This probably shows how long it takes the White House to announce something new after some activists give them the idea -- see when they were given the idea here:
So you can see that it takes approximately 24 days from when the activists make a statement of their intentions for the press (non-mainstream press unless they do something wacky or are connected with ad dollars.)
Uh, I don't mean to insult the students by calling them activists, that word has negative connotations here in the USA.
Just an easy excuse to avoid it becoming an issue while keeping their corporate masters happy.
If you think statements from the Reagan admin were honest you've a lot to learn.
Hell, just having the 1st lady grow an organic garden caused some industry pressure. They'll be in there pushing again with the next 1st lady - they don't hire scum to do that stuff for nothing.
The idiots in that area of the country don't like taxes and don't think government does them any good. So they end up with arrangements as stupid as this one. It is NOT the fault of the firemen it is the fault of the idiot citizens to not include fire in their property taxes!
People get the government they deserve. Unfortunately, it is unlikely this lesson will teach his community anything.
It costs MORE to pay out like this - its cheaper to just include it into the local taxes than to make somebody mail bills and do follow up calls AND KEEP RECORDS of people who payed up -- the fire dept then has to look you up to see if they can help you. Wouldn't it suck if they made a mistake and thought you didn't pay?
It does not surprise me one bit. Our Governor is a slime who only about 1/3 support and many of those only because of his party affiliation. (3rd parties upset results often here.) He's been doing the whole "no new taxes" thing for his whole term and its only ended up hurting us as well as word games where they actually raised taxes in other ways. Then we have our ROADS -- that bridge that fell down was ours -- which took a voter initiative to get the road funds used ON ROADS! (before the bridge fell, but not fast enough... the bridge fell while they were fixing it.) I wouldn't be surprised if MS bought his support since he wants to run for President or VP.
I used to know a state IT guy - a unix guru. You can be assured that they have some great experts for intelligent planning who were not the deciding factor. I will have to reach him and see if they cut his job since he did do some email servers among the 100s he managed.
While the democrats are clearly better on a range of issues at certain times in the nations history and are quite easily the better of the two parties overall (they are the oldest for a reason) it becomes difficult to make generalized statements about them over time. Even my statement, the parties changed so much long ago that its almost like they swapped names.
Right now, on most any issue of importance which conflicts with the corporate powers, the democrats are just putting up an act. -both working for the same master but with a different act. Because the democrats have to sell themselves as opposing some of these forces, they will throw out a bone or two while still licking the boots of their corporate masters. Slight difference, I often think its worse to appease each side with weak measures and flip who is "in power" every few years to keep the public distracted and just placated enough to be inactive.
There are a few good ones in each, but more on the democrat side-- not that it matters who has more decent reps because its STILL a minority. BTW, the GOP is not tolerant of decent and hasn't been for some time, they have just gone off the deep end as far as their purging in the last 15 years. So a decent one has less chance in the GOP these days.
Then you have the moves made by corrupt democrats and nearly all republicans to increase corp/bank influences over them. From the Nixon years to the K street 90s to compromises in McCain/Feingold campaign reform - all increased corp power over them; mostly dems. The latter one undermined union influence over the dems and that vacuum was filled by corps (who's job is not to represent voters, unlike the unions; regardless of "your" beliefs of that concept.)
Net neutrality SHOULD have had an easy time in the HOUSE; clearly the majority fears the loss of MONEY at this time-- the only shot it had was in 2009 and now thanks to the crooks in the S. Court it won't have that chance again.
Then we have the pragmatists... Those who give in to corruption so they do not get crushed with the excuse that they can only pick so many fights and must give in on all the others. Many "honest" people faced with the reality of the situation would cave in and I suspect that over time would slowly become corrupted as well as shorten their list of principles they won't compromise. (Unless, they never make such compromises, like Ron Paul.) You should understand this unless people refer to you as unreasonable. I also find the older people are the more ways they have to rationalize their actions, including convincing themselves (aka lying to themselves.)
FEW nations fall quickly; especially democracies and large empires don't fall that quickly either.
It'll be gradual and involve most the population being at fault beforehand.
Obama could be the straw that breaks the camel's back; however, that back was arguably broken already and we are have been seeing a mirage. Obama could be the messenger of doom who is falsely blamed as well. Repair takes a lot of strain, we also may not be up to the task of going the right direction... Lots is possible but what is not possible is for us to return to the previous decade in just 4 years.... if EVER (1 in a million shot at best. you have to be clueless to think it can return to those days.)
Ranting is only going to let the ignorant and corrupt define the modern way wiretaps are implemented.
Wiretaps and spying LEGALLY are part of the law enforcement process for centuries. Its considered fair game and has been. Going against this is another issue and only makes you look like a nutcase.
Instead, geeks should be CONSTRUCTIVE on how to implement the needs of law enforcement so we increase accountability and minimize abuse. You know darn well there ARE totalitarian control freaks in government but just painting every issue as theirs removes you from the legitimate debates.
The law NEEDS wiretaps. I saw this coming decades ago. They need a means to backdoor into stuff like they've always been able to do before. Its so bad now that even legal wiretaps on phones are ineffective when the process is slower than the criminals ability to buy another disposable phone. (one solution would be to make wiretaps PERSON based instead of phone number based; which means they still have to work to find what your new number is but this seems like a fair compromise to having a national registry... although in the past your identity was registered to a phone number.)
They couldn't usually get into your Diary under the 5th etc. Your computer and files should be thought of like that - its just electronic forms of existing concepts. HOWEVER, because its new and technical issues always come up when you actually have to do something in the real world-- policies need adjusting and so do laws.
We geeks should be there making sure the ignorant are informed and the corrupt are not the only ones with a voice on how to implement OLD methods on new technology. We should not be ranting against the whole methodology itself and removing our constructive influence. We get enough stupid technology laws as it is and its up to us to prevent that-- these arrogant lawyers can't be left alone thinking they understand everything they need to know about computers technology or internet "tubes".
When you rant against the corrupt only you marginalize yourself from the middle even though you may be bringing them out into view. (so somebody has to do it-- but not enough are ignoring them and doing actual battle against them.)
---
The two parties are organized differently so they function differently. The control freaks are not out in the open (except a few like Cheney) nor are they a few old men in a room somewhere.
Both are like good cop / bad cop and are working for a powerful minority which is not centralized and is so well entrenched in our system that we won't be willing to change enough of the system in order to eliminate them. (in which case, they are still powerful but no longer everlasting... however, they won't be idle while they are undermined.) You could kill the top of a crime syndicate and a new members would fill the gap. You have to break the organization and then a new organization fills the void-- you only can stop the cycle by fixing the environment in which they thrive. This is extremely difficult to do; often it involves the public having to change themselves. Ultimately, it comes down to YOU contributing a little to the problem and not being willing to take enough responsibility.
So when did the usa get closer to market anarchy (nationwide?) I was referring to the market; that was the context - not general anarchy. You are looking too hard for something to jump upon...
FYI: the FED is NOT part of the US government! They handed over their constitutional power to the private sector century ago (which helped cause the 1st great depression, BTW.)
Corporatism; it may not be the same as fascism, depends on the definition you choose.
You are stuck on your solution which is not the solution. You think you are solving the disease but its just a symptom of something else. It is all about POWER not markets; those are just 1 means to the same end. POWER must be diffused and not allowed to concentrate too highly not just in government organization but outside government as well. The USA is being brought down from outside government forces infecting the system like a virus.
Its not the person who is the disease its the virus inside the person.
Some things are quick fixes and other things are not.
The all mighty economy is in many aspects like Skinner's Pigeons with the economists each acting like they've found the pattern. Even if the DFL was 100% honestly working for us, it could not reliably stop the momentum of the present situation because of the nature of the problem. Perhaps it could be done better; that is always speculative, and always a sore point open to criticism. Of course they are not 100% honest either...
In addition, about 30% of the population will never accept the truth when it counters their beliefs no matter how obvious and factual; it may actually make them more entrenched: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128490874 (Note: I'm not saying just that 1/3 but I'm referring to the 1/3 who blindly follow anything the neoliberals want, which to some degree still loves Bush.)
While Democrats and Republicans look dangerously similar to the informed observer, they still function differently and arguably their differences are necessary to keep the whole democracy farce alive. Democrats are disorganized and not unified, it is like herding cats - in fact, they pride themselves on their diversity of opinion over being effective. The Republicans are run like much more like a modern business and it comes as no surprise they embrace selling out to business openly and fire insubordinates. There are a few good ones on both sides; more on the Democrat side because they are more tolerant which also means they tolerate moderate Republicans becoming Democrats. The label "Democrat" does not mean a whole lot. A 1 party rule by Democrats does not look like the other side. Yes, in the larger picture of critical issues both produce similar results.
Corruption maintains a working control over the game making the two parties more like a Good Cop, Bad Cop routine and the public wastes time fighting about which one is the Bad Cop. As I am again doing with this post.
You are incorrect if you think the Exec Branch has so much power. It has gained too much power, that is true - but actually, it is not powerful.... Its a matter of going with the flow or against it. Going with the flow, it appears almost dictatorial but going against it - it appears weak -- it does not have as much to do with the individual in the job as people think it does.... or the law... Corruption is too powerful today and the power brokers determine which way the "flow" is going and how strong.
Healthcare should have pointed this out if you really payed attention to it (not on tv news.) The public wanted more by huge numbers. That didn't matter, Obama stubbornly pushed his party to suicide forcing them to not give up which is what most wanted and some planned for. Remember, its better to try and fail (for millions of excuses) than to oppose something popular - that's politics 101. Even most the opposition couldn't reveal their true position, it always had to be framed in failure -- its not good enough, its in the wrong direction, etc. Few dared to say they loved the current situation -- lying is part of the job you know.
Some think the 70s was the turning point. I think Nixon was a turning point. It wasn't Carter being weak or poor at his job - the system was hijacked so it didn't matter. Either "side" honestly pursuing their goals will not be effective going against the flow of corruption. I must admit however, I was shocked healthcare passed with any significant concessions (still pathetic, but better than I expected.)
You are another misguided well intentioned person on the wrong track. Another victim of these think tanks from the 70s to sell any ideas that fuel corporate power which ultimately ends up undermining yours.
We have government involvement now but its as close to anarchy as we've had - yet you people think the cure is more anarchy because all the problems are a result of there being still too much intervention. Even minimal rules creates a point of interest to attack for huge gains - because people don't play by the rules - routinely-- if they were honest, we'd not need refereeing in sports... but even in a GAME we can't expect fair play. You can't have anarchy as the corporations preach and have some great Utopian order result as their think tanks have been selling you. Government has to split monopolies to keep a marketplace at minimum but then the monopolies must prevent that... the incentives will always exist.
Your solution is too specific to address the real problems. Its all about POWER, not markets. Money is a part of it but it does not need to be the main tool. Violence also works, but here money is god so violence is an unnecessary (except for bit players) means to gain power.
The amassing of unsafe levels of power is the problem. The powerful get addicted and never have enough. Its a fundamental concept of the constitution. Problem is we only SEPARATE POWERS in government to minimize threats and do nothing outside of it (we once did some stuff but it has been undermined since the civil war.) There are many who game the system but its the ones trying to control the system and have power enough to do it that are a problem. The mega corporations and super wealthy can not be allowed to amass more power than government - not literally more powerful but more powerful than the process which makes up the government; functionally making them dangerously powerful and much more a threat to democracy than anything else. Most governments have fallen to despotism due to the masses not keeping the powerful out.
There will always be a power great enough to surpass all protections of government; all that can be done is to prevent such power from growing and festering because once it exists it'll likely have been screwing things up in order to get that powerful. Yes, this means a cap on personal wealth (it still can still be high) but more importantly it means "severe" limitations on corporations which would have seemed totally reasonable for most the nations history; just not since the propaganda got so good and so financially supported back in the 70s (possibly before that but the 70s are a notable turning point in the fall of this democracy.)
Its a system design flaw that can't be fixed by dealing with many resulting symptoms.
I'm probably wasting my time if you've bought into the anarchy advocated by the power elites to sucker you. Sure, you get rid of the rules, then you get rid of enforcers; therefore, there will be no corruption of the "system" because there will be no system to corrupt. Yeah, how about you try that in a sport and see how well it works out 1st.
I don't see why there is so much stress on firewalls. Nobody should have insecure ports open they are not using. Fix the systems don't obscure their security holes.
Yes, software is flawed etc but if you need that port open the firewall isn't going to do much. Too much is put onto firewalls as the solution to all our problems.
You shouldn't need a desktop firewall unless your system is BROKEN by design.
Outgoing connections are another issue: Actually, all OS should include an update API! The API can protect against information loss under the guise of software updates. Security / Privacy are still way behind.
Government of any kind rises and falls on the backs of its citizens. They ultimately are responsible for it; that responsibility may be too small and abstract for most people but during bad enough times a large enough group wakes up to their true power and revolution happens.
The constitution exists because of the peoples' support of it and it's irrelevance and lack of power is ALSO a result of the citizen. As Franklin predicted, all gov fall into despotism and a democratic one does when the people allow it to do so; which eventually error by error the group collectively fucks up - which manifests in their government.
This kind of government is MORE representative of the public than the others which lack their involvement - making their portion of the blame LARGER. We didn't wimp out over a dictator take over, we just didn't pay attention and learn think past the propaganda (marketing.)
If one was to civilize the process of governments, they would make a system where peaceful revolutions against the establishment are possible and this leads to democracies which is 1 way to implement the natural social process that is government. If the rules are not enforced then the game becomes irrelevant; problem is that people don't see it like a virtual machine - its just 1 big OS to them. You can't get back the VM once it is compromised even if an honest client OS is installed.
--
Clinton didn't cause the crash. The high priests we allowed to be unchained turned around 1st chance they had and screwed us all. We didn't care when their regulator (Clinton/congress) didn't put up a fight when McCain's economic adviser successfully attached the holy deregulation to a larger bill. The FDR "socialist" regulations remaining are the only thing that gave us time to respond to the crisis we created.
How about some radio waves given off in the area that increase static charge in metal objects? if you are good with the FCC... would it be your fault if their powder tended to ignite? I admit I don't know if static charge triggers bullets.
License! Arms is a right in the USA and for good reasons should be everywhere; however, it is merely a right to a means of insurgency, popular revolt, and more selfless leadership... It is NOT for recreation or even many forms of "self defense" (not to say there are not a few situations where it is justified.) It is not for subsistence anymore either.
You could arm up but be severely punished for ANY AND ALL USES. This would still allow them to serve their real purpose. If you had to spend a year in JAIL because you shot somebody or some animal to save your life that is a price worth paying. (Who's saying you'd be caught shooting a bobcat, lots of criminals get away. duh.) Just because there is a cost for a legitimate use does not make it illegitimate; if you've been in a leadership position you probably had to deal with minimizing lose-lose situations - its reality; life is hard. My life is worth a year in jail. Is it worth doing time for shooting an ex? It may cut down on domestic stuff... It surely would make "fucktards" a bit more careful - if they even could get a license in the 1st place for limited legal use of a firearm.
My dad tried hunting. it was too expensive a hobby. Doing species counts for the DNR was much cheaper and still involved hunting for stuff. Sure, we need some "volunteers" to manage populations but it can be properly licensed (and enforced.) FYI: farming animals is productive.
why not- SMG 2 was even greater! wonderful and clever game. They even have some new ideas in there that are used in a few places. Its like they have more ideas than they need most games have a couple ideas used with increasing difficulty and that is it-- not so with this one.
If you are lazy because you are old and used to the old ways... and don't want to relearn new control schemes that take a little muscle then you should stick with the old stuff and yell out the window to the kids: "keep off my lawn!"
I enjoyed those years of building up my thumb skills and mouse skills - I can't get that back without erasing my memory but I can try something new. Xbox seems to largely have rehashes of the same stuff I've seen plenty of and I have enough good memories of those games that I do not need to consume them to reminiscence over the past -- which is not the same as living it... So, try to create new experiences so when you are too old to do anything you have even more to remember back to.
Atheists lacking any organizations to defend their group, are unable to constantly clarify and define the term Atheist. The major religious have enough troubles doing this with their name and image; however, they have the organization and power to maintain a general sense of their terms. Some are zealots about maintaining this stuff because its quite damaging to lose control of one's terminology and image.
Atheist means so many things it is not that useful and often is as bad as labeling yourself as a pedophile or satanist. I've met people who thought it was some satanic demonic type thing that worshiped evil and would have felt more comfortable trusting a drug dealer or pimp than an Atheist. They probably got their misconceptions from their church...
Atheists don't believe. Yet many define them as believing there is no god - undermining their whole position greatly right from the start.
Now some people, they think that god is irrelevant because there is no real impact - anymore than santa clause does. So the question of existence is a pointless exercise because the answer does not matter either way. These people are not really Atheists by almost any definition - they are outside the taxonomy used in this area.
BTW- BBC is reporting the Pope's numbers in the UK are down significantly since the last visit in the 80s... maybe things will change as we get more Atheists?
Government well regulated which does not happen all that often and promotes corruption which is what I've seen more of. I've seen well run government where it beat the private sector and I've seen it be a close call too.
Something people often forget is GOVERNMENT IS THE PEOPLE, in a democracy this should be obvious but other forms it is indirectly the public's fault for the actions of their government. You need to stop thinking of government as something you are not a part of-- yet hypocritically you probably go vote... there is more than voting and then there is informed voting...
BTW, Clinton rode the GOP wave to the housing crash he didn't cause it all by himself. He's more like an old sane republican from decades ago on many issues. Corporate democrats are not far from corporate republicans (its mostly marketing style.. good cop/bad cop)
The bean counters nick and dime customers to death for sake of the ever increasing STOCK VALUE because its not a matter of profitability but of how much GROWTH and even the 2nd and possibly 3rd derivatives of anticipated value (and its not directly linked with profitability; more with perception and herd mentality.)
The TAX they pay to use OUR airwaves should be paid, we can't give away OUR collective property to just anybody to exploit; although, we do too much of this already with dire consequences... Sure it is pushed onto customers as overhead cost - but those customers are using OUR collective property too and are not 100% of the public but a minority who again is using OUR property and should pay US for their exclusive use.
If we were WISE we would have government handle the whole mess like they've done with the highway system, water, sewer, power grid -- by making the airwaves a public right of way that anybody can use if they follow the laws. How? Well, create a new digital network where multiple users can share the bandwidth similar to how we do on the internet. No Mhz range licensed monopolies but bandwidth allocations over the same bandwidth. The towers can be government handled (like the roads) -- and as many know, laws force phones and power into rural areas because private corps would never have done it on their own - the cost of this is on your bill usually itemized out - so either way you are paying for it except a gov run system would be faster to move into rural areas and lack a profit motive (which in decently managed governments would cost less than the corruption costs of having government do it.) Of course, I'm a socialist communist pinko for suggesting this-- because we shouldn't have public land, public resources, libraries, fire, police, roads, bridges, water, sewer, etc.
The fact our democracy is functionally dead is another matter altogether.
Legal documents use UPPERCASE in place of BOLD quite often. They used to be TYPED without even the ability to format the type... longer than we've had computers with formatting...
A simple text editor is all they require... actually, there surely must be some word processor without document features that has tools to aid in writing legal documents... and one might be created... but everybody thinks WORD is what should be used.
So... I've been wondering how much of an attack vector we are creating by sending content more directly into the GPU libraries and the security limitations of such libraries which are so geared for performance they must be skimping on security? are GPUs limited in their DMA access like say... firewire/1394 was? (eventually it was)
With VMs allowing access to hardware for speed boosts one begins to wonder how secure the VMs are and as they get complex... just how much of a VM they are --> leading more towards a lower layer kernel system... But then the lack of solid OS + good design + standards is why we are stuck with another layer of abstraction which openly ADMITS that current OS are too immature.
Emergent behaviors are not conscious in the members of the group but can easily be misinterpreted to be some sort of leader planning or group think. Don't assume that simply because you may do this or see this that the world operates similarly. It is very human to think geese plan to fly in a V shape - its a fractal pattern that emerges without any planning whatsoever. Some will see the pattern try to make theory and rules from it and perhaps say its proof god's influence that such "headless" intelligence exists.
Capitalist conspiracies are far more real than people realize; however, a lot of the evil that goes on is thoughtless emergent behavior - only a little bit is individuals contributing their ill will to the direction; from little Eichmanns to big Eichmanns, even leaders become caught up in the momentum there is no inside control/plan to easily point to. Sure there are groups of like minded people complicating the whole thing and possibly their understanding is enough that they can nudge the beast towards their goals but not as much as one would like to think.
I tend to see these things as ghosts in the system; but unlike computer science fiction, these are real -- ghosts running on human social systems. Even that is not so simple in that the two are influencing each other and each have some degree of consciousness of the other. (the 'ghosts' not having a normal sense of consciousness obviously.) Many people who see evil emergent patterns attribute it to a thought or force and will give it a name like The Devil; some famious psychologists have done so (few openly) while others see it as a perfect example of emergence.
See the Stanford prison study as a primer. Then think about how when acts are abstracted by removing them it becomes easier to get people to do them - money is 1 layer and there are good studies showing that removing just 1 layer past money can get honest people to do things that everybody would disapprove of with money. (You should already be familiar with the famous Milgram Experiment.) Its bad enough with money, but we have multiple levels... Now we have this whole P.R. created belief system around "intellectual property" that makes the intangible into something tangible...
Start by looking at the environmental resource usage numbers and how many earths we need to keep it up at the current pace - not the perpetual growth our economy is based upon and have been selling that whole religion to most the world as well.
The USA consumes and it does not produce much; I suggest you look at the trade deficit problem.
I've read plenty over the years where EU people use less resources. "Quality of life" is highly subjective, I don't think you are interpreting it the way I do - I see it from the view of the people I know here in the midwest USA; personally, I differ greatly on what I'd consider quality of life from my neighbors. My brother thinks the EU sucks in part because they can't drive fast massive gas hog monster trucks with cheap gas like he does here. If transit is part of the equation there is a big difference...
Just because you lived in 1 place in the EU and your life didn't change doesn't say a whole lot. If you are some geek on the computer in an apartment and cubical all the time it wouldn't probably matter where you lived.
Quality of life is relative plus even by your measurement it may not apply to other income groups, social groups, locations(mass transit?) etc.
I object to the largest GDP comment. I'd like proof of that one; even then I'm not sure I like GDP as a measurement anyhow. The largest economy has been the EU for years now and China is close to second place-- its so close some minor tweaks to the meter changes the rankings. Currency levels skew this stuff as well, since China is probably #1 but their output is measured by relative monetary value - they are not... if you measure internally and remove the exchange rates China is probably near 1st place and the USA is probably not even 3rd (due to trade deficit.)
Haiti is far from free- the USA and France have been screwing them since the beginning and I do not think it will end with reconstruction which they are using to continue to screw them. In many ways Haiti is the freemarket libertarian ideal world of the American "right wing" except most the Haitians don't want what they have and the Americans don't understand what they are professing to want for themselves.
Modern propaganda is so good it can make an informed intellectual question the effectiveness of democracies... can democracy survive the exploitation from the march of science? indefinitely?? think about it (go sci-fi if you must to think about the limitations.)
FDR was the greatest and most popular president in USA history and setup more for the EU and Japan than any leader of the last century. He fought the banksters that we recently LOST against (we didn't really put up much of a fight.) The result of all the great things FDR accomplished is we got term limits so nobody as great will be able to do so much good for mankind. He was the opposite of a tyrant and the was very reason we didn't have term limits.
Slashdot Mirror
Letting people smoke their pot is harmful to the rest of us THE SAME WAY letting gay people marry harms straight marriages.
This probably shows how long it takes the White House to announce something new after some activists give them the idea -- see when they were given the idea here:
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/9/9/unity_college_students_bill_mckibben_launch
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/9/13/headlines#11
So you can see that it takes approximately 24 days from when the activists make a statement of their intentions for the press (non-mainstream press unless they do something wacky or are connected with ad dollars.)
Uh, I don't mean to insult the students by calling them activists, that word has negative connotations here in the USA.
Just an easy excuse to avoid it becoming an issue while keeping their corporate masters happy.
If you think statements from the Reagan admin were honest you've a lot to learn.
Hell, just having the 1st lady grow an organic garden caused some industry pressure. They'll be in there pushing again with the next 1st lady - they don't hire scum to do that stuff for nothing.
The idiots in that area of the country don't like taxes and don't think government does them any good. So they end up with arrangements as stupid as this one. It is NOT the fault of the firemen it is the fault of the idiot citizens to not include fire in their property taxes!
People get the government they deserve. Unfortunately, it is unlikely this lesson will teach his community anything.
It costs MORE to pay out like this - its cheaper to just include it into the local taxes than to make somebody mail bills and do follow up calls AND KEEP RECORDS of people who payed up -- the fire dept then has to look you up to see if they can help you. Wouldn't it suck if they made a mistake and thought you didn't pay?
It does not surprise me one bit. Our Governor is a slime who only about 1/3 support and many of those only because of his party affiliation. (3rd parties upset results often here.) He's been doing the whole "no new taxes" thing for his whole term and its only ended up hurting us as well as word games where they actually raised taxes in other ways. Then we have our ROADS -- that bridge that fell down was ours -- which took a voter initiative to get the road funds used ON ROADS! (before the bridge fell, but not fast enough... the bridge fell while they were fixing it.) I wouldn't be surprised if MS bought his support since he wants to run for President or VP.
I used to know a state IT guy - a unix guru. You can be assured that they have some great experts for intelligent planning who were not the deciding factor. I will have to reach him and see if they cut his job since he did do some email servers among the 100s he managed.
While the democrats are clearly better on a range of issues at certain times in the nations history and are quite easily the better of the two parties overall (they are the oldest for a reason) it becomes difficult to make generalized statements about them over time. Even my statement, the parties changed so much long ago that its almost like they swapped names.
Right now, on most any issue of importance which conflicts with the corporate powers, the democrats are just putting up an act. -both working for the same master but with a different act. Because the democrats have to sell themselves as opposing some of these forces, they will throw out a bone or two while still licking the boots of their corporate masters. Slight difference, I often think its worse to appease each side with weak measures and flip who is "in power" every few years to keep the public distracted and just placated enough to be inactive.
There are a few good ones in each, but more on the democrat side-- not that it matters who has more decent reps because its STILL a minority. BTW, the GOP is not tolerant of decent and hasn't been for some time, they have just gone off the deep end as far as their purging in the last 15 years. So a decent one has less chance in the GOP these days.
Then you have the moves made by corrupt democrats and nearly all republicans to increase corp/bank influences over them. From the Nixon years to the K street 90s to compromises in McCain/Feingold campaign reform - all increased corp power over them; mostly dems. The latter one undermined union influence over the dems and that vacuum was filled by corps (who's job is not to represent voters, unlike the unions; regardless of "your" beliefs of that concept.)
Net neutrality SHOULD have had an easy time in the HOUSE; clearly the majority fears the loss of MONEY at this time-- the only shot it had was in 2009 and now thanks to the crooks in the S. Court it won't have that chance again.
Then we have the pragmatists... Those who give in to corruption so they do not get crushed with the excuse that they can only pick so many fights and must give in on all the others. Many "honest" people faced with the reality of the situation would cave in and I suspect that over time would slowly become corrupted as well as shorten their list of principles they won't compromise. (Unless, they never make such compromises, like Ron Paul.) You should understand this unless people refer to you as unreasonable. I also find the older people are the more ways they have to rationalize their actions, including convincing themselves (aka lying to themselves.)
FEW nations fall quickly; especially democracies and large empires don't fall that quickly either.
It'll be gradual and involve most the population being at fault beforehand.
Obama could be the straw that breaks the camel's back; however, that back was arguably broken already and we are have been seeing a mirage. Obama could be the messenger of doom who is falsely blamed as well. Repair takes a lot of strain, we also may not be up to the task of going the right direction... Lots is possible but what is not possible is for us to return to the previous decade in just 4 years.... if EVER (1 in a million shot at best. you have to be clueless to think it can return to those days.)
Ranting is only going to let the ignorant and corrupt define the modern way wiretaps are implemented.
Wiretaps and spying LEGALLY are part of the law enforcement process for centuries. Its considered fair game and has been. Going against this is another issue and only makes you look like a nutcase.
Instead, geeks should be CONSTRUCTIVE on how to implement the needs of law enforcement so we increase accountability and minimize abuse. You know darn well there ARE totalitarian control freaks in government but just painting every issue as theirs removes you from the legitimate debates.
The law NEEDS wiretaps. I saw this coming decades ago. They need a means to backdoor into stuff like they've always been able to do before. Its so bad now that even legal wiretaps on phones are ineffective when the process is slower than the criminals ability to buy another disposable phone. (one solution would be to make wiretaps PERSON based instead of phone number based; which means they still have to work to find what your new number is but this seems like a fair compromise to having a national registry... although in the past your identity was registered to a phone number.)
They couldn't usually get into your Diary under the 5th etc. Your computer and files should be thought of like that - its just electronic forms of existing concepts. HOWEVER, because its new and technical issues always come up when you actually have to do something in the real world-- policies need adjusting and so do laws.
We geeks should be there making sure the ignorant are informed and the corrupt are not the only ones with a voice on how to implement OLD methods on new technology. We should not be ranting against the whole methodology itself and removing our constructive influence. We get enough stupid technology laws as it is and its up to us to prevent that-- these arrogant lawyers can't be left alone thinking they understand everything they need to know about computers technology or internet "tubes".
When you rant against the corrupt only you marginalize yourself from the middle even though you may be bringing them out into view. (so somebody has to do it-- but not enough are ignoring them and doing actual battle against them.)
---
The two parties are organized differently so they function differently. The control freaks are not out in the open (except a few like Cheney) nor are they a few old men in a room somewhere.
Both are like good cop / bad cop and are working for a powerful minority which is not centralized and is so well entrenched in our system that we won't be willing to change enough of the system in order to eliminate them. (in which case, they are still powerful but no longer everlasting... however, they won't be idle while they are undermined.) You could kill the top of a crime syndicate and a new members would fill the gap. You have to break the organization and then a new organization fills the void-- you only can stop the cycle by fixing the environment in which they thrive. This is extremely difficult to do; often it involves the public having to change themselves. Ultimately, it comes down to YOU contributing a little to the problem and not being willing to take enough responsibility.
Power addicts are not just politicians.
So when did the usa get closer to market anarchy (nationwide?) I was referring to the market; that was the context - not general anarchy. You are looking too hard for something to jump upon...
FYI: the FED is NOT part of the US government! They handed over their constitutional power to the private sector century ago (which helped cause the 1st great depression, BTW.)
Corporatism; it may not be the same as fascism, depends on the definition you choose.
You are stuck on your solution which is not the solution. You think you are solving the disease but its just a symptom of something else. It is all about POWER not markets; those are just 1 means to the same end. POWER must be diffused and not allowed to concentrate too highly not just in government organization but outside government as well. The USA is being brought down from outside government forces infecting the system like a virus.
Its not the person who is the disease its the virus inside the person.
Some things are quick fixes and other things are not.
The all mighty economy is in many aspects like Skinner's Pigeons with the economists each acting like they've found the pattern. Even if the DFL was 100% honestly working for us, it could not reliably stop the momentum of the present situation because of the nature of the problem. Perhaps it could be done better; that is always speculative, and always a sore point open to criticism. Of course they are not 100% honest either...
In addition, about 30% of the population will never accept the truth when it counters their beliefs no matter how obvious and factual; it may actually make them more entrenched: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128490874
(Note: I'm not saying just that 1/3 but I'm referring to the 1/3 who blindly follow anything the neoliberals want, which to some degree still loves Bush.)
While Democrats and Republicans look dangerously similar to the informed observer, they still function differently and arguably their differences are necessary to keep the whole democracy farce alive. Democrats are disorganized and not unified, it is like herding cats - in fact, they pride themselves on their diversity of opinion over being effective. The Republicans are run like much more like a modern business and it comes as no surprise they embrace selling out to business openly and fire insubordinates. There are a few good ones on both sides; more on the Democrat side because they are more tolerant which also means they tolerate moderate Republicans becoming Democrats. The label "Democrat" does not mean a whole lot. A 1 party rule by Democrats does not look like the other side. Yes, in the larger picture of critical issues both produce similar results.
Corruption maintains a working control over the game making the two parties more like a Good Cop, Bad Cop routine and the public wastes time fighting about which one is the Bad Cop. As I am again doing with this post.
You are incorrect if you think the Exec Branch has so much power. It has gained too much power, that is true - but actually, it is not powerful.... Its a matter of going with the flow or against it. Going with the flow, it appears almost dictatorial but going against it - it appears weak -- it does not have as much to do with the individual in the job as people think it does.... or the law... Corruption is too powerful today and the power brokers determine which way the "flow" is going and how strong.
Healthcare should have pointed this out if you really payed attention to it (not on tv news.) The public wanted more by huge numbers. That didn't matter, Obama stubbornly pushed his party to suicide forcing them to not give up which is what most wanted and some planned for. Remember, its better to try and fail (for millions of excuses) than to oppose something popular - that's politics 101. Even most the opposition couldn't reveal their true position, it always had to be framed in failure -- its not good enough, its in the wrong direction, etc. Few dared to say they loved the current situation -- lying is part of the job you know.
Some think the 70s was the turning point. I think Nixon was a turning point. It wasn't Carter being weak or poor at his job - the system was hijacked so it didn't matter. Either "side" honestly pursuing their goals will not be effective going against the flow of corruption. I must admit however, I was shocked healthcare passed with any significant concessions (still pathetic, but better than I expected.)
You are another misguided well intentioned person on the wrong track. Another victim of these think tanks from the 70s to sell any ideas that fuel corporate power which ultimately ends up undermining yours.
We have government involvement now but its as close to anarchy as we've had - yet you people think the cure is more anarchy because all the problems are a result of there being still too much intervention. Even minimal rules creates a point of interest to attack for huge gains - because people don't play by the rules - routinely-- if they were honest, we'd not need refereeing in sports... but even in a GAME we can't expect fair play. You can't have anarchy as the corporations preach and have some great Utopian order result as their think tanks have been selling you. Government has to split monopolies to keep a marketplace at minimum but then the monopolies must prevent that... the incentives will always exist.
Your solution is too specific to address the real problems. Its all about POWER, not markets. Money is a part of it but it does not need to be the main tool. Violence also works, but here money is god so violence is an unnecessary (except for bit players) means to gain power.
The amassing of unsafe levels of power is the problem. The powerful get addicted and never have enough. Its a fundamental concept of the constitution. Problem is we only SEPARATE POWERS in government to minimize threats and do nothing outside of it (we once did some stuff but it has been undermined since the civil war.) There are many who game the system but its the ones trying to control the system and have power enough to do it that are a problem. The mega corporations and super wealthy can not be allowed to amass more power than government - not literally more powerful but more powerful than the process which makes up the government; functionally making them dangerously powerful and much more a threat to democracy than anything else. Most governments have fallen to despotism due to the masses not keeping the powerful out.
There will always be a power great enough to surpass all protections of government; all that can be done is to prevent such power from growing and festering because once it exists it'll likely have been screwing things up in order to get that powerful. Yes, this means a cap on personal wealth (it still can still be high) but more importantly it means "severe" limitations on corporations which would have seemed totally reasonable for most the nations history; just not since the propaganda got so good and so financially supported back in the 70s (possibly before that but the 70s are a notable turning point in the fall of this democracy.)
Its a system design flaw that can't be fixed by dealing with many resulting symptoms.
I'm probably wasting my time if you've bought into the anarchy advocated by the power elites to sucker you. Sure, you get rid of the rules, then you get rid of enforcers; therefore, there will be no corruption of the "system" because there will be no system to corrupt. Yeah, how about you try that in a sport and see how well it works out 1st.
I don't see why there is so much stress on firewalls. Nobody should have insecure ports open they are not using. Fix the systems don't obscure their security holes.
Yes, software is flawed etc but if you need that port open the firewall isn't going to do much. Too much is put onto firewalls as the solution to all our problems.
You shouldn't need a desktop firewall unless your system is BROKEN by design.
Outgoing connections are another issue:
Actually, all OS should include an update API! The API can protect against information loss under the guise of software updates. Security / Privacy are still way behind.
Government of any kind rises and falls on the backs of its citizens. They ultimately are responsible for it; that responsibility may be too small and abstract for most people but during bad enough times a large enough group wakes up to their true power and revolution happens.
The constitution exists because of the peoples' support of it and it's irrelevance and lack of power is ALSO a result of the citizen. As Franklin predicted, all gov fall into despotism and a democratic one does when the people allow it to do so; which eventually error by error the group collectively fucks up - which manifests in their government.
This kind of government is MORE representative of the public than the others which lack their involvement - making their portion of the blame LARGER. We didn't wimp out over a dictator take over, we just didn't pay attention and learn think past the propaganda (marketing.)
If one was to civilize the process of governments, they would make a system where peaceful revolutions against the establishment are possible and this leads to democracies which is 1 way to implement the natural social process that is government. If the rules are not enforced then the game becomes irrelevant; problem is that people don't see it like a virtual machine - its just 1 big OS to them. You can't get back the VM once it is compromised even if an honest client OS is installed.
--
Clinton didn't cause the crash. The high priests we allowed to be unchained turned around 1st chance they had and screwed us all. We didn't care when their regulator (Clinton/congress) didn't put up a fight when McCain's economic adviser successfully attached the holy deregulation to a larger bill. The FDR "socialist" regulations remaining are the only thing that gave us time to respond to the crisis we created.
How about some radio waves given off in the area that increase static charge in metal objects? if you are good with the FCC... would it be your fault if their powder tended to ignite? I admit I don't know if static charge triggers bullets.
License!
Arms is a right in the USA and for good reasons should be everywhere; however, it is merely a right to a means of insurgency, popular revolt, and more selfless leadership... It is NOT for recreation or even many forms of "self defense" (not to say there are not a few situations where it is justified.) It is not for subsistence anymore either.
You could arm up but be severely punished for ANY AND ALL USES. This would still allow them to serve their real purpose. If you had to spend a year in JAIL because you shot somebody or some animal to save your life that is a price worth paying. (Who's saying you'd be caught shooting a bobcat, lots of criminals get away. duh.) Just because there is a cost for a legitimate use does not make it illegitimate; if you've been in a leadership position you probably had to deal with minimizing lose-lose situations - its reality; life is hard. My life is worth a year in jail. Is it worth doing time for shooting an ex? It may cut down on domestic stuff... It surely would make "fucktards" a bit more careful - if they even could get a license in the 1st place for limited legal use of a firearm.
My dad tried hunting. it was too expensive a hobby. Doing species counts for the DNR was much cheaper and still involved hunting for stuff. Sure, we need some "volunteers" to manage populations but it can be properly licensed (and enforced.) FYI: farming animals is productive.
why not- SMG 2 was even greater! wonderful and clever game. They even have some new ideas in there that are used in a few places. Its like they have more ideas than they need most games have a couple ideas used with increasing difficulty and that is it-- not so with this one.
If you are lazy because you are old and used to the old ways ... and don't want to relearn new control schemes that take a little muscle then you should stick with the old stuff and yell out the window to the kids: "keep off my lawn!"
I enjoyed those years of building up my thumb skills and mouse skills - I can't get that back without erasing my memory but I can try something new. Xbox seems to largely have rehashes of the same stuff I've seen plenty of and I have enough good memories of those games that I do not need to consume them to reminiscence over the past -- which is not the same as living it... So, try to create new experiences so when you are too old to do anything you have even more to remember back to.
Atheists lacking any organizations to defend their group, are unable to constantly clarify and define the term Atheist. The major religious have enough troubles doing this with their name and image; however, they have the organization and power to maintain a general sense of their terms. Some are zealots about maintaining this stuff because its quite damaging to lose control of one's terminology and image.
Atheist means so many things it is not that useful and often is as bad as labeling yourself as a pedophile or satanist. I've met people who thought it was some satanic demonic type thing that worshiped evil and would have felt more comfortable trusting a drug dealer or pimp than an Atheist. They probably got their misconceptions from their church...
Atheists don't believe. Yet many define them as believing there is no god - undermining their whole position greatly right from the start.
Now some people, they think that god is irrelevant because there is no real impact - anymore than santa clause does. So the question of existence is a pointless exercise because the answer does not matter either way. These people are not really Atheists by almost any definition - they are outside the taxonomy used in this area.
BTW- BBC is reporting the Pope's numbers in the UK are down significantly since the last visit in the 80s... maybe things will change as we get more Atheists?
Government well regulated which does not happen all that often and promotes corruption which is what I've seen more of. I've seen well run government where it beat the private sector and I've seen it be a close call too.
Something people often forget is GOVERNMENT IS THE PEOPLE, in a democracy this should be obvious but other forms it is indirectly the public's fault for the actions of their government. You need to stop thinking of government as something you are not a part of-- yet hypocritically you probably go vote... there is more than voting and then there is informed voting...
BTW, Clinton rode the GOP wave to the housing crash he didn't cause it all by himself. He's more like an old sane republican from decades ago on many issues. Corporate democrats are not far from corporate republicans (its mostly marketing style.. good cop/bad cop)
The bean counters nick and dime customers to death for sake of the ever increasing STOCK VALUE because its not a matter of profitability but of how much GROWTH and even the 2nd and possibly 3rd derivatives of anticipated value (and its not directly linked with profitability; more with perception and herd mentality.)
The TAX they pay to use OUR airwaves should be paid, we can't give away OUR collective property to just anybody to exploit; although, we do too much of this already with dire consequences... Sure it is pushed onto customers as overhead cost - but those customers are using OUR collective property too and are not 100% of the public but a minority who again is using OUR property and should pay US for their exclusive use.
If we were WISE we would have government handle the whole mess like they've done with the highway system, water, sewer, power grid -- by making the airwaves a public right of way that anybody can use if they follow the laws. How? Well, create a new digital network where multiple users can share the bandwidth similar to how we do on the internet. No Mhz range licensed monopolies but bandwidth allocations over the same bandwidth. The towers can be government handled (like the roads) -- and as many know, laws force phones and power into rural areas because private corps would never have done it on their own - the cost of this is on your bill usually itemized out - so either way you are paying for it except a gov run system would be faster to move into rural areas and lack a profit motive (which in decently managed governments would cost less than the corruption costs of having government do it.) Of course, I'm a socialist communist pinko for suggesting this-- because we shouldn't have public land, public resources, libraries, fire, police, roads, bridges, water, sewer, etc.
The fact our democracy is functionally dead is another matter altogether.
Legal documents use UPPERCASE in place of BOLD quite often. They used to be TYPED without even the ability to format the type... longer than we've had computers with formatting...
A simple text editor is all they require... actually, there surely must be some word processor without document features that has tools to aid in writing legal documents... and one might be created... but everybody thinks WORD is what should be used.
So... I've been wondering how much of an attack vector we are creating by sending content more directly into the GPU libraries and the security limitations of such libraries which are so geared for performance they must be skimping on security? are GPUs limited in their DMA access like say... firewire/1394 was? (eventually it was)
With VMs allowing access to hardware for speed boosts one begins to wonder how secure the VMs are and as they get complex... just how much of a VM they are --> leading more towards a lower layer kernel system... But then the lack of solid OS + good design + standards is why we are stuck with another layer of abstraction which openly ADMITS that current OS are too immature.
Emergent behaviors are not conscious in the members of the group but can easily be misinterpreted to be some sort of leader planning or group think. Don't assume that simply because you may do this or see this that the world operates similarly. It is very human to think geese plan to fly in a V shape - its a fractal pattern that emerges without any planning whatsoever. Some will see the pattern try to make theory and rules from it and perhaps say its proof god's influence that such "headless" intelligence exists.
Capitalist conspiracies are far more real than people realize; however, a lot of the evil that goes on is thoughtless emergent behavior - only a little bit is individuals contributing their ill will to the direction; from little Eichmanns to big Eichmanns, even leaders become caught up in the momentum there is no inside control/plan to easily point to. Sure there are groups of like minded people complicating the whole thing and possibly their understanding is enough that they can nudge the beast towards their goals but not as much as one would like to think.
I tend to see these things as ghosts in the system; but unlike computer science fiction, these are real -- ghosts running on human social systems. Even that is not so simple in that the two are influencing each other and each have some degree of consciousness of the other. (the 'ghosts' not having a normal sense of consciousness obviously.) Many people who see evil emergent patterns attribute it to a thought or force and will give it a name like The Devil; some famious psychologists have done so (few openly) while others see it as a perfect example of emergence.
See the Stanford prison study as a primer. Then think about how when acts are abstracted by removing them it becomes easier to get people to do them - money is 1 layer and there are good studies showing that removing just 1 layer past money can get honest people to do things that everybody would disapprove of with money. (You should already be familiar with the famous Milgram Experiment.) Its bad enough with money, but we have multiple levels... Now we have this whole P.R. created belief system around "intellectual property" that makes the intangible into something tangible...
Start by looking at the environmental resource usage numbers and how many earths we need to keep it up at the current pace - not the perpetual growth our economy is based upon and have been selling that whole religion to most the world as well.
The USA consumes and it does not produce much; I suggest you look at the trade deficit problem.
I've read plenty over the years where EU people use less resources. "Quality of life" is highly subjective, I don't think you are interpreting it the way I do - I see it from the view of the people I know here in the midwest USA; personally, I differ greatly on what I'd consider quality of life from my neighbors. My brother thinks the EU sucks in part because they can't drive fast massive gas hog monster trucks with cheap gas like he does here. If transit is part of the equation there is a big difference...
Just because you lived in 1 place in the EU and your life didn't change doesn't say a whole lot. If you are some geek on the computer in an apartment and cubical all the time it wouldn't probably matter where you lived.
Quality of life is relative plus even by your measurement it may not apply to other income groups, social groups, locations(mass transit?) etc.
I object to the largest GDP comment. I'd like proof of that one; even then I'm not sure I like GDP as a measurement anyhow. The largest economy has been the EU for years now and China is close to second place-- its so close some minor tweaks to the meter changes the rankings. Currency levels skew this stuff as well, since China is probably #1 but their output is measured by relative monetary value - they are not... if you measure internally and remove the exchange rates China is probably near 1st place and the USA is probably not even 3rd (due to trade deficit.)
Haiti is far from free- the USA and France have been screwing them since the beginning and I do not think it will end with reconstruction which they are using to continue to screw them. In many ways Haiti is the freemarket libertarian ideal world of the American "right wing" except most the Haitians don't want what they have and the Americans don't understand what they are professing to want for themselves.
Modern propaganda is so good it can make an informed intellectual question the effectiveness of democracies... can democracy survive the exploitation from the march of science? indefinitely?? think about it (go sci-fi if you must to think about the limitations.)
FDR was the greatest and most popular president in USA history and setup more for the EU and Japan than any leader of the last century. He fought the banksters that we recently LOST against (we didn't really put up much of a fight.) The result of all the great things FDR accomplished is we got term limits so nobody as great will be able to do so much good for mankind. He was the opposite of a tyrant and the was very reason we didn't have term limits.