Cow007 (735705) writes ""The U.S. Debt Crisis from the Founders Perspective is republished with permission of Stratfor." A worthwhile read for a little perspective. "...I think the founders would have questioned the prudence of our current debt. They would ask if it were necessary to incur, and how and whether it would be paid back. They would also question whether economic growth driven by debt actually strengthens the nation. In any case, I think there is little doubt they would be appalled by our debt levels, not necessarily because of what it might do to the economy, but because of what it does to the national character. However, because they were moderate men they would not demand an immediate solution. Nor would they ask for a solution that undermines national power.
As for federally mandated health care, I think they would be wary of entrusting such an important service to an entity they feared viscerally. But they wouldn't have been fanatical in their resistance to it. As much as federally mandated health care would frighten them, I believe fanaticism would have frightened them even more.
Cow007 (735705) writes "Here's the question nobody seems to be talking about in earnest: do they really NEED to do this. All of the powers been developed for gathering information are they able to accomplish their stated goal without it. isn't it really a matter of analyzing intelligence they have that is the issue? I tend to lean in some ways towards a yes answer for that question. However intelligence analysis is not something to be under estimated. When looking back over the events of 9/11 it became clear that the government had the information necessary to be able to prevent the attack or know about it in advance.
Does the cost-benefit ratio of this surveillance to infringement on freedom truly pan out when were talking about terrorism? The founding fathers would probably say no, however in situations where there's a possibility of terrorists acquiring acquiring CBRN weapons this is a difficult question.
In calculating this cost-benefit ratio one would have to take into account the possibility of this actually happening. However the most concerning situation would one where terrorists used biological weapons. Such attacks would be much more cost-effective than building a crude nuclear device or using chemical weapons since it's fissile materials are hard to come by and prohibitively expensive as are radiological materials suitable for building a dirty bomb. It is also notable that chemical weapons are difficult to disperse effectively and require a larger amount of material. By far the smallest amount material needed for an attack would be biological in nature.
If someone were to distribute a lethal, transmittable and weaponized virus we would be talking about fucking Moonraker level damage to human life.
I don't know if you remember but it was talked about in the media that the NSA was going to do "a mop up operation" after 9/11. The goal of this procedure was to go back through their databases and whatever stored information they had in the files to extract information such as phone calls regarding this event. They were in fact able to extract phone calls probably talking about the operation on 9/11. For example a phone call using code words such as the wedding is a go etc. I developed the opinion that it would have been possible for the intelligence community, properly coordinated could have analyzed the intelligence they already and been able to prevent the attacks or at least have some information about them being a possibility.
A big problem with having more intelligence means that you have more intelligence to sort through. This is reflected by the NSA's efforts to be able to analyze large amounts of information. Nevertheless this is a trade-off.
What do you think? Did the NSA and other government agencies really need all the tools that they been developing to be a will to adequately execute their mission?
In regards to encryption it is definitely a system of very low cost method to be a will to make it very difficult for others to be able to decipher information. Should the NSA undermine encryption standards be provided with keys for them or two at the old-fashioned way- hard way?
I have been thinking for a long time that for the NSA to properly do their job they would have to be able to decrypt communications. So much so in fact that the NSA would seem like a nearly irrelevant body without this capability. I think that they must be using quantum computers or heavily developing them to be able to do this. Evidence of seems to suggest that they have not fully achieved this capability as of yet as evidenced by the continued need to undermine encryption standards or circumvent them.
The problem with using quantum computers to pick up messages within data that is theoretically impossible to distinguish from random data and streams of random data due to encryption circuits that are continuously loaded.
I joke that if one is using quantum computers to find messages in data that may contain random data or actual encryption then decrypt they will always find exactly the messages they are looking for:P" top
Cow007 (735705) writes "With all the talk of lack of infrastructure for wireless charging a standards based solution is indicated. Perhaps Wireless USB; works with the same protocol layer and gives the device within range a USB connection and power. Older devices having adapters. Useable for devices that would use USB but not for cars, etc. It seems a perfect idea for phones, imput devices and all thoes other USB powered/ connected devices. Read IEEE..." Link to Original Source top
There has been a few stories in the media lately linking biodesel production to the hike in grocery food prices and a grim prediction of a worldwide food shortage as greater amounts of corn and other agricultural products are used to produce the fuel. The best alternative is is to use hemp to produce it. By some estimates 1 acre of hemp which grows really fast will produce about 300 gallons of biodesel from hemp oil. Seems that hemp is the most productive biomass energy source in existence and developing this resource is a matter of national security, lets get talking about this and make it happen. Everyone will benefit.
Cow007 writes | more than 8 years ago
When I used to stay in hotel rooms in Portland I ended up doing some pretty creative things in order to maintain an internet conection. I am a smoker you see and the WIFI signal on the higher up smoking floor was no good. So i ended up suspending 15 stories above the ground: 1 802.11b to Ethernet adaptor with power cord, 1 Airport express wireless base station with power cord and 1 6 inch ethernet patch cable. This arrangment offered the benifit of a wifi antenna that could bounce the signal to where it was needed as well as provide firewall and lan. The connection was secured with WPA Personal. This arrangement worked well in many situations and I ended up taping the rig together for quick deployment and soon started using it in coffee shops to have a secure lan layerd under the existing one. This offered the benifit of being able to wirelessly communicate with other clients without putting a load on the main network as well as maintain a high level of security by layering additional protocols.
The point of this is that I would like to put the idea out there to have a small 802.11 to rj45 adaptor that is basicially an antenna on one end and an ethernet plug on the other. The device would draw its power from the ethernet jack thus eliminating any unneccicary cables.
There may already be a product like this and if so let me know. But if not this seems like a really good idea, feel free to use it.