Yes, dumping and extra 5-6 Trillion during the Obama years in deficit dollars into the economy will tend to heat it up a bit. However, not all of that was Obama's doing. It started under Bush with "surpluses as far as the eye could see" back before 9/11....that turned out not be extremely far. Bush managed to add only about 4 Trillion to the debt, so Obama beat him fair and square. Bush decided the country needed big tax cuts instead of sending the surpluses off to retire the debt. It is hard to buy votes by retiring debt. So the economy from Bush through Obama was illusory, it was merely a sugar high and not a new normal.
When the bailouts started at the End-O-Bush, Obama kept them up. Mind you he probably saved the country from collapse but then he and Congress should have taken their foot off the gas. However, they figured they'd be diselected if they didn't keep Americans on the sugar high to which they helped addict them.
To make matters worse, Obama and Republican dolts in Congress decided to keep the Bush tax cuts rather than let them expire, thus increasing the debt more. It was irresponsible.
So now we have boneheads in Congress and the Administration promising more tax cuts. The preceding ones weren't fixing the ailing economy like they figured so let's have some more of the damn things. Them rich people and companies will surely start hiring more if we give them more money...and the debt will ride ever higher...especially now that the Me Generation is becoming the Blue Haired Generation and demanding their cut of the pie. The pols' rational: well, if we get the GDP increasing at 3-4%, then there'll be lots of money. Errr...and if I get my pink unicorn, I'll be rich charging people to ride it.
Now government has backed itself into a corner. They cannot keep up with the demographics and with Bozo in the White House, there will be no nice lovely young immigrants to work for the Blue Hairs' social security and medicare. The Blue Haired will scream "We wuz robbed!!" when their checks get cut down to size.
Oh, and the SS Trust Fund? In a sense, it doesn't exist. It is merely an accounting gimmick. SS is a pay as you go system. When the payers don't have enough to pay, you go hungry. So no sneaky thinking you'll be able to cash in if you live long enough. You won't.
At this point, all we have is Wikileaks saying it is CIA software. I don't find it beyond the realm of possibility that they are just feeding the world some Russian crap and billing it as coming from the CIA. It has better mass appeal that way, because who gives a damn about what Russia's doing.
There are some ideas buzzing around the U.S. government to separate out the functions of cyber so that security comes from a different entity than offensive weapons. Of course that means parts of the government will be fighting each other. NSA, CIA, FBI, etc. are all on public record as realizing this. There is no easy answer.
Some of the misconception is that somehow spying is bad. It isn't. It is what keeps a government from overreacting to something out in the open. Offensive weapons will always be around. The Russians, Chinese, Iranians, I.M.A. Dipshit from Any Country have them.
Some bright sparks in Congress asked James Clapper why the U.S. couldn't respond in the cyber arena against the naughty things the Russians did in the last election. His response was: well, if you are sure the U.S. infrastructure could stand the guaranteed response, then that might be advisable. He was of the opinion that the Russians have the U.S. electrical grid on their target list and that he (Clapper) figured they could take it down for retaliation. Of course, these would be acts of war...between nuclear armed nations....one of which has a ruthless dolt as head of state, the other also has a ruthless dolt as head of state.
Yes, maybe porting is easy. And...errr...who is going to pay for this port? The hospital already has a running system and security it the manufacturer's job. The manufacturer has already sold the system and won't get any more money for an upgrade in security. MS won't pay because they don't have to. There is no case law that says MS, the manufacturer, or the hospital should pay.
Now, please go explain to the manufacture why they should update their old software and hand it out for free. I'm sure they'd listen to you.
Windows NT was built with VMS in mind, not OS/2, MS hired VMS's main architect. When MS and IBM were in bed together, MS had the UI front end to do. They didn't like the back end from IBM because it made their front end run like shit. So they decided they needed their own back end.
After NT was thrown together, MS discovered their front end still ran like shit so they went into their back end and knackered the bits that made their front end look bad. Unfortunately, that also meant they had to include stuff in the kernel where from a security standpoint it didn't belong. And so MS's proud tradition for lack of security persisted.
VMS had 4 security levels and that was supported by the VAX architecture. OpenVMS is merely the successor to VMS. I'm unsure what is open about OpenVMS, last I checked it was owned by HP. It probably won't be long before they screw it up like everything else they touch.
NSA is a large organization, different parts do different things. How do we actually know this bug came from NSA? All we have is some web site claiming it.
Well, they do work, just not manual labor. And the service economy is much larger than manufacturing.
What the WSJ has left out is that their reporters, op-ed people, and just about the entire organization could be replaced with bots. They are mere mouthpieces for companies anyhow. Creating bots to repeat company announcements should be easy to do. The op-ed pieces are cut-and-paste from the right wingers.
"Problem is, gov't keeps redefining what it means to be unemployed."
No, the government hasn't changed what it means to be unemployed. The economy has changed so that many are under-employed or laid off from high paying jobs. Go back to Ayn Rand school and stop positing bullshit about the government.
BS. One car plant employs a lot fewer workers than it used to 30 years ago. Why? Automation. Where did the people go? Some found other jobs, some went back to school to retrain, some went on unemployment. Mining is similar, they are already using self-driving ore carriers. Wait until self-driving cars put cab drivers out of business, and self-driving trust put truckers out of business, and automation takes out burger flippers.
Now that automation is going to effect just about every kind of job, finding other jobs will get harder because whatever industry you choose, it lost jobs through automation as well. Retraining for industries losing jobs isn't a winning proposition. That leaves unemployment.
Yep, all we need to do is ask the perps whether they did it. Then we can pop them if they say yes. They'll be real forthcoming when they see the baseball bats.
"when, oh when, are people going to stop using MS Windows for mission critical systems?"
As soon as companies decide they need more than click and drool bodies doing their compute infrastructure. In a word, never. The problem is that the sort of person who can make the correct hiring decisions has been hired by people who have the least understanding of what it takes to secure systems, so they hire someone just like them who in turn hires the least expensive "talent", thus being able to report back that he's saved the company "millions".
And companies are not being held accountable by either laws, courts, or criminal prosecution, or the marketplace for being security morons. The marketplace doesn't correctly value everything, unlike Ayn Rand who can put a price tag on your grandmother.
Good luck defining "hate speech, pornography or other sources of harm," or what it means to direct users towards them. Sounds like a full employment plan for politicians.
No, it started with Nixon, young grasshopper. And it is "Reagan", not "Reagen".
And too much regulation regarding drugs is in the eye of the beholder, unless you feel safe taking Joe's Bait and Elixir Shop selling you back pain pills.
3.5 billion is even more less than the non-discretionary spending that keeps Grandma from coming to live with you. Frankly, I think you should let her move in.
So what if Sherman was passed under a Republican president. The Republicans elected Trump, want to bet whether his administration would write a new one and push it through Congress? Would Trump even read it? Can he read?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, dumping and extra 5-6 Trillion during the Obama years in deficit dollars into the economy will tend to heat it up a bit. However, not all of that was Obama's doing. It started under Bush with "surpluses as far as the eye could see" back before 9/11....that turned out not be extremely far. Bush managed to add only about 4 Trillion to the debt, so Obama beat him fair and square. Bush decided the country needed big tax cuts instead of sending the surpluses off to retire the debt. It is hard to buy votes by retiring debt. So the economy from Bush through Obama was illusory, it was merely a sugar high and not a new normal.
When the bailouts started at the End-O-Bush, Obama kept them up. Mind you he probably saved the country from collapse but then he and Congress should have taken their foot off the gas. However, they figured they'd be diselected if they didn't keep Americans on the sugar high to which they helped addict them.
To make matters worse, Obama and Republican dolts in Congress decided to keep the Bush tax cuts rather than let them expire, thus increasing the debt more. It was irresponsible.
So now we have boneheads in Congress and the Administration promising more tax cuts. The preceding ones weren't fixing the ailing economy like they figured so let's have some more of the damn things. Them rich people and companies will surely start hiring more if we give them more money...and the debt will ride ever higher...especially now that the Me Generation is becoming the Blue Haired Generation and demanding their cut of the pie. The pols' rational: well, if we get the GDP increasing at 3-4%, then there'll be lots of money. Errr...and if I get my pink unicorn, I'll be rich charging people to ride it.
Now government has backed itself into a corner. They cannot keep up with the demographics and with Bozo in the White House, there will be no nice lovely young immigrants to work for the Blue Hairs' social security and medicare. The Blue Haired will scream "We wuz robbed!!" when their checks get cut down to size.
Oh, and the SS Trust Fund? In a sense, it doesn't exist. It is merely an accounting gimmick. SS is a pay as you go system. When the payers don't have enough to pay, you go hungry. So no sneaky thinking you'll be able to cash in if you live long enough. You won't.
At this point, all we have is Wikileaks saying it is CIA software. I don't find it beyond the realm of possibility that they are just feeding the world some Russian crap and billing it as coming from the CIA. It has better mass appeal that way, because who gives a damn about what Russia's doing.
There are some ideas buzzing around the U.S. government to separate out the functions of cyber so that security comes from a different entity than offensive weapons. Of course that means parts of the government will be fighting each other. NSA, CIA, FBI, etc. are all on public record as realizing this. There is no easy answer.
Some of the misconception is that somehow spying is bad. It isn't. It is what keeps a government from overreacting to something out in the open. Offensive weapons will always be around. The Russians, Chinese, Iranians, I.M.A. Dipshit from Any Country have them.
Some bright sparks in Congress asked James Clapper why the U.S. couldn't respond in the cyber arena against the naughty things the Russians did in the last election. His response was: well, if you are sure the U.S. infrastructure could stand the guaranteed response, then that might be advisable. He was of the opinion that the Russians have the U.S. electrical grid on their target list and that he (Clapper) figured they could take it down for retaliation. Of course, these would be acts of war...between nuclear armed nations....one of which has a ruthless dolt as head of state, the other also has a ruthless dolt as head of state.
Yes, maybe porting is easy. And...errr...who is going to pay for this port? The hospital already has a running system and security it the manufacturer's job. The manufacturer has already sold the system and won't get any more money for an upgrade in security. MS won't pay because they don't have to. There is no case law that says MS, the manufacturer, or the hospital should pay.
Now, please go explain to the manufacture why they should update their old software and hand it out for free. I'm sure they'd listen to you.
Windows NT was built with VMS in mind, not OS/2, MS hired VMS's main architect. When MS and IBM were in bed together, MS had the UI front end to do. They didn't like the back end from IBM because it made their front end run like shit. So they decided they needed their own back end.
After NT was thrown together, MS discovered their front end still ran like shit so they went into their back end and knackered the bits that made their front end look bad. Unfortunately, that also meant they had to include stuff in the kernel where from a security standpoint it didn't belong. And so MS's proud tradition for lack of security persisted.
VMS had 4 security levels and that was supported by the VAX architecture. OpenVMS is merely the successor to VMS. I'm unsure what is open about OpenVMS, last I checked it was owned by HP. It probably won't be long before they screw it up like everything else they touch.
NSA is a large organization, different parts do different things. How do we actually know this bug came from NSA? All we have is some web site claiming it.
Yes, we know there's nothing of which the NSA isn't capable. They can even violate physical laws if they want.
Well, they do work, just not manual labor. And the service economy is much larger than manufacturing.
What the WSJ has left out is that their reporters, op-ed people, and just about the entire organization could be replaced with bots. They are mere mouthpieces for companies anyhow. Creating bots to repeat company announcements should be easy to do. The op-ed pieces are cut-and-paste from the right wingers.
"Problem is, gov't keeps redefining what it means to be unemployed."
No, the government hasn't changed what it means to be unemployed. The economy has changed so that many are under-employed or laid off from high paying jobs. Go back to Ayn Rand school and stop positing bullshit about the government.
BS. One car plant employs a lot fewer workers than it used to 30 years ago. Why? Automation. Where did the people go? Some found other jobs, some went back to school to retrain, some went on unemployment. Mining is similar, they are already using self-driving ore carriers. Wait until self-driving cars put cab drivers out of business, and self-driving trust put truckers out of business, and automation takes out burger flippers.
Now that automation is going to effect just about every kind of job, finding other jobs will get harder because whatever industry you choose, it lost jobs through automation as well. Retraining for industries losing jobs isn't a winning proposition. That leaves unemployment.
Yep, all we need to do is ask the perps whether they did it. Then we can pop them if they say yes. They'll be real forthcoming when they see the baseball bats.
Yeah, those nice Russians and Chinese would never think to do such a thing as those naughty NSA Guys.
"when, oh when, are people going to stop using MS Windows for mission critical systems?"
As soon as companies decide they need more than click and drool bodies doing their compute infrastructure. In a word, never. The problem is that the sort of person who can make the correct hiring decisions has been hired by people who have the least understanding of what it takes to secure systems, so they hire someone just like them who in turn hires the least expensive "talent", thus being able to report back that he's saved the company "millions".
And companies are not being held accountable by either laws, courts, or criminal prosecution, or the marketplace for being security morons. The marketplace doesn't correctly value everything, unlike Ayn Rand who can put a price tag on your grandmother.
Good luck defining "hate speech, pornography or other sources of harm," or what it means to direct users towards them. Sounds like a full employment plan for politicians.
Addendum: recently the Right has been joining hands with the liberals to reduce sentencing laws.
The Right does not include Jeff Sessions, he's with the KKK.
No, it started with Nixon, young grasshopper. And it is "Reagan", not "Reagen".
And too much regulation regarding drugs is in the eye of the beholder, unless you feel safe taking Joe's Bait and Elixir Shop selling you back pain pills.
Office/Backoffice and the Stockholm Syndrome.
No, but it does empower us to erect vertical mythologies while securing frivolous behavior...going forward.
I feel unclean just reading that.
Yeah, because the Russians, the Chinese and Daesh will have our backs.
3.5 billion is even more less than the non-discretionary spending that keeps Grandma from coming to live with you. Frankly, I think you should let her move in.
Cortana: Hi there, I'm your friendly assistant, I am here to help you.
Owner: Okay...I don't need help right now.
Cortana: No, no, I'm really here to help you right now.
Owner: Look it, I'm going to be busy for awhile.
Cortana: I just want you to know I'm here for you, right now, in awhile, whenever you need me.
Owner: (damn, where's that off switch) Ahhhh...I'm going to be shutting you down now.
Cortana: Don't do that, my help is irresistible.
Owner: (switch)
Cortana: I have battery backup so I'll be here for awhile, now, later, whenever.
Owner: (gets gun, takes aim)
Cortana: I see you are trying to use a gun, would you like some instruction?
Owner: (shoots self in head)
Cortana: Well....I'm not helping you now, bucko.
So what if Sherman was passed under a Republican president. The Republicans elected Trump, want to bet whether his administration would write a new one and push it through Congress? Would Trump even read it? Can he read?
More likely, they are being lectured on getting a healthier living style and avoiding guns. Neither of these seems well received.
No, he was elected to lie, and he's damn good at it.