Sorry, but this is yet another modern version of Eugenics being pushed in to your face. Just like "using DNA to determine future criminals" and "Detecting psychopaths by Tweets".
The people working on these papers expressing opinions like this are dangerous and should be locked up. Yes, it's that simple and yes, the propaganda they are spreading is extremely dangerous. If you don't understand the danger, go read a fucking history book and see what happens when people are convinced that genocide or racial superiority are good things.
Education and Society dictate a persons capabilities. If a person has a good education and ample opportunity, they tend to work for the betterment of the society they received their education in and have the opportunities in. If a person lacks education, how can they better society? If a person has education and no opportunity, what choice do they have other than harming society to survive? (And to usurp any stupid arguments you may have regarding farmers not needing education or some such, you are wrong. Farmers need to know how to be farmers, and need to know how to be content to be the best farmer possible. That requires as much education regarding society as a rocket scientist requires, but of course lacking the sciences required by the rocket scientists.)
This is basic sociology and psychology, with countless historical examples showing both sides of the argument. Hell, Socrates discussed the same thing in "The Allegory of the Artisan" (go read Plato's "The Republic" you lazy bastards!) well over 2 thousand years ago. It's not new, yet we still fall prey to the rhetoric of evil greedy people.
Where did I say he did know and/or collaborate? Nowhere did I state any such thing, so learn to read and comprehend before you claim bullshit. What I did state, is that a bill like Citizens United is a problem and PACs are a problem. There is no accountability in the system.
Fist you claimed incorrectly that the candidate claimed responsibility, then you conveniently forget everything you stated, and finally you lie about everything I stated. It's all in the thread fucktard so take your ad homimem whine and pound it up your big fat, failing to read, can't follow your own dialogue, confounded by post history, stinky asshole!
WTF? Do you know how to read English or follow your own dialogue? You essentially have pre-judged the individual with no evidence, and expect that individual to accept responsibility for something he may not have done. You are no better than a crooked cop demanding an apprehended individual to sign a confession.Wrong! I never judged anyone. I stated exactly what the article did, which is that the candidate denied responsibility and blamed the PAC, after you claimed that the candidate accepted responsibility. Did you perhaps miss the part where he took responsibility?
I showed that this quote from you Did you perhaps miss the part where he took responsibility? was factually not correct. You then asked "How would someone accept responsibility?" to which I gave an answer Taking responsibility would be exactly that. If the candidate stated "yeah, it was my ad and my competition sucks" or something similar that would have been accepting responsibility..
Try opening up the thread and reading the dialogue in context, in English we read left to right, top to bottom. I'm not sure what language structure you are using, but it sure as hell is not English.
How dare you speak common sense you protectionist!
While I agree with your point, I have seen anyone that tries to implement common sense laws to protect the US economy labelled and belittled by people that make more profit sending things overseas for cheap labor. If you speak common sense about an economy, you are silenced by propaganda. It's not about the people of the US any longer, it's about the top getting more at all costs (and no, I'm not referring to the upper 10%, more like the upper.1%.
I wrote an article about 20 years ago which was ignored, stating that the shipping of industrial jobs overseas would kill our economy. Hell, I was not alone by a long shot. Numerous economists, philanthropists, etc.. etc.. were already warning of it way before I was. The Ford model worked, and made us prosper. Middle class people spend their money, the upper 1% does not. This is how we get and hold our positions in the economy.
Look at Detroit and Flint. Tons of cash was there for both the upper and middle classes. Every middle class household owned 2 cars, and a mortgage. Increases in pay meant that the middle class purchased snow mobiles, boats, motorcycles, wave runners, hunting gear, fishing gear, "Big Screen TV", etc.. The middle class money tends to be very liquid.
The upper class in Detroit owned houses they rarely stayed in. They go on trips, they don't spend locally. They invest to get more money and property, they don't purchase locally and definitely nothing trivial like a snow mobile or wave runner. If they purchased a boat, it was an investment boat and again not generating money locally. That makes sense, it's how the wealthy remain wealthy and increase wealth.
The lower class in Detroit were all in line to become middle class. They stood outside the auto plants applying all the time, took shop classes, got GEDs and went to school all in hopes of getting to the middle class.
So when we sent all the middle class jobs overseas, the economy collapsed. At first, the wealthy still had money. But in short order, even they lost out. Property values dropped massively sticking everyone that owned property with huge debt and no capital. The lines stopped forming at the plants, and people started dropping like flies out of school. Now once prosperous areas in Detroit are like ghost towns.
All of these things were called out in the 80s, before NAFTA was passed and the plants were moved first to Mexico then to China. Not by me, but by countless economists gave warnings and said "DON'T DO NAFTA!". Those guys were told that they were just being protectionist, if they were heard at all.
Strike, it's the only power they have. Until they get shot for being on strike that is, or run over by a tank.. this is happening in China you know..
And actually, China lets them strike because it hurts the US more than China. It's not like Apple is going to close the slave labor camps any time soon, even if they lose a few bucks.
I'll see your request to read, and raise you your own statement.
Dark Energy? we don't even know what it actually is, if it is energy, or if it can do anything useful.
Nothing there indicates that it's hypothetical. In fact, claiming we don't know what it is, or if we can find use for it, both require it existing first correct? If I said "We don't know if Santa has a beard or not" it would obviously indicate that I know some dude named Santa right?
Your last paragraph could be taken one of two ways. First that the energy types are hypothetical, second that we just lack the science to know much about them. Since the first conflicted with what you previously stated, I had to go with the latter.
So back at you, reading comprehension motherfucker. If you write something you don't mean, it's not a problem with the recipient when you are taken literally.
If you read what was in the article, you will see that the candidate actually denied responsibility and blamed a PAC for the ad. I am not sure how you can come to a conclusion such as you have, which is "accepting responsibility".
Taking responsibility would be exactly that. If the candidate stated "yeah, it was my ad and my competition sucks" or something similar that would have been accepting responsibility.
I agree with the last portion you stated, and would say that we (the People) need to have Citizens United overturned. Petition and vote is your method.
Currently this is a very real set of limits. Until we set up asteroid mining stations, colonize other planets and moons, and can permanently inhabit space, we are very limited to the resources we have here or what gets dropped here from outside (materials and energy).
I believe that you are confusing myopic with realistic. Your optimism is fine, and hopefully one day we will extend our reach but reality has to trump your optimism.
As the old saying goes:
The optimist claims the glass is half full. The pessimist claims the glass is half empty. The realist claims that the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
Dark Energy is real? Oh come now. Are you one of the first in line to bash a "believer" too? Dark energy is a fairy tale created to back the Big Bang Theory, which would not have been possible without fairy tales like that, and dark matter.
The latest quantum physics has shown that the Big Bang is indeed just a fairy tale. Guess what that makes the 2 fairy tales required to support it?
There is a lot we don't know, but when the fairy tales are exposed why continue pretending they are real? Did your parents make you put out milk and cookies for Santa for years after you learned it was a good hoax?
Ad Hominem is indeed a fallacy, but at the same time you need to remember what Rhetoric is all about, at least for most people. The Sophists did not use rhetoric for finding the truth, they used it to win the debate. That tradition continues today, it's an extreme minority that use rhetoric for "truth".
There are way more sophists today than followers of Socrates and Plato, in fact I would guess that most people in Politics know the names but not the works.
I see a lot of people that have the same problem with Bars and Booze. I see a lot of people that have the same issue with TV shows, I know many that can't do things because one of their shows is on. I know bloggers and facebookers that have the same issue.
It's rather short sighted to claim only "gaming" has a problem, many hobbies are addictive and can distract people.
You are confusing "accepting responsibility" with "stating information contrary to the ad", there is a difference. I do get your point, but lets not forget how every candidate claims to hate negative ads. Every single one, yet every election cycle we deal with the same shit from the same people. If it gets them to win, that's all they worry about. Citizens United, PACs and Super-PACs just allow it to happen without anyone being able to point a finger at the responsible party.
There is a logical point that people miss when asking such questions, and where I don't discount people playing video games are better or worse than anyone else.
Lets take a Socratic approach shall we?
How much time does the average person spend watching TV? Is a Gamer spending about the same amount time in a Game instead of watching TV? This tends to actually favor gamers by the way, at least from my experience and the people I have met. The TV is showing you as much fantasy as the Game, the difference is really that TV does not allow one do actually do anything to participate.
How much time does the average person spend in a Bar? Is a Gamer spending any time in a Bar? Usually they don't, so again this favors gamers.
How much time do Gamers spend at Theaters, Concerts, Plays, etc...? Very little compared to average people, and are not both escapes from reality?
The point here, is that when you consider that "Gaming" is entertainment, many people treat Gaming as "bad" entertainment while pretending that their preferred form of entertainment is "good". In reality, it is not different. It's not unusual mind you, that people are biased, it happens all the time. People don't like others to be different and their preferred entertainment methods are no different than skin color, sex, age, etc...
I never claimed to be an economist, however I have studied many and what their thoughts are. There is no confusion in whom I was referring. Here is a Wiki page with his information, but there are numerous speeches from him available on Youtube. A quick Google search would have yielded the same result as I posted, so you obviously care very little about your ignorance.
Pay attention to what he says regarding deficit spending, and remember that he is not alone. Every great economist over the last 300+ years has said the same thing. If you want to bankrupt and kill a country, spend what you don't have. This is not rocket science at all, you are just believing a fallacy that someone taught you claiming it's okay for a Government to spend spend spend even when they don't have it. You have been mislead, and all you have to do is study a bit to see that the fallacy is just that.
If you fail to believe the economists, why not look at history? I gave you an example, but there are many more. Germany was not the only country to do this. And don't keep fooling yourself, how economies work does not change over time. The mistakes being made now will yield the same results as they yielded the Germans in the early 20th century, and have yielded for every country that has taken the same path. As the old proverb states "those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Deficit spending is the same, no matter who's budget you are looking at. Whether Government or you at home, spending what you don't have with no plan to get out of debt ensures bankruptcy. The difference of course is a matter of whom gets fucked when the bankruptcy occurs, in which case a Government should never have been allowed to spend money it does not have since every citizen gets fucked over on a default. See here.
To claim there is no similarity without qualifiers screams of ignorance. If you had claimed the difference is that the Government fucks over a lot more people in the process, I'd agree with your claim. You however seem to be under the delusion that it's okay for a Government to spend in a deficit, take money from funds of the people (see what the US President EO's have done to Social Security over the last 30 years), etc.. etc.. and it's not. A Government should NEVER spend money it does not have, ever.
Have you bothered to study any history at all? Do you know what happens when a country goes bankrupt? I'm guessing not, since you seem to believe that it's no big deal. Go read some fooking history, the get back to us on the issue.
And to say it does not compare is completely asinine on your part, at least in the basics of an economy and budget. Since you fail to read history, I'm guessing that you really truly believe that comparing spending money I don't have is different between a Government and a Household, which means that you severely lack education.
Ever hear of Morgan Friedman? Go listen to some of his speeches so that you don't have to work very hard to get educated. Heaven forbid anyone exert any effort in knowing what they hell they are talking about.
You make it sound so easy to hide, when in reality it's not. You are not talking about a secure services or networks like TOR, you are talking about open connections which are not obscured in most cases.
You also ignore the fact that even if it is originating elsewhere, and all you can do is find the origin and it happens to be in China.. are you saying China can't shut down the route? Working at a DOD contractor for almost a decade, this was routine. It's called "cooperatioin" and happens pretty often to stop attacks.
Most of these types of attacks are open connections, and routes are very clear. Did you look at the part where it was the result of a spear phishing campaign, which is generally how people are breached in DOD land? Why hide after they get your username and password? Brute force or DOS attacks are not the same, obviously.
And just to be clear, do you think Obama is just "Stupid" when he is spending 2 times what the Government income is every year? Does anyone not know what happens when they have 0 savings, and spend twice their income year after year? Come on now, you can't be that gullible can you?
Do you think that Fast and Furious was just a stupid idea, and of course ignore demand letters 1-3? I'm guessing so, because they are too stupid to make those kinds of mistakes intentionally right?
The NDAA was just another mistake I'm sure. Lets ignore the fact that Obama and his attorneys have appealed the judges ruling twice now, it's just stupidity at work and he really does care about John Q Public and would never put them in jail or kill them without trial.
Yeah, I mean.. these guys are just stupid. I mean, all those years of grooming and college to prep them for the office and they are just.. well, stupid right? Or are the people that believe they are stupid?
How long will you excuse the stupidity before you realize that it's intentional? It took me quite a long time, and I ignored all the warnings from people around me at the time. Now that we have descended in to the state they predicted, bankrupted and near tyranny I get it.
Instead of wasting your time making excuses for them, do something productive. Go get some people you trust on ballots and campaign to get them in to offices, and get the turds out of the punch bowl.
You do realize that even with proxies one can track down addresses right? Sorry, but if you get a few hundred thousand probes come in from addresses that belong to China, you can probably be sure that it's China making the attack. Here is why: The US generally reports these attacks to China and asks them to stop the attack, so the Chinese Government is aware of the attack. Being the Chinese Government, they can either investigate and shut it down, or allow it to happen. If they choose the latter, they are at least accomplices correct?
Now are you fool enough to believe that China would allow free-for all hacking if they did not want it to happen or were not behind it? I guess you need to learn what they do to people that bypass their firewall system, or perhaps make a visit and try it yourself.
So yeah, we can usually be sure of where attacks come from. It's really not technically difficult, but rather politically difficult to stop.
Which does lead to the question of "Why the fuck do we have military installations, especially that sensitive, on the Public Internet to begin with?
Are you still under the delusion that the Politicians for the US Government or any of the 3 letter agencies really give a shit about the USA, or the people that live in the USA?
For anyone under this delusion, I can only ask you to look around. I'm not claiming that everyone working for these agencies is bad mind you, most I consider people that just want to do a job and get a pay check. The people running the shows however, are very bad people. I'm sure many people working at these agencies realize this, but fear opening their mouths for obvious reasons. We all saw what happened with a whistle blower in CA right? I mean, their house was raided, father was left to die having a heart attack. Of course their house was ransacked costing them money, they lost their job, and had to pay a fortune in legal fees. That's one of the few stories that made it to the public, and not an isolated incident.
Currently, we are pretty fucked. Way to many people sleeping through what's been going on, and those that are awake prefer complacency to action.
No matter what they claim the post you responded to is correct. If the UN declares power to tax, the US needs to leave the UN. They are not a Government, and have no authority over any country which volunteers to be a member (and of course is approved). The purpose of the UN is strictly for resolution of dispute.
If you believe your own rhetoric, you are guilty of treasonous thought. Please go report yourself to your local police department and tell them you should be arrested for treason. Any politician backing thoughts similar to yours (I do realize that the rhetoric is not yours, you are simply repeating) is also guilty treason, and needs to be put be arrested and punished appropriately.
There is no "but.. but.. but.." to my comments regarding it being treason. Read the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Think about the ramifications of a politician making the US sub servant to the UN, there is nothing more treasonous.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but this is yet another modern version of Eugenics being pushed in to your face. Just like "using DNA to determine future criminals" and "Detecting psychopaths by Tweets".
The people working on these papers expressing opinions like this are dangerous and should be locked up. Yes, it's that simple and yes, the propaganda they are spreading is extremely dangerous. If you don't understand the danger, go read a fucking history book and see what happens when people are convinced that genocide or racial superiority are good things.
Education and Society dictate a persons capabilities. If a person has a good education and ample opportunity, they tend to work for the betterment of the society they received their education in and have the opportunities in. If a person lacks education, how can they better society? If a person has education and no opportunity, what choice do they have other than harming society to survive? (And to usurp any stupid arguments you may have regarding farmers not needing education or some such, you are wrong. Farmers need to know how to be farmers, and need to know how to be content to be the best farmer possible. That requires as much education regarding society as a rocket scientist requires, but of course lacking the sciences required by the rocket scientists.)
This is basic sociology and psychology, with countless historical examples showing both sides of the argument. Hell, Socrates discussed the same thing in "The Allegory of the Artisan" (go read Plato's "The Republic" you lazy bastards!) well over 2 thousand years ago. It's not new, yet we still fall prey to the rhetoric of evil greedy people.
Where did I say he did know and/or collaborate? Nowhere did I state any such thing, so learn to read and comprehend before you claim bullshit. What I did state, is that a bill like Citizens United is a problem and PACs are a problem. There is no accountability in the system.
Fist you claimed incorrectly that the candidate claimed responsibility, then you conveniently forget everything you stated, and finally you lie about everything I stated. It's all in the thread fucktard so take your ad homimem whine and pound it up your big fat, failing to read, can't follow your own dialogue, confounded by post history, stinky asshole!
WTF? Do you know how to read English or follow your own dialogue? You essentially have pre-judged the individual with no evidence, and expect that individual to accept responsibility for something he may not have done. You are no better than a crooked cop demanding an apprehended individual to sign a confession. Wrong! I never judged anyone. I stated exactly what the article did, which is that the candidate denied responsibility and blamed the PAC, after you claimed that the candidate accepted responsibility. Did you perhaps miss the part where he took responsibility?
I showed that this quote from you Did you perhaps miss the part where he took responsibility? was factually not correct. You then asked "How would someone accept responsibility?" to which I gave an answer Taking responsibility would be exactly that. If the candidate stated "yeah, it was my ad and my competition sucks" or something similar that would have been accepting responsibility. .
Try opening up the thread and reading the dialogue in context, in English we read left to right, top to bottom. I'm not sure what language structure you are using, but it sure as hell is not English.
How dare you speak common sense you protectionist!
While I agree with your point, I have seen anyone that tries to implement common sense laws to protect the US economy labelled and belittled by people that make more profit sending things overseas for cheap labor. If you speak common sense about an economy, you are silenced by propaganda. It's not about the people of the US any longer, it's about the top getting more at all costs (and no, I'm not referring to the upper 10%, more like the upper .1%.
I wrote an article about 20 years ago which was ignored, stating that the shipping of industrial jobs overseas would kill our economy. Hell, I was not alone by a long shot. Numerous economists, philanthropists, etc.. etc.. were already warning of it way before I was. The Ford model worked, and made us prosper. Middle class people spend their money, the upper 1% does not. This is how we get and hold our positions in the economy.
Look at Detroit and Flint. Tons of cash was there for both the upper and middle classes. Every middle class household owned 2 cars, and a mortgage. Increases in pay meant that the middle class purchased snow mobiles, boats, motorcycles, wave runners, hunting gear, fishing gear, "Big Screen TV", etc.. The middle class money tends to be very liquid.
The upper class in Detroit owned houses they rarely stayed in. They go on trips, they don't spend locally. They invest to get more money and property, they don't purchase locally and definitely nothing trivial like a snow mobile or wave runner. If they purchased a boat, it was an investment boat and again not generating money locally. That makes sense, it's how the wealthy remain wealthy and increase wealth.
The lower class in Detroit were all in line to become middle class. They stood outside the auto plants applying all the time, took shop classes, got GEDs and went to school all in hopes of getting to the middle class.
So when we sent all the middle class jobs overseas, the economy collapsed. At first, the wealthy still had money. But in short order, even they lost out. Property values dropped massively sticking everyone that owned property with huge debt and no capital. The lines stopped forming at the plants, and people started dropping like flies out of school. Now once prosperous areas in Detroit are like ghost towns.
All of these things were called out in the 80s, before NAFTA was passed and the plants were moved first to Mexico then to China. Not by me, but by countless economists gave warnings and said "DON'T DO NAFTA!". Those guys were told that they were just being protectionist, if they were heard at all.
Strike, it's the only power they have. Until they get shot for being on strike that is, or run over by a tank.. this is happening in China you know..
And actually, China lets them strike because it hurts the US more than China. It's not like Apple is going to close the slave labor camps any time soon, even if they lose a few bucks.
I did not take their statement the same, I took it as a bit paradoxical perhaps to be humorous.
I'll see your request to read, and raise you your own statement.
Dark Energy? we don't even know what it actually is, if it is energy, or if it can do anything useful.
Nothing there indicates that it's hypothetical. In fact, claiming we don't know what it is, or if we can find use for it, both require it existing first correct? If I said "We don't know if Santa has a beard or not" it would obviously indicate that I know some dude named Santa right?
Your last paragraph could be taken one of two ways. First that the energy types are hypothetical, second that we just lack the science to know much about them. Since the first conflicted with what you previously stated, I had to go with the latter.
So back at you, reading comprehension motherfucker. If you write something you don't mean, it's not a problem with the recipient when you are taken literally.
If you read what was in the article, you will see that the candidate actually denied responsibility and blamed a PAC for the ad. I am not sure how you can come to a conclusion such as you have, which is "accepting responsibility".
Taking responsibility would be exactly that. If the candidate stated "yeah, it was my ad and my competition sucks" or something similar that would have been accepting responsibility.
I agree with the last portion you stated, and would say that we (the People) need to have Citizens United overturned. Petition and vote is your method.
Currently this is a very real set of limits. Until we set up asteroid mining stations, colonize other planets and moons, and can permanently inhabit space, we are very limited to the resources we have here or what gets dropped here from outside (materials and energy).
I believe that you are confusing myopic with realistic. Your optimism is fine, and hopefully one day we will extend our reach but reality has to trump your optimism.
As the old saying goes:
The optimist claims the glass is half full. The pessimist claims the glass is half empty. The realist claims that the glass is twice as large as it needs to be.
Thanks, I was worried I was the only one that thought that this is a staggeringly foolish endeavor.
Dark Energy is real? Oh come now. Are you one of the first in line to bash a "believer" too? Dark energy is a fairy tale created to back the Big Bang Theory, which would not have been possible without fairy tales like that, and dark matter.
The latest quantum physics has shown that the Big Bang is indeed just a fairy tale. Guess what that makes the 2 fairy tales required to support it?
There is a lot we don't know, but when the fairy tales are exposed why continue pretending they are real? Did your parents make you put out milk and cookies for Santa for years after you learned it was a good hoax?
Ad Hominem is indeed a fallacy, but at the same time you need to remember what Rhetoric is all about, at least for most people. The Sophists did not use rhetoric for finding the truth, they used it to win the debate. That tradition continues today, it's an extreme minority that use rhetoric for "truth".
There are way more sophists today than followers of Socrates and Plato, in fact I would guess that most people in Politics know the names but not the works.
I see a lot of people that have the same problem with Bars and Booze. I see a lot of people that have the same issue with TV shows, I know many that can't do things because one of their shows is on. I know bloggers and facebookers that have the same issue.
It's rather short sighted to claim only "gaming" has a problem, many hobbies are addictive and can distract people.
You are confusing "accepting responsibility" with "stating information contrary to the ad", there is a difference. I do get your point, but lets not forget how every candidate claims to hate negative ads. Every single one, yet every election cycle we deal with the same shit from the same people. If it gets them to win, that's all they worry about. Citizens United, PACs and Super-PACs just allow it to happen without anyone being able to point a finger at the responsible party.
There is a logical point that people miss when asking such questions, and where I don't discount people playing video games are better or worse than anyone else.
Lets take a Socratic approach shall we?
How much time does the average person spend watching TV? Is a Gamer spending about the same amount time in a Game instead of watching TV? This tends to actually favor gamers by the way, at least from my experience and the people I have met. The TV is showing you as much fantasy as the Game, the difference is really that TV does not allow one do actually do anything to participate.
How much time does the average person spend in a Bar? Is a Gamer spending any time in a Bar? Usually they don't, so again this favors gamers.
How much time do Gamers spend at Theaters, Concerts, Plays, etc...? Very little compared to average people, and are not both escapes from reality?
The point here, is that when you consider that "Gaming" is entertainment, many people treat Gaming as "bad" entertainment while pretending that their preferred form of entertainment is "good". In reality, it is not different. It's not unusual mind you, that people are biased, it happens all the time. People don't like others to be different and their preferred entertainment methods are no different than skin color, sex, age, etc...
I never claimed to be an economist, however I have studied many and what their thoughts are. There is no confusion in whom I was referring. Here is a Wiki page with his information, but there are numerous speeches from him available on Youtube. A quick Google search would have yielded the same result as I posted, so you obviously care very little about your ignorance.
Pay attention to what he says regarding deficit spending, and remember that he is not alone. Every great economist over the last 300+ years has said the same thing. If you want to bankrupt and kill a country, spend what you don't have. This is not rocket science at all, you are just believing a fallacy that someone taught you claiming it's okay for a Government to spend spend spend even when they don't have it. You have been mislead, and all you have to do is study a bit to see that the fallacy is just that.
If you fail to believe the economists, why not look at history? I gave you an example, but there are many more. Germany was not the only country to do this. And don't keep fooling yourself, how economies work does not change over time. The mistakes being made now will yield the same results as they yielded the Germans in the early 20th century, and have yielded for every country that has taken the same path. As the old proverb states "those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Deficit spending is the same, no matter who's budget you are looking at. Whether Government or you at home, spending what you don't have with no plan to get out of debt ensures bankruptcy. The difference of course is a matter of whom gets fucked when the bankruptcy occurs, in which case a Government should never have been allowed to spend money it does not have since every citizen gets fucked over on a default. See here.
To claim there is no similarity without qualifiers screams of ignorance. If you had claimed the difference is that the Government fucks over a lot more people in the process, I'd agree with your claim. You however seem to be under the delusion that it's okay for a Government to spend in a deficit, take money from funds of the people (see what the US President EO's have done to Social Security over the last 30 years), etc.. etc.. and it's not. A Government should NEVER spend money it does not have, ever.
Have you bothered to study any history at all? Do you know what happens when a country goes bankrupt? I'm guessing not, since you seem to believe that it's no big deal. Go read some fooking history, the get back to us on the issue.
And to say it does not compare is completely asinine on your part, at least in the basics of an economy and budget. Since you fail to read history, I'm guessing that you really truly believe that comparing spending money I don't have is different between a Government and a Household, which means that you severely lack education.
Ever hear of Morgan Friedman? Go listen to some of his speeches so that you don't have to work very hard to get educated. Heaven forbid anyone exert any effort in knowing what they hell they are talking about.
You make it sound so easy to hide, when in reality it's not. You are not talking about a secure services or networks like TOR, you are talking about open connections which are not obscured in most cases.
You also ignore the fact that even if it is originating elsewhere, and all you can do is find the origin and it happens to be in China.. are you saying China can't shut down the route? Working at a DOD contractor for almost a decade, this was routine. It's called "cooperatioin" and happens pretty often to stop attacks.
Most of these types of attacks are open connections, and routes are very clear. Did you look at the part where it was the result of a spear phishing campaign, which is generally how people are breached in DOD land? Why hide after they get your username and password? Brute force or DOS attacks are not the same, obviously.
Fuck you! Now you have a troll to mark, but correct the OPINION I presented above you fucktards!
And just to be clear, do you think Obama is just "Stupid" when he is spending 2 times what the Government income is every year? Does anyone not know what happens when they have 0 savings, and spend twice their income year after year? Come on now, you can't be that gullible can you?
Do you think that Fast and Furious was just a stupid idea, and of course ignore demand letters 1-3? I'm guessing so, because they are too stupid to make those kinds of mistakes intentionally right?
The NDAA was just another mistake I'm sure. Lets ignore the fact that Obama and his attorneys have appealed the judges ruling twice now, it's just stupidity at work and he really does care about John Q Public and would never put them in jail or kill them without trial.
Yeah, I mean.. these guys are just stupid. I mean, all those years of grooming and college to prep them for the office and they are just.. well, stupid right? Or are the people that believe they are stupid?
How long will you excuse the stupidity before you realize that it's intentional? It took me quite a long time, and I ignored all the warnings from people around me at the time. Now that we have descended in to the state they predicted, bankrupted and near tyranny I get it.
Instead of wasting your time making excuses for them, do something productive. Go get some people you trust on ballots and campaign to get them in to offices, and get the turds out of the punch bowl.
You do realize that even with proxies one can track down addresses right? Sorry, but if you get a few hundred thousand probes come in from addresses that belong to China, you can probably be sure that it's China making the attack. Here is why: The US generally reports these attacks to China and asks them to stop the attack, so the Chinese Government is aware of the attack. Being the Chinese Government, they can either investigate and shut it down, or allow it to happen. If they choose the latter, they are at least accomplices correct?
Now are you fool enough to believe that China would allow free-for all hacking if they did not want it to happen or were not behind it? I guess you need to learn what they do to people that bypass their firewall system, or perhaps make a visit and try it yourself.
So yeah, we can usually be sure of where attacks come from. It's really not technically difficult, but rather politically difficult to stop.
Which does lead to the question of "Why the fuck do we have military installations, especially that sensitive, on the Public Internet to begin with?
Are you still under the delusion that the Politicians for the US Government or any of the 3 letter agencies really give a shit about the USA, or the people that live in the USA?
For anyone under this delusion, I can only ask you to look around. I'm not claiming that everyone working for these agencies is bad mind you, most I consider people that just want to do a job and get a pay check. The people running the shows however, are very bad people. I'm sure many people working at these agencies realize this, but fear opening their mouths for obvious reasons. We all saw what happened with a whistle blower in CA right? I mean, their house was raided, father was left to die having a heart attack. Of course their house was ransacked costing them money, they lost their job, and had to pay a fortune in legal fees. That's one of the few stories that made it to the public, and not an isolated incident.
Currently, we are pretty fucked. Way to many people sleeping through what's been going on, and those that are awake prefer complacency to action.
No matter what they claim the post you responded to is correct. If the UN declares power to tax, the US needs to leave the UN. They are not a Government, and have no authority over any country which volunteers to be a member (and of course is approved). The purpose of the UN is strictly for resolution of dispute.
If you believe your own rhetoric, you are guilty of treasonous thought. Please go report yourself to your local police department and tell them you should be arrested for treason. Any politician backing thoughts similar to yours (I do realize that the rhetoric is not yours, you are simply repeating) is also guilty treason, and needs to be put be arrested and punished appropriately.
There is no "but.. but.. but.." to my comments regarding it being treason. Read the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Think about the ramifications of a politician making the US sub servant to the UN, there is nothing more treasonous.