I would say it is both Pentagon inefficiency and corporate ripoffs.
I remember reading an article by an electronics engineer who visited an electronics plant which was making a specific item for the government. When he arrived at the plant, it had a hundred cars for employees in the parking lot and sales of something like $100 million - mostly from the government. He examined the design and production plans and concluded that he could produce the device with X (small) number of employees and the total cost would be no more than $1 million. The owner of the plant said, "Yeah, but I have a hundred employees and $100 million - so who's smarter?"
This is how government business is done - which is the responsibility of the government procurement policies to prevent - which they don't...because money changes hands to politicians and others...
No amount of excuses about paperwork and whatnot explains or justifies that...
The government and business are both corrupt - that simple...
- The United States does not have the ability to - kill everyone 50 times over
Not to mention the fact that they aren't targets that way anyhow, as you say. I'm always amused by the peace people who say we have enough nukes to kill the whole world. Since they aren't targeted that way, the concept is irrelevant.
What IS true is that we don't build extra nukes because of attrition or whatever (most likely all the nuke storage sites would be blown sky high in the first hour of a general war) - we build them because they cost (taxpayer) money which goes to contractors who spend money on campaign contributions to get those contracts - or hasn't anybody heard of the upcoming story on Rumsfeld's being involved in selling the North Koreans the two reactors...(denials and stonewalling all around, of course - like the video of him shaking hands with Saddam in 1983)...
It's the small print. That WAS Johnny Weismuller you saw at the site. Somebody obviously had the same idea you did re the scientist's name and the connection with muscles...
Add this - Israeli influence. Just read an article that says the first big project in the works is a pipeline from Mosul to Haifa - something the Israelis have wanted for years, but with Saddam in power, there was no way to get it.
Now all that's holding it up is the fact that it had to cross Jordan (guess who's on the PNAC hit list along with Syria?) and the ruler there is obviously hesitant about saying yes just now since he'll look bad among the Arabs.
And Paul Wolfowitz's(sp?) sister lives in Israel... Surprise!
You're assuming the nation is NOT currently run by Saddam.
Given that all of his supporters (except for a few in a card deck) are still around, and HE is still around (under Russian control, apparently), I'd say it is premature to suggest that he isn't able to screw the US out of it's fancy about democracy and free oil...
The US just killed 13 more civilians and wounded fifty more when the idiots opened fire on a crowd when some Iraqi idiots in the crowd fired Ak's in the air (as Iraqis are wont to do during public demonstations - not a smart move when there are US troops facing you because they don't understand your customs). Whether this was orchestrated by Saddam's agents or was a spontaneous event, it works to Saddam's plans to regain power.
Where every four years, 51% (or higher - or about even or less in the last election) vote to enslave the rest of the population...
I don't see the difference...
I do see a difference in Switzerland where major laws such as changing bank secrecy or raising the tax rate have to go to a referendum where they are routinely voted down by the population...
Did you see the article about how there is a work walkout in Basra because the occupation forces CUT THE PAY of the workers?
One of the workers said, "Even during Saddam the pay was better than this!"
I kid you not... One occupation authority said, "Now we have to bring them the benefits of freedom". I said in a post, "Yeah, right, like the benefit of being exploited by a corporate state instead of being exploited by a dictator..."
Excellent point. Has ANYONE heard ANYTHING about the US writing an Iraqi Constitution that directly apes the US one?
Thought not...
Not that it matters. When all is said and done, there will either be an Islamic state (fundamentalist or not, depending on whether the Shia get control or not) or there will be a weak puppet government under continual guerrilla war like Afghanistan...
The US won't be able to stop it for two reasons: 1) you can't stop shit like that, and 2) the US will be too busy taking 50,000 casualties in North Korea after Bush gets the war going there...(that figure is from a CNN report about a DOD study of the cost of a new war in North Korea - BTW, that's 50,000 in the first ninety days...)
You're missing the point of government intelligence. As someone (I believe a government official in some totalitarian country - might have been the US...) said, "The important thing is to know something someone else doesn't."
If you collect tons of useless intelligence, you can then use it to manufacture your OWN intelligence - as the Iraq WMD situation demonstrated very graphically. Anthony Cordesman points out in a recent news piece that the problem was that Bush and Powell couldn't check everything themselves, they had to rely on their intelligence agencies - who were busy manufacturing "evidence" in the usual way - connecting the dots - dots that were really on a Roschach blotter, not an actually existing graph...if you get my meaning...
The problem is - if you have people connecting the dots for you, you have to be sure they are connecting REAL dots, not random dots. But the intelligence and law enforcement agencies make their living by coming up with dots to be connected - whether they are real or not.
As Robert Anton Wilson has pointed out numerous times, you can connect anything to anything if you look hard enough. That's what human brains do - interpret patterns - the key word being "interpret". There's plenty of connections between George Bush and the bin Laden family - the same family that many people find are still "linked" to Osama. Does this prove George Bush funds Osama? Well, no, but if someone WANTS it to, it WILL.
So the more information you have, the better the people whose job it is to "interpret" that information like it.
Which is why the rule is: when the FBI comes to your door, you say this and ONLY this: "On advice of attorney, I have nothing to say to the FBI." Period. Full stop. If you say ANYTHING else, they WILL use it against you or against anyone else they can...even if you just say, "Well, my brother-in-law said it rained yesterday"...somehow they will find a way to use that to prove that you contacted your brother-in-law and it was raining in Afghanistan yesterday so he must be an Al-Qaeda operative...
If you think this is paranois, you have never read anything about the FBI or the CIA - or talked to anyone who has been or is in prison in this country.
From the article: Cozzens said the said NSF is well aware of the privacy issues such networks pose. "Look, look, it's a trade-off - do you want to be secure or not?" he said. "This technology will make us more secure, but there is a price for all this."
What part of "price" didn't you understand?
I don't condemn the concept of the research, BTW, I merely condemn the automatic intention by the people funding it that it will be used for pervasive surveillance by the public entities on the private ones rather than vice versa - where it is really needed.
As far as I'm concerned, if the kid stole secrets, that's tough noogies for the people he stole it from. It still should not be a crime to steal a "trade secret".
The kid should get fired, maybe even sued in civil court (although I'm probably opposed to even that) but in no way should this be a criminal offense.
Unless of course the kid actually physically removed physical documents from the office - that would be physical theft and thus criminal. If, however, he just copied them and/or scanned them and/or burned them to CD from digital copies on some computer somewhere, that is not theft. You can call it a variety of things, but it ain't property theft.
If you don't want your secrets stolen, keep them encrypted and exercise control over who can decrypt them. Using the state to do your dirty work for you because you failed to exercise due diligence in the conduct of your business is fascism...
Remember, morons, this sort of thing sets legal precedents which will then be used against YOU in a case where those precedents should not apply. That is one of the ways the state expands its power and reduces freedom. Look under the RICO statutes for examples...
We could also "alias" the names to anything the user wants - that could be an installation option - pick the name you want to call the browser and email client.
Stand up for freedom! Why let some company or collection of geeks choose the name of your tools?
Down with marketing! Name everything "anonymous"! If it works for poetry and prose, it can work for software...
That's Ann Winblad (former date and potential wife to Bill Gates) and so-and-so Hummer (I forget his first name) - some football guy, I think he used to be, correct me if I'm wrong...
They got a couple hundred million, IIRC, which makes Ann better-looking in my eyes than she actually is...
Slashdot Mirror
I would say it is both Pentagon inefficiency and corporate ripoffs.
I remember reading an article by an electronics engineer who visited an electronics plant which was making a specific item for the government. When he arrived at the plant, it had a hundred cars for employees in the parking lot and sales of something like $100 million - mostly from the government. He examined the design and production plans and concluded that he could produce the device with X (small) number of employees and the total cost would be no more than $1 million. The owner of the plant said, "Yeah, but I have a hundred employees and $100 million - so who's smarter?"
This is how government business is done - which is the responsibility of the government procurement policies to prevent - which they don't...because money changes hands to politicians and others...
No amount of excuses about paperwork and whatnot explains or justifies that...
The government and business are both corrupt - that simple...
- The United States does not have the ability to
- kill everyone 50 times over
Not to mention the fact that they aren't targets that way anyhow, as you say. I'm always amused by the peace people who say we have enough nukes to kill the whole world. Since they aren't targeted that way, the concept is irrelevant.
What IS true is that we don't build extra nukes because of attrition or whatever (most likely all the nuke storage sites would be blown sky high in the first hour of a general war) - we build them because they cost (taxpayer) money which goes to contractors who spend money on campaign contributions to get those contracts - or hasn't anybody heard of the upcoming story on Rumsfeld's being involved in selling the North Koreans the two reactors...(denials and stonewalling all around, of course - like the video of him shaking hands with Saddam in 1983)...
I did? And I don't even know how!
You mean Sydney Biddle-Barrows was...oh, never mind...
Probably will go to the lawyers...
It's the small print. That WAS Johnny Weismuller you saw at the site. Somebody obviously had the same idea you did re the scientist's name and the connection with muscles...
Hah!LOL!
I believe Bush thinks of it in terms of "colonic irrigation"...
as in BOHICA...
Add this - Israeli influence. Just read an article that says the first big project in the works is a pipeline from Mosul to Haifa - something the Israelis have wanted for years, but with Saddam in power, there was no way to get it.
Now all that's holding it up is the fact that it had to cross Jordan (guess who's on the PNAC hit list along with Syria?) and the ruler there is obviously hesitant about saying yes just now since he'll look bad among the Arabs.
And Paul Wolfowitz's(sp?) sister lives in Israel... Surprise!
You're assuming the nation is NOT currently run by Saddam.
Given that all of his supporters (except for a few in a card deck) are still around, and HE is still around (under Russian control, apparently), I'd say it is premature to suggest that he isn't able to screw the US out of it's fancy about democracy and free oil...
The US just killed 13 more civilians and wounded fifty more when the idiots opened fire on a crowd when some Iraqi idiots in the crowd fired Ak's in the air (as Iraqis are wont to do during public demonstations - not a smart move when there are US troops facing you because they don't understand your customs). Whether this was orchestrated by Saddam's agents or was a spontaneous event, it works to Saddam's plans to regain power.
Where every four years, 51% (or higher - or about even or less in the last election) vote to enslave the rest of the population...
I don't see the difference...
I do see a difference in Switzerland where major laws such as changing bank secrecy or raising the tax rate have to go to a referendum where they are routinely voted down by the population...
Did you see the article about how there is a work walkout in Basra because the occupation forces CUT THE PAY of the workers?
One of the workers said, "Even during Saddam the pay was better than this!"
I kid you not... One occupation authority said, "Now we have to bring them the benefits of freedom". I said in a post, "Yeah, right, like the benefit of being exploited by a corporate state instead of being exploited by a dictator..."
Ah, in case you're not aware, she is an out lesbian...
OTOH - you could be right...
Excellent point. Has ANYONE heard ANYTHING about the US writing an Iraqi Constitution that directly apes the US one?
Thought not...
Not that it matters. When all is said and done, there will either be an Islamic state (fundamentalist or not, depending on whether the Shia get control or not) or there will be a weak puppet government under continual guerrilla war like Afghanistan...
The US won't be able to stop it for two reasons: 1) you can't stop shit like that, and 2) the US will be too busy taking 50,000 casualties in North Korea after Bush gets the war going there...(that figure is from a CNN report about a DOD study of the cost of a new war in North Korea - BTW, that's 50,000 in the first ninety days...)
...put his head on Mount Rushmore!
/. symbol? (All the /.'ers rush to the Cathedral to view and "slashdot" the tourist lines...)
While we're at it, let's put George Bush's head on the Cathedral next to Hitler's...
As for cultural icons, how about Jodie Foster and John Hinckley?
Pamela Anderson's tits? (Could disquise them as simple pyramid projections...)
Britney Spears?
A
You're missing the point of government intelligence. As someone (I believe a government official in some totalitarian country - might have been the US...) said, "The important thing is to know something someone else doesn't."
If you collect tons of useless intelligence, you can then use it to manufacture your OWN intelligence - as the Iraq WMD situation demonstrated very graphically. Anthony Cordesman points out in a recent news piece that the problem was that Bush and Powell couldn't check everything themselves, they had to rely on their intelligence agencies - who were busy manufacturing "evidence" in the usual way - connecting the dots - dots that were really on a Roschach blotter, not an actually existing graph...if you get my meaning...
The problem is - if you have people connecting the dots for you, you have to be sure they are connecting REAL dots, not random dots. But the intelligence and law enforcement agencies make their living by coming up with dots to be connected - whether they are real or not.
As Robert Anton Wilson has pointed out numerous times, you can connect anything to anything if you look hard enough. That's what human brains do - interpret patterns - the key word being "interpret". There's plenty of connections between George Bush and the bin Laden family - the same family that many people find are still "linked" to Osama. Does this prove George Bush funds Osama? Well, no, but if someone WANTS it to, it WILL.
So the more information you have, the better the people whose job it is to "interpret" that information like it.
Which is why the rule is: when the FBI comes to your door, you say this and ONLY this: "On advice of attorney, I have nothing to say to the FBI." Period. Full stop. If you say ANYTHING else, they WILL use it against you or against anyone else they can...even if you just say, "Well, my brother-in-law said it rained yesterday"...somehow they will find a way to use that to prove that you contacted your brother-in-law and it was raining in Afghanistan yesterday so he must be an Al-Qaeda operative...
If you think this is paranois, you have never read anything about the FBI or the CIA - or talked to anyone who has been or is in prison in this country.
From the article:
Cozzens said the said NSF is well aware of the privacy issues such networks pose. "Look, look, it's a trade-off - do you want to be secure or not?" he said. "This technology will make us more secure, but there is a price for all this."
What part of "price" didn't you understand?
I don't condemn the concept of the research, BTW, I merely condemn the automatic intention by the people funding it that it will be used for pervasive surveillance by the public entities on the private ones rather than vice versa - where it is really needed.
what, you thought it was over?
The RIAA and MPAA will continue to appeal and file suits until they get a judge they can work with...
C'mon, don't your know how the American "justice" system works by now?
Morons...
Now I have it on my hard drive along with my other 62,000 pictures of babes...
As far as I'm concerned, if the kid stole secrets, that's tough noogies for the people he stole it from. It still should not be a crime to steal a "trade secret".
The kid should get fired, maybe even sued in civil court (although I'm probably opposed to even that) but in no way should this be a criminal offense.
Unless of course the kid actually physically removed physical documents from the office - that would be physical theft and thus criminal. If, however, he just copied them and/or scanned them and/or burned them to CD from digital copies on some computer somewhere, that is not theft. You can call it a variety of things, but it ain't property theft.
If you don't want your secrets stolen, keep them encrypted and exercise control over who can decrypt them. Using the state to do your dirty work for you because you failed to exercise due diligence in the conduct of your business is fascism...
Remember, morons, this sort of thing sets legal precedents which will then be used against YOU in a case where those precedents should not apply. That is one of the ways the state expands its power and reduces freedom. Look under the RICO statutes for examples...
Jodie Foster and the email client Winona Ryder...
How's that?
We could also "alias" the names to anything the user wants - that could be an installation option - pick the name you want to call the browser and email client.
Stand up for freedom! Why let some company or collection of geeks choose the name of your tools?
Down with marketing! Name everything "anonymous"!
If it works for poetry and prose, it can work for software...
...a few more rate increases and we'll be paying $20K a letter...
Your government monopoly at work...
Where is Lysander Spooner when we need him?
Said it before, I'll say it again.
You monkeys are gonna die. We Transhumans aren't.
Have a nice day.
- Hummer Winblad (what a silly, cool name)
That's Ann Winblad (former date and potential wife to Bill Gates) and so-and-so Hummer (I forget his first name) - some football guy, I think he used to be, correct me if I'm wrong...
They got a couple hundred million, IIRC, which makes Ann better-looking in my eyes than she actually is...
No - we should kill them - Shakespeare was right...
During some riots in London a couple centuries ago, the mobs burned down every lawyer's house they came upon.
We need to re-create those wonderful days of yore...