I agree - it looks to me like it was an internal EPA budgetary decision. OK, so they're going to close some libraries. I can see why people might get upset, but nothing presented in the article actually presents *any* evidence that George W. Bush wants to make sure that this information is hidden away, like the Ark in that warehouse.
The only thing that the authors did to prove their point was to show that drivers in passenger cars were much more likely to be injured/killed if they were struck in the side by an SUV, than if they were hit by a lighter vehicle. They obviously think that this is enough to prove their statement about cars and SUVs not being able to co-exist, but they haven't done that at all.
What they've got to look at is, "How many lives are saved because people are driving SUVs rather than lighter vehicles vs. How many lives are lost because people are struck by an SUVs rather than lighter vehicles". All they've quantified at this point is a small part of that equation, namely that people are, in fact, more likely to die if they're struck by an SUV rather than a lighter vehicle. If even *more* lives are saved on the part of the people in SUV's, then cars and SUVs can safely co-exist - less lives will be lost on balance. It's not necessarily fair, since people in SUVs will be safer, and people in cars will be less safe, but the overall level of safety will be higher. In all the articles that I've seen about this issue that trumpet the fact that car occupants are more likely to die than SUV occupants in crashes, I've never seen one analysis of the statistical likelihood of death, for car and SUV occupants combined, to see if the total # of deaths goes down or up.
But from reading what Stallman says, I get the feeling that he doesn't believe in a person's freedom to produce non-free software. I'm all for free software and the success of the GNU project - the geek in me likes it, and it'd be cool to have the skills to contribute to it. On the other hand, while we're talking about all of these different types of freedom (as in beer, as in freedom, freedom's #0 thru #3, etc.), I want to ensure that people have the freedom to be an asshole and not share their software, if they don't want to share it.
It's pretty funny, in Update #2, this Steve Phillips guy is complaining about the tactics of flooding his stores phone lines. That was before it hit/.'s front page. If he thought it was bad before, he's in for a world of shit now.
I'm all for stopping the people that send spam, and spread spyware, trojans, viruses, etc., through legal means.
Unfortunately, legal means aren't doing much to solve the problem that we're facing (increasing identify theft, credit card fraud, computers that have to be re-imaged to start working again, etc.). In fact, even while more and more people work on security issues from the defense side, the epidemic spread of malicious programs continues. When the people that do this stuff operate in the U.S., they're hard to catch, and hard to prosecute. When they're operating in places like Russia, where the law is not in our favor, they are nearly impossible to prosecute effectively through legal means.
If legal means are completely ineffective at creating a deterrent, as they seem to be, then vigilante action becomes a more viable option, IMHO. Granted, the corpse in this story appears to have been a spammer, not an organized-crime trojan writer. As such, I think murder was not warranted. But for the people who *are* writing and spreading trojans, defrauding people, etc., I think that the only true deterrent would be the murder of a significant number of them (enough to get their attention and make them re-think their career choice).
If you think I'm going far here, just think about this: How many man-hours are spent here in the U.S. each year dealing with security issues caused by scum like this? Millions, I'm sure. Each hour spent dealing with these problems is an hour that is effectively stolen from the person who has to deal with that problem - if the problem didn't exist, then they could be doing something of their own choice. So the people that perpetrate this stuff rob us of millions of hours of our lives, while they enjoy all of the hours of their lives. In the big balance sheet of life, we come out ahead if the perps are deceased.
I agree that the metric system is better, but when you're dealing with HVAC systems in the U.S., trying to do everything in SI and then convert to English at different points would add a great deal of trouble. The programs that calculate cooling loads have English unit outputs, and expect English unit inputs. The catalogs for U.S.-centric equipment are figured in English units (there are SI catalogs out there, but they're hard to get, and the equipment itself is typically designed in multiples of tons or Btu/hr). So I'd support a conversion to metric, but it hasn't happened yet, so I'll stick with English for now.
It's funny, I hadn't noticed that in quite a while until the other day when I went to an architect's office down at the Riverplace tower. I guess they're close enough to the plants that you can smell it if the wind is right.
It was a lot worse back in the 80's, though. I guess the paper mills are getting better technology.
I believe that there is such a restriction, which pretty much sucks, IMHO. But that's exactly why there's a need for services like this. Here in Jacksonville, Florida, the Sheriff's office has an online crime rate thing, but the only problem is that it doesn't show the crime at individual points - it shows a half-mile radius that you can move around, which makes it hard to tell which actual streets are bad, etc.
I'm really curious what the real-estate agent groups out there think of developments like this. It seems to me that it'd make for more fluctuations in prices, as people learn how to use tools like this and educate themselves (since the real estate agents can't or won't).
I'm not so worried about the police planting blood/semen as someone else planting it. I guess the nightmare scenario I'm thinking of would be a disgruntled lover who could just save a used condom and plant that somewhere incriminating.
As far as fingerprints go, I don't know that they can be planted - maybe they can, but I'm not aware of that possibility.
I trust the technical accuracy of DNA testing - O.J. was guilty, and his DNA fingerprint didn't jus turn up by mistake from the samples at the crime scene.
I'm fine with a database of the DNA of *convicted* felons.
My whole problem is in how it will be used. Say there's an unsolved murder, and a splatter of the unexplained blood is found nearby that lab tests say does not belong to the victim. The logical conclusion is that the perpetrator was wounded in the commission of the crime, and left that blood splatter.
At that point, I object to doing a full search of a DNA database to find the killer. From what I see, that could (and probably would, in time) lead to a frame-up of an innocent person. I say that, only if the police have reason to suspect an individual can they check the crime scene sample against that individuals sample in the database.
There's not much that I enjoy more than watching police mace or Taser some belligerant person, so I'm usually on the side of law enforcement.
This, however, would just make it too easy to plant someone's blood or semen on the scene of a crime and frame them.
I'm a little confused here. Ken Brown seems to be okay with BSD, but he doesn't like Linux. I understand that there are, in fact, licensing differences between the two, but I'm curious about his motivation.
If MS is funding him, as I believe they are (and probably SCO, too), then why don't they also see BSD as a threat? It seems like, if they killed Linux, they'd still have BSD to worry about, because all the Linux folks would hop over there.
As a conservative/libertarian, there's nothing about Linux or Open Source that conflicts with any of my beliefs. I pretty much stand with ESR, I guess, in that respect.
I do have a problem with the idea that Stallman seems to espouse, which is that people shouldn't be allowed to keep their source code to themselves, sell copies of the software, keep people from copying it, etc. People who do open source/free software are good and I am thankful for their efforts, but along with 'free as in beer' and 'free as in speech', I think there should also be 'free to be an asshole and not give my software away for $0.00'.
AdTI seems to be working on the right wing, or at least working with some right wing orgs, but I think that's a sign of how people can be bought, not an indictment of the core beliefs of the right.
What would really help me out would be an option to invert the colors on the screen when some web designer makes one of those black background w/ white or yellow text sites (Yes, I know I can select the text, but that's a pain). What about just making things easy to read, you website designers? The opera site, Arstechnica, and probably three-quarters of gaming sites out there are built in this color scheme, and it sucks.
Now, on my nice home monitor, I can read without too much trouble. But my employer buys monitors from Sams for our CAD work, so the white letters on black just tend to get swallowed up. So think about us people with sucky monitors when you're putting together information on the web. Pretty is great, but not at the expense of being difficult to read.
Actually, we're in a time of extreme class mobility here in the states. For 95% (or more) of history, the course of a persons life would be determined by their parentage. Today, with just a little effort I was able to be one of the first college graduates in my extended family. With a lot more effort, I could be rich.
Sure, there are some people who are rich because of what their grandparents did (Kennedy's, Rockefellers, etc.), but the vast majority of rich people got that way because they took risks and ended up producing something that the public liked. Bill Gates may be a jerk, and Windows may have its problems, but it's difficult to deny that he revolutionized computing by making the operating system central, and decentralizing the hardware. So he's rich, extremely rich. Did he get that way by going into the ghetto and stealing the government cheese from the hands of some poor child? No. Wealth is not zero-sum. Wealth got created. The poor in America have a standard of living that people across the world envy.
Bill Gates might have 100,000 times more money in the bank than I do, and in that respect, the system is not necessarily *fair*. He's not nearly 100,000 times as productive as me. Free market capitalism isn't perfect in this respect, but it's better than any other system I've seen as far as creating widespread prosperity. And the people making the profits when these companies offshore jobs aren't just rich folks with trust funds. It's people with money invested in 401k's, IRA's, 403b's, pension funds, etc. These are average people, like us, and when IBM makes a bigger profit from offshoring, those profits are distributed to *all* the shareholders, not just the trust fund babies.
The problem is that you're assuming a zero-sum game, like once this dollar leaves the US, it's gone forever. But that isn't how it works. just as we invest money in India to pay wages, India and other countries invest money in the U.S. for our goods and services. In fact, I read this morning that when you compare how much we outsource to other countries to how much other countries outsource to our country, we have a net surplus.
Also, the programmer that gets laid off due to outsourcing isn't going to just sit on his butt (at least once his unemployment runs out). He's going to find something else to do. He'll gain some new skills, repackage himself, take some more classes, get some certs, etc., but he'll do something to get back into the workplace. At that point, we'll have his productivity back in our economy, plus the productivity of the Indian worker who replaced him at his old job. And what's the cost to the economy at this point? His salary, and the salary of the Indian worker, which totals to maybe 120% of his original salary, and the productivity input into the economy has doubled or more. It's all about productivity.
The same argument was made against allowing blacks into the unions not too long ago. White factory workers saw blacks as a threat to their livelihoods, since they (blacks) were generally willing to work for less.
In fact, the same general situation happened in South Africa, from what I understand, even under apartheid. Even with that society being generally racist, there was still a big part of the white business community that worked hard to flout laws against hiring blacks. Whether they thought less of the black man or not, it just made good economic sense to hire him if he was cheaper than a white worker. So the government had to actually work to enforce apartheid, even when the business owners they were influencing were racists in their own right.
It's immoral to tell someone that they aren't allowed to compete with me, just because I was lucky enough to be born a white man in America, and they weren't. Another thought that comes to mind is that, as Americans, we have an awesome opportunity. We're given an opportunity for a free decent education (obviously depending upon the location, but still better than most folks in the world), we're given economic freedom, along with all the other freedoms to develop ourselves that come with being Americans. If we, as Americans, can't compete with people from second and third world countries, there is a problem with us, not with them.
I don't know how many other Slashdotters this bothers, but Comcast runs a lot of commercials in our area that focus on how difficult the DirecTV dish is to install. The families that they use for the focus of the commercials leave me dumbfounded as to how people can be so stupid that they can't follow a few directions.
One commercial has this single guy complaining that the dish instructions wanted him to put the dish mounting rod in a bucket of cement. He says, "Where am I going to mix cement? I live in an apartment." So it shows how he rigged the dish onto a small bookcase or shelving unit, and then put the whole deal on his porch. Of course, the wind knocked it over without any trouble whatsoever, and this guy thinks it's DirecTV that's got the problems. Well, the problem is that you are too stupid to figure out how to mix a little bit of cement in a freaking bucket, you idiot. You go to Home Depot, talk to a man in an orange apron, and he'll show you what to do. A bucket, cement mix, water, and a stick to mix it with, maybe, and be sure not to eat any, as it is not the paste that you, no doubt, devoured in elementary school.
Another commercial talks about how the guy had to hook up the satellite dish kind of far away from the TV that he was hooking it to. So in order to find out if he was catching the signal, his wife talks about how he had to set up an elaborate system of mirrors so that he could see the television to tell if the dish was pointed in the right direction. Whatever happened to having your wife yell to you when the signal is right? No, I guess that isn't an option, you probably have her and all of your children busy holding up mirrors.
These are just a couple of examples of the idiots that the marketing people at Comcast think the general public will identify with, and that really causes me to be worried about the intelligence of the general public.
My co-worker worked at Sandia in some classified lab, and he had some stories about that idiot Hazel O'Leary. She wanted access to a certain lab that required a very specific clearance that she didn't have. Evidently the decision on whether to let her in or not was up to the people in that department, so they decided to keep her out. She said she was going to lunch, and expected to have the proper clearance waiting for her when she got back. She returned from lunch and was refused entry once again.
Sometime after this incident was when she changed the security policy to get rid of security badges with specific colors clearly denoting which security clearances you had.
I just don't see how it helps race relations in the U.S. to put an idiot like that into an important office just because they're black and female.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree - it looks to me like it was an internal EPA budgetary decision. OK, so they're going to close some libraries. I can see why people might get upset, but nothing presented in the article actually presents *any* evidence that George W. Bush wants to make sure that this information is hidden away, like the Ark in that warehouse.
Yeah, because news outlets are known for their scientific analyses.
Perhaps you could provide a link to some of this documentation.
The only thing that the authors did to prove their point was to show that drivers in passenger cars were much more likely to be injured/killed if they were struck in the side by an SUV, than if they were hit by a lighter vehicle. They obviously think that this is enough to prove their statement about cars and SUVs not being able to co-exist, but they haven't done that at all.
What they've got to look at is, "How many lives are saved because people are driving SUVs rather than lighter vehicles vs. How many lives are lost because people are struck by an SUVs rather than lighter vehicles". All they've quantified at this point is a small part of that equation, namely that people are, in fact, more likely to die if they're struck by an SUV rather than a lighter vehicle. If even *more* lives are saved on the part of the people in SUV's, then cars and SUVs can safely co-exist - less lives will be lost on balance. It's not necessarily fair, since people in SUVs will be safer, and people in cars will be less safe, but the overall level of safety will be higher. In all the articles that I've seen about this issue that trumpet the fact that car occupants are more likely to die than SUV occupants in crashes, I've never seen one analysis of the statistical likelihood of death, for car and SUV occupants combined, to see if the total # of deaths goes down or up.
But from reading what Stallman says, I get the feeling that he doesn't believe in a person's freedom to produce non-free software. I'm all for free software and the success of the GNU project - the geek in me likes it, and it'd be cool to have the skills to contribute to it. On the other hand, while we're talking about all of these different types of freedom (as in beer, as in freedom, freedom's #0 thru #3, etc.), I want to ensure that people have the freedom to be an asshole and not share their software, if they don't want to share it.
It's pretty funny, in Update #2, this Steve Phillips guy is complaining about the tactics of flooding his stores phone lines. That was before it hit /.'s front page. If he thought it was bad before, he's in for a world of shit now.
If people walked their kids to the bus stop every day, then Darwin wouldn't have a chance to weed out the stupid ones. ;)
I'm all for stopping the people that send spam, and spread spyware, trojans, viruses, etc., through legal means.
Unfortunately, legal means aren't doing much to solve the problem that we're facing (increasing identify theft, credit card fraud, computers that have to be re-imaged to start working again, etc.). In fact, even while more and more people work on security issues from the defense side, the epidemic spread of malicious programs continues. When the people that do this stuff operate in the U.S., they're hard to catch, and hard to prosecute. When they're operating in places like Russia, where the law is not in our favor, they are nearly impossible to prosecute effectively through legal means.
If legal means are completely ineffective at creating a deterrent, as they seem to be, then vigilante action becomes a more viable option, IMHO. Granted, the corpse in this story appears to have been a spammer, not an organized-crime trojan writer. As such, I think murder was not warranted. But for the people who *are* writing and spreading trojans, defrauding people, etc., I think that the only true deterrent would be the murder of a significant number of them (enough to get their attention and make them re-think their career choice).
If you think I'm going far here, just think about this: How many man-hours are spent here in the U.S. each year dealing with security issues caused by scum like this? Millions, I'm sure. Each hour spent dealing with these problems is an hour that is effectively stolen from the person who has to deal with that problem - if the problem didn't exist, then they could be doing something of their own choice. So the people that perpetrate this stuff rob us of millions of hours of our lives, while they enjoy all of the hours of their lives. In the big balance sheet of life, we come out ahead if the perps are deceased.
I agree that the metric system is better, but when you're dealing with HVAC systems in the U.S., trying to do everything in SI and then convert to English at different points would add a great deal of trouble. The programs that calculate cooling loads have English unit outputs, and expect English unit inputs. The catalogs for U.S.-centric equipment are figured in English units (there are SI catalogs out there, but they're hard to get, and the equipment itself is typically designed in multiples of tons or Btu/hr). So I'd support a conversion to metric, but it hasn't happened yet, so I'll stick with English for now.
It's funny, I hadn't noticed that in quite a while until the other day when I went to an architect's office down at the Riverplace tower. I guess they're close enough to the plants that you can smell it if the wind is right.
It was a lot worse back in the 80's, though. I guess the paper mills are getting better technology.
I believe that there is such a restriction, which pretty much sucks, IMHO. But that's exactly why there's a need for services like this. Here in Jacksonville, Florida, the Sheriff's office has an online crime rate thing, but the only problem is that it doesn't show the crime at individual points - it shows a half-mile radius that you can move around, which makes it hard to tell which actual streets are bad, etc.
I'm really curious what the real-estate agent groups out there think of developments like this. It seems to me that it'd make for more fluctuations in prices, as people learn how to use tools like this and educate themselves (since the real estate agents can't or won't).
What you need is a gun and a shovel (or maybe a wood chipper) ;)
I'm not so worried about the police planting blood/semen as someone else planting it. I guess the nightmare scenario I'm thinking of would be a disgruntled lover who could just save a used condom and plant that somewhere incriminating.
As far as fingerprints go, I don't know that they can be planted - maybe they can, but I'm not aware of that possibility.
I trust the technical accuracy of DNA testing - O.J. was guilty, and his DNA fingerprint didn't jus turn up by mistake from the samples at the crime scene.
I'm fine with a database of the DNA of *convicted* felons.
My whole problem is in how it will be used. Say there's an unsolved murder, and a splatter of the unexplained blood is found nearby that lab tests say does not belong to the victim. The logical conclusion is that the perpetrator was wounded in the commission of the crime, and left that blood splatter.
At that point, I object to doing a full search of a DNA database to find the killer. From what I see, that could (and probably would, in time) lead to a frame-up of an innocent person. I say that, only if the police have reason to suspect an individual can they check the crime scene sample against that individuals sample in the database.
There's not much that I enjoy more than watching police mace or Taser some belligerant person, so I'm usually on the side of law enforcement.
This, however, would just make it too easy to plant someone's blood or semen on the scene of a crime and frame them.
I'm a little confused here. Ken Brown seems to be okay with BSD, but he doesn't like Linux. I understand that there are, in fact, licensing differences between the two, but I'm curious about his motivation.
If MS is funding him, as I believe they are (and probably SCO, too), then why don't they also see BSD as a threat? It seems like, if they killed Linux, they'd still have BSD to worry about, because all the Linux folks would hop over there.
As a conservative/libertarian, there's nothing about Linux or Open Source that conflicts with any of my beliefs. I pretty much stand with ESR, I guess, in that respect.
I do have a problem with the idea that Stallman seems to espouse, which is that people shouldn't be allowed to keep their source code to themselves, sell copies of the software, keep people from copying it, etc. People who do open source/free software are good and I am thankful for their efforts, but along with 'free as in beer' and 'free as in speech', I think there should also be 'free to be an asshole and not give my software away for $0.00'.
AdTI seems to be working on the right wing, or at least working with some right wing orgs, but I think that's a sign of how people can be bought, not an indictment of the core beliefs of the right.
I currently use Mozilla at home & IE at work.
What would really help me out would be an option to invert the colors on the screen when some web designer makes one of those black background w/ white or yellow text sites (Yes, I know I can select the text, but that's a pain). What about just making things easy to read, you website designers? The opera site, Arstechnica, and probably three-quarters of gaming sites out there are built in this color scheme, and it sucks.
Now, on my nice home monitor, I can read without too much trouble. But my employer buys monitors from Sams for our CAD work, so the white letters on black just tend to get swallowed up. So think about us people with sucky monitors when you're putting together information on the web. Pretty is great, but not at the expense of being difficult to read.
Actually, we're in a time of extreme class mobility here in the states. For 95% (or more) of history, the course of a persons life would be determined by their parentage. Today, with just a little effort I was able to be one of the first college graduates in my extended family. With a lot more effort, I could be rich.
Sure, there are some people who are rich because of what their grandparents did (Kennedy's, Rockefellers, etc.), but the vast majority of rich people got that way because they took risks and ended up producing something that the public liked. Bill Gates may be a jerk, and Windows may have its problems, but it's difficult to deny that he revolutionized computing by making the operating system central, and decentralizing the hardware. So he's rich, extremely rich. Did he get that way by going into the ghetto and stealing the government cheese from the hands of some poor child? No. Wealth is not zero-sum. Wealth got created. The poor in America have a standard of living that people across the world envy.
Bill Gates might have 100,000 times more money in the bank than I do, and in that respect, the system is not necessarily *fair*. He's not nearly 100,000 times as productive as me. Free market capitalism isn't perfect in this respect, but it's better than any other system I've seen as far as creating widespread prosperity. And the people making the profits when these companies offshore jobs aren't just rich folks with trust funds. It's people with money invested in 401k's, IRA's, 403b's, pension funds, etc. These are average people, like us, and when IBM makes a bigger profit from offshoring, those profits are distributed to *all* the shareholders, not just the trust fund babies.
The problem is that you're assuming a zero-sum game, like once this dollar leaves the US, it's gone forever. But that isn't how it works. just as we invest money in India to pay wages, India and other countries invest money in the U.S. for our goods and services. In fact, I read this morning that when you compare how much we outsource to other countries to how much other countries outsource to our country, we have a net surplus.
Also, the programmer that gets laid off due to outsourcing isn't going to just sit on his butt (at least once his unemployment runs out). He's going to find something else to do. He'll gain some new skills, repackage himself, take some more classes, get some certs, etc., but he'll do something to get back into the workplace. At that point, we'll have his productivity back in our economy, plus the productivity of the Indian worker who replaced him at his old job. And what's the cost to the economy at this point? His salary, and the salary of the Indian worker, which totals to maybe 120% of his original salary, and the productivity input into the economy has doubled or more. It's all about productivity.
So by buying Nikes, it sounds like I'm contributing to the feeding of a child who wouldn't otherwise have food. That's pretty cool.
The same argument was made against allowing blacks into the unions not too long ago. White factory workers saw blacks as a threat to their livelihoods, since they (blacks) were generally willing to work for less.
In fact, the same general situation happened in South Africa, from what I understand, even under apartheid. Even with that society being generally racist, there was still a big part of the white business community that worked hard to flout laws against hiring blacks. Whether they thought less of the black man or not, it just made good economic sense to hire him if he was cheaper than a white worker. So the government had to actually work to enforce apartheid, even when the business owners they were influencing were racists in their own right.
It's immoral to tell someone that they aren't allowed to compete with me, just because I was lucky enough to be born a white man in America, and they weren't. Another thought that comes to mind is that, as Americans, we have an awesome opportunity. We're given an opportunity for a free decent education (obviously depending upon the location, but still better than most folks in the world), we're given economic freedom, along with all the other freedoms to develop ourselves that come with being Americans. If we, as Americans, can't compete with people from second and third world countries, there is a problem with us, not with them.
I don't know how many other Slashdotters this bothers, but Comcast runs a lot of commercials in our area that focus on how difficult the DirecTV dish is to install. The families that they use for the focus of the commercials leave me dumbfounded as to how people can be so stupid that they can't follow a few directions.
One commercial has this single guy complaining that the dish instructions wanted him to put the dish mounting rod in a bucket of cement. He says, "Where am I going to mix cement? I live in an apartment." So it shows how he rigged the dish onto a small bookcase or shelving unit, and then put the whole deal on his porch. Of course, the wind knocked it over without any trouble whatsoever, and this guy thinks it's DirecTV that's got the problems. Well, the problem is that you are too stupid to figure out how to mix a little bit of cement in a freaking bucket, you idiot. You go to Home Depot, talk to a man in an orange apron, and he'll show you what to do. A bucket, cement mix, water, and a stick to mix it with, maybe, and be sure not to eat any, as it is not the paste that you, no doubt, devoured in elementary school.
Another commercial talks about how the guy had to hook up the satellite dish kind of far away from the TV that he was hooking it to. So in order to find out if he was catching the signal, his wife talks about how he had to set up an elaborate system of mirrors so that he could see the television to tell if the dish was pointed in the right direction. Whatever happened to having your wife yell to you when the signal is right? No, I guess that isn't an option, you probably have her and all of your children busy holding up mirrors.
These are just a couple of examples of the idiots that the marketing people at Comcast think the general public will identify with, and that really causes me to be worried about the intelligence of the general public.
What about the box art for Planescape: Torment? Now that was ugly, and I'm sure it hurt their sales.
Unfortunately, you can't find Planescape: Torment at any stores that I've been able to find. The only places I've been able to find is Ebay.
My co-worker worked at Sandia in some classified lab, and he had some stories about that idiot Hazel O'Leary. She wanted access to a certain lab that required a very specific clearance that she didn't have. Evidently the decision on whether to let her in or not was up to the people in that department, so they decided to keep her out. She said she was going to lunch, and expected to have the proper clearance waiting for her when she got back. She returned from lunch and was refused entry once again.
Sometime after this incident was when she changed the security policy to get rid of security badges with specific colors clearly denoting which security clearances you had.
I just don't see how it helps race relations in the U.S. to put an idiot like that into an important office just because they're black and female.