can be recorded with which to make sure the pursuit of progress does not produce the same errors as before.
Ivory tower socialism teaching? HAHAHAHA! I'm either getting trolled or you actually think that "ivory tower" and "socialism" can be said to be associated... Ivory Tower education is what existed before the mid-1800s in America. Since then, it's been a steady climb to equitable education-- something you'd surely call "socialist" until you find your own child isn't getting her "free and appropriate education". Because then it would be your "right" to education.
You ask questions based on a false dilemma. If you can show me one country known to sponsor guerrilla terrorism, I'll show you a massive number of families that want education and a better life for their children.
"Despite improvements, large percentage of the population remained illiterate. Beginning with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, successive wars virtually destroyed the education system. Most teachers fled the country during the wars. In the middle of the 1990s, about 650 schools were functioning.
In 1996 the Taliban regime banned education for females, and the madrassa (mosque school) became the main source of primary and secondary education."
That doesn't sound like parents fighting education to me. It sounds like they fear their children being outright killed by the Taliban which exists to breed more Taliban.
But hey, don't let reality get in your way.
(PS: If you're interested in education, let me know. It's kind of my "thing".)
(1) Restraint Emboldens (2) Measured Response (3) A huge amount to avoid civilian casualties (4) Bombing troublesome areas (5) Offending host countries, Dirty war
I listed some key points from your post above.
(1) You noted that Western military restraint emboldens terrorists. That's definitely true. Part of guerrilla warfare is testing for tolerance and weaknesses. Terrorists, being guerrilla fighters, will find limits of response and try to exploit those thresholds by acting against their target up to that threshold, but not beyond it. It's very resource efficient. However, you have to be careful to be very specific about who the terrorists are: a relatively small number of extremists and not an entire nation or culture of people. Such distinction is particularly important when speaking with those who are prone to prejudice.
(2) You are very right about the Measured Response Doctrine. It does not apply in asymmetric warfare because by definition, the resources are not sufficient to give any similar measure. What would work is "Adaptive Response" which would require conventional forces to adopt the tactics used by terrorists against those who would actually be able to influence the moral of terrorist groups. And the only group that affects the morale of terrorist groups is group itself. Thus: target the groups directly.
(3) I agree that there's a good amount of effort made to minimize civilian *injury*, but since we're fighting terrorism here, *casualties* can include more than physical harm. A feeling of safety, economic security, access to water/markets, etc. can all be casualties of war that affect the morale of the occupied public and thus must be protected just as much as civilian bodies. Their lives and their WAYS OF life need to be preserved and protected.
(4) Bombing troublesome areas is against that Adaptive Response concept I put forth above.
(5) When half the battle is preventing the recruitment of new fighters, a dirty war is the last thing you want. Yes, even after a lost war.
Ahh... I understand. You don't actually know what you're talking about. I get it. You're under the prejudice that birth within certain political borders automatically enrolls children and families alike in a religious extremism thus creating an entire, massive population of people dangerous to everyone in the world.
Well, you and I won't have much to talk about then. I tend to trust academic sources over hyperbole and yellow journalism.
We do... but with different intent. Prior to the 1990s, schools/education was an investment for the betterment of personal income and general society. Since the late 1990s, however, education has been seen as a commodity whose purpose is to create a non-management-associated, high-skilled labor force to feed the economy through industrial innovation and consumption. This is the reason there's such massive investment in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) subjects and such cuts to things that tend to advance society (History/Social Science, Literature, Writing, the Arts).
As it relates to my suggestion above, I would put particular emphasis on those socially-minded subjects before STEM since the subjugated need to first understand themselves and record a personal culture before they become part of the world market (the ultimate purpose of STEM education) or else they will not have the group strength to resist conservative pushes to return to feudal ways.
Everyone wants education. That's not an assumption, that's a fact. More significantly, every rational parent wants their child to be educated so that they could be more successful (via wisdom, intelligence, income, access, power of choice, etc.) than they are. This is a universal phenomenon.
And I'm not even talking the construction of massive educational networks or systems. I'm talking about a multi-room school house with access paths/roads, heating, and funding for standard school supplies (books in the native language, pencils, papers, etc). These are not schools to breed the next MBA or robotics engineer, necessarily. These are places for children to learn math (at least through trigonometry), writing/reading, and another language.
Regarding the drive of a Muslim extremist to turn the entire world to Islam: You're right! But children aren't born extremist. And, in fact, few families would choose to be around extremists if it were a viable option. They want safety and happiness for their children. So let's give them that option... free of charge and influence. Protect those people.
Regarding your suggested tactic of constantly escalating violence: Are you joking? Seriously... are you?
I'm kind of confused by the intent of your post. Are you requesting that I flesh out my simple assertion on the appropriate expenditure of reactive security resources? I'd definitely be willing to. That would make for a very stimulating internet discussion if you're willing to help out.
On the other hand, I get the feeling that you're really just interested in a drive-by ridiculing and not really interested in the construction of anything useful to anyone ever.
Slashdot Mirror
Watching webs and spheres of influence, sticking in moles to be paid influencers. It's all marketing and data mining. Maybe a bit of recording youthful indiscretions for future blackmail.
You see, I continually miss that step in my line of attempting to rationalize things like Twitter and Facebook. I always go the route of "people need to feel like they're noticed" and "people who don't like who they were try to reinvent themselves online instead of real life"...
... but I can just stop at "people are stupid".
How many Twitter accounts *are* there? How many unique (in the scientific, not cultural way) individuals actually use twitter? What percentage of that 100 million and then the entire population are actually just marketing accounts?
"Hey guys! All the impressionable consumers with disposable income are over here now!!!"
*five minutes later*
"@JackNormalGuy "Yo dawg dez nue kix are sweet! U shood check there syt, srslyLOL!! bit.ly/4Tju7"
We have a 13" black and white TV and a digital converter box in the garage "just in case" our internet connection goes down and we can't get the news. Or if we still have a connection, but the news is so spectacular that major news outlet sites crash, we can rely on plucky tech communities to shoulder the burden (I'm looking at you, Slashdot of September 11, 2001).
I even have a usb tv adapter that I use from time to time with some rabbit ears just to see local news. No need to pull out the TV!
Otherwise, we consume all our entertainment media online. Netflix, Hulu, station sites (Fox, NBC, etc.), and... other flash-delivered sources.
Why? Because we don't want to pay for media we don't want to watch. We're happy to watch commercials for the TV shows we like (and actually enjoy the 1-2 minute surveys that sometimes pop up en lieu of commercials in Hulu), but we don't want to have to pay an intercessor an additional $50-$70 per month for the opportunity to ignore 99% of their presented content and still watch MORE commercials than we would online.
Ubiquity deals with high frequency.
Normalcy deals with expectations.
Something common, in my usage, refers to being trite or overexposed.
Not exactly. While everyone *uses* computers, the massive majority of the world still uses paper. That means that desks must have room for computers, writing, books/manuals, stacking papers, a notepad, and paper-related utensils.
I have NO personal items on my desk aside from a mug for tea.
Then again, I also work for a major west coast university system that still does financial, payroll, and purchasing tasks via a dos-emulation black and green screen. They're just starting to *scan* in their purchasing records so that thousands of square feet of real estate don't need to be held aside for filing cabinets. If only they could make the whole process digital...
I could tell you how I re-set a CMOS battery to get a computer to boot up after transport, but that wouldn't be all that impressive, would it?
The theme of the thread is "Stunts, Idiocy, and Hero Hacks" not "Intelligent, Foresightful, and Mundane Troubleshooting".
It's called ubiquity. Once something, ANYTHING, is ubiquitous, it is then assumed to be normal, common, and easy.
As much as I silently approve of Anonymous' vengeance tactics here (implicitly by not condemning them), I'm glad they weren't able to crash Amazon simply because of my dedication to Penny Arcade's Child's Play Charity drive. The main vehicle for donations is Amazon and I'd hate to see the kids in Children's Hospitals make due with less because of a vengeance ploy.
It was the 3rd year of undergrad and my roomie and come to me with a problem: his brother's computer goes black on booting up to windows. Safe Mode wouldn't work. Finals was the following week and his brother had 2 papers on the computer, unfinished, which had to be turned in on Monday. I told him to bring the computer down and I'd do what I could.
I hooked his computer up to my KVM (best low-space hobby troubleshooter investment I ever made). I booted up and the diagnosis was definitely correct. The second Windows tried booting, the screen would go black and Safe Mode crashed on each attempt. He didn't have a recovery disc for his factory installation so I just had to wing it... without seeing my actions on screen.
I booted up to XP Pro on my computer (which he was using on his) and wrote down all the keystrokes, tabs, enters, etc. in order to get down a method of setting the display settings to minimum settings (Windows key, up x times, right once, etc.). That didn't change anything. I then set out to uninstall the drivers, again writing down the operation as performed on my computer and then repeating the process blind on his. That still didn't fix it. "Oh!," I thought, "Maybe I'll uninstall the device and reboot... duh!" I did that blind, rebooted, and the desktop was viewable. I spent the next 3 hours removing viruses and malware.
Lesson to the brother: Don't install ATI drivers for their built-in software overclocking when you have an NVidia card.
Lesson to me: Fix computer, get beer.
FTFA JUST below the video: As lithium ions flow from the positively charged cathode into the 200-nanometre diameter wires of tin oxide that make up the negatively charged anode, the nanowires writhe and bulge, causing them to expand up to 2.5 fold. The wires also change structure from a neatly ordered crystal to a disordered glassy material. These distortions may explain why such batteries ultimately wear down, the team reports online today in Science.
It's not that money doesn't motivate them, they *know* there's not money in it to begin with. Thus, they have no money motive AND no money expectation.
It's a fine difference, but it goes a long way. It's the difference between a teacher knowingly being underpaid because of his/her passion for education (s/he isn't motivated by money, but still needs it) and someone who gives up his/her career, goes to a 3rd world country, and serves as a freelance 1-room school teacher to share his/her education (where there would be no *expectation* of money).
File-sharers (the massive portion of them), in fact, actually PAY to share (internet connection, hard drive space, blank media, etc.).
But those distinctions are entirely too honest to use in a politicized court of law.
And let's not forget that Phoenix came before Firebird. Of course, the BIOS company took issue with that once it's beta started gaining momentum...
I still remember the frustration I had when it went from Phoenix to Firebird and Firebird to Firefox. I had been telling people to install the browser (and installing it myself on their computers during troubleshooting sessions), but their name changes kinda hurt their "reliability" in the eyes of new users.
I would love to go see this. I want to see how distant their representation is from the Bible and see if I can walk around without laughing/getting thrown out.
I am always disappointed that with such things, the decision to move one way or the next is left up to people who don't understand the topic. The founding fathers were educated men and philosophers. They wrote books on concepts and engaged in intellectual discourse regarding those concepts.
Congress, in its short history, has been almost entirely a political game, however. Money interests and personal bias determines how important decisions are made.
Have there been congressional debates guest-starring important people on the topic? Have actual academics and their research been given at least equal priority and importance to industry power house CEOs?
Or if they find it in contradiction of other more established laws. It's a common misunderstanding that they can only deal with strictly constitutional issues because, normally, only constitutional issues make it all the way through the appeals.
Their general charter, if you will, is to ensure the development of orderly federal law.
So you think standard education is "Ivory Tower" and "socialist", assume a denigrating usage of "civilization", and yet claim that you value education? If you do, you surely don't demonstrate it in your posts.
The way you suggest "civilization" is being used would also suggest that I wear a top hat and ride in a carriage to the haberdasher on Sundays. Of course, civilization, as any rational person would define it today, is the establishment of complex relationships within a society. It affords for the preservation of the past and expectations of the future through the (written or unwritten) social contract.
When a civilization interacts with other civilizations, it needs to progress (typically quite quickly) to the levels of others to prevent being dominated or exploited. (See: Colonialism)
To progress, a civilization needs knowledge of self and others while creating systems within their own civilization to serve their own peoples' needs. (See: Self-Determination) Math and Writing/Reading is needed for that.
Afghanistan, for example, was well on their road to the advancement of their civilization when the Soviets invaded. Soviet invasion destroyed educational progress. America funded the Taliban which then did a nice double-whammy to education.
America then invaded to take out the Taliban (fail) and the terrorist group they were/are protecting (fail). Now people simply want to survive the Taliban. They need to be re-empowered, but that will only come generationaly (through education) or with the complete and quick obliteration of the Taliban and their allies. (That's not happening)
Keep on posting for more lessons.
Americans are not bound together by common cultural roots or heritage. In fact, there's a strong history of the division of culture. (Blacks, Latin immigrants, Asian immigrants, South/North, City/Suburb/Country, religious/non-religious, etc.)
Many Americans see education beyond high school as elitist (not that they don't want their own children to go).
Most Americans have non-controversial sources of income, but they fear losing that income since it's really quite expensive to live at a preferable, what is considered "common", standard in America. They'll do anything to not jeopardize that income... even allow their rights and dignity to be evermore tread upon.
I actually think Haiti will be a future example of the failure of the facade of international cooperation via the UN. Slow response. No follow-through. Very high corporate interest in the readily available labor force.
The whole country was leveled and there is a population willing to rebuild it. The UN and/or the US could have stepped up and helped to rebuild the nation as the first International Nation with hospitals and universities focused on international cooperation and understanding. Those and their support industries alone would have created massive numbers of jobs (likely 95%+ employment) for the Haitians while also giving their children education.
And we failed.
Do you even know what education is? Indoctrination to my culture and values? Math? Reading and Writing? Those aren't cultural values, those are the basis of civilization. Without those there is no progress can happen and no history can be recorded with which to make sure the pursuit of progress does not produce the same errors as before.
Ivory tower socialism teaching? HAHAHAHA! I'm either getting trolled or you actually think that "ivory tower" and "socialism" can be said to be associated... Ivory Tower education is what existed before the mid-1800s in America. Since then, it's been a steady climb to equitable education-- something you'd surely call "socialist" until you find your own child isn't getting her "free and appropriate education". Because then it would be your "right" to education.
You ask questions based on a false dilemma. If you can show me one country known to sponsor guerrilla terrorism, I'll show you a massive number of families that want education and a better life for their children.
Afghanistan? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Afghanistan
"Despite improvements, large percentage of the population remained illiterate. Beginning with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, successive wars virtually destroyed the education system. Most teachers fled the country during the wars. In the middle of the 1990s, about 650 schools were functioning.
In 1996 the Taliban regime banned education for females, and the madrassa (mosque school) became the main source of primary and secondary education."
That doesn't sound like parents fighting education to me. It sounds like they fear their children being outright killed by the Taliban which exists to breed more Taliban.
But hey, don't let reality get in your way.
(PS: If you're interested in education, let me know. It's kind of my "thing".)
(1) Restraint Emboldens
(2) Measured Response
(3) A huge amount to avoid civilian casualties
(4) Bombing troublesome areas
(5) Offending host countries, Dirty war
I listed some key points from your post above.
(1) You noted that Western military restraint emboldens terrorists. That's definitely true. Part of guerrilla warfare is testing for tolerance and weaknesses. Terrorists, being guerrilla fighters, will find limits of response and try to exploit those thresholds by acting against their target up to that threshold, but not beyond it. It's very resource efficient. However, you have to be careful to be very specific about who the terrorists are: a relatively small number of extremists and not an entire nation or culture of people. Such distinction is particularly important when speaking with those who are prone to prejudice.
(2) You are very right about the Measured Response Doctrine. It does not apply in asymmetric warfare because by definition, the resources are not sufficient to give any similar measure. What would work is "Adaptive Response" which would require conventional forces to adopt the tactics used by terrorists against those who would actually be able to influence the moral of terrorist groups. And the only group that affects the morale of terrorist groups is group itself. Thus: target the groups directly.
(3) I agree that there's a good amount of effort made to minimize civilian *injury*, but since we're fighting terrorism here, *casualties* can include more than physical harm. A feeling of safety, economic security, access to water/markets, etc. can all be casualties of war that affect the morale of the occupied public and thus must be protected just as much as civilian bodies. Their lives and their WAYS OF life need to be preserved and protected.
(4) Bombing troublesome areas is against that Adaptive Response concept I put forth above.
(5) When half the battle is preventing the recruitment of new fighters, a dirty war is the last thing you want. Yes, even after a lost war.
Ahh... I understand. You don't actually know what you're talking about. I get it. You're under the prejudice that birth within certain political borders automatically enrolls children and families alike in a religious extremism thus creating an entire, massive population of people dangerous to everyone in the world.
Well, you and I won't have much to talk about then. I tend to trust academic sources over hyperbole and yellow journalism.
We do... but with different intent. Prior to the 1990s, schools/education was an investment for the betterment of personal income and general society. Since the late 1990s, however, education has been seen as a commodity whose purpose is to create a non-management-associated, high-skilled labor force to feed the economy through industrial innovation and consumption. This is the reason there's such massive investment in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) subjects and such cuts to things that tend to advance society (History/Social Science, Literature, Writing, the Arts).
As it relates to my suggestion above, I would put particular emphasis on those socially-minded subjects before STEM since the subjugated need to first understand themselves and record a personal culture before they become part of the world market (the ultimate purpose of STEM education) or else they will not have the group strength to resist conservative pushes to return to feudal ways.
Everyone wants education. That's not an assumption, that's a fact. More significantly, every rational parent wants their child to be educated so that they could be more successful (via wisdom, intelligence, income, access, power of choice, etc.) than they are. This is a universal phenomenon.
And I'm not even talking the construction of massive educational networks or systems. I'm talking about a multi-room school house with access paths/roads, heating, and funding for standard school supplies (books in the native language, pencils, papers, etc). These are not schools to breed the next MBA or robotics engineer, necessarily. These are places for children to learn math (at least through trigonometry), writing/reading, and another language.
Regarding the drive of a Muslim extremist to turn the entire world to Islam: You're right! But children aren't born extremist. And, in fact, few families would choose to be around extremists if it were a viable option. They want safety and happiness for their children. So let's give them that option... free of charge and influence. Protect those people.
Regarding your suggested tactic of constantly escalating violence: Are you joking? Seriously... are you?
I'm kind of confused by the intent of your post. Are you requesting that I flesh out my simple assertion on the appropriate expenditure of reactive security resources? I'd definitely be willing to. That would make for a very stimulating internet discussion if you're willing to help out.
On the other hand, I get the feeling that you're really just interested in a drive-by ridiculing and not really interested in the construction of anything useful to anyone ever.
Which is it?