Archive for the ‘In the news’ Category

… east of Java

Monday, August 10th, 2009

I had not realized that the anniversary of Krakatoa’s eruption comes up later this month.

Some impressive photos at the link … they think it may be getting ready to erupt again.

My blood runs cold

Thursday, August 6th, 2009

My memory has just been sold.

My last duty station in the Navy was Antigua. I should see if I still have my map of the island anywhere. Antigua wasn’t as lush as some of the other islands, but it was still an interesting place to be. You know, it’s too bad nobody had a Mackeson at the beer summit – it would have given me another silly Obama-Antigua link. Mackeson had a series of brief, somewhat suggestive radio ads playing when I was stationed there, and I still recall one of them: imagine a sultry female voice with a Caribbean accent saying, “Men, drink Mackeson. My man gets some every day.”

Ah, they don’t make ’em like that, anymore.

This is scary

Monday, August 3rd, 2009

Others have already written about problems with the Cash for Clunkers program.

Now The Anchoress points out a problem (video at link) with the website for the program: the click-through agreement to use the site notes that a computer used to access the site becomes the property of the federal government!

The actual language used is, “This application provides access to the DoT CARS system. When logged on to the CARS system, your computer is considered a Federal computer system and is the property of the U.S. Government. Any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorized CARS, DoT, and law enforcement personnel, as well as authorized officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign.”

Is this a violation of the Fifth Amendment? I don’t see what the “public use” would be, and I’m unaware of any compensation. How about the Fourth Amendment?

True, it says, “When logged on,” as opposed to “Once logged on,” which implies that your computer is government property only while you’re on the site. However, is there a persistent state change anyway? Once your computer becomes a Federal computer system, does it automatically become a private computer again when you leave the site, or must you take explicit steps to make it a private system again?

If your computer belongs to the government, even if only for the time you’re using the site, they can install software onto it, can’t they? After all, it’s their computer … right? Keyloggers, spyware, and rootkits, anyone?

I’m not sure if I’m hoping that there is just another wet-behind-the-ears, out-of-control junior lawyer behind this, who will be reversed as soon as a grown-up finds out about it, or if this is actually a planned policy of the Obama administration. If the first is the case, then it’s evil, but more in the sense of “Obama’s people don’t have enough handle on what they’re doing to prevent evil from being done.” If it’s the second, then it’s EVIL – no ifs, ands, or buts.

How long before this language spreads to other government websites? Raise your hands, everybody who can guarantee that their computer has nothing on it that violates any regulation pertaining to use of government computers. And, given that information may be provided to officials of foreign agencies, guarantee that you won’t run afoul of laws in some other country.

You know, if we had actual journalists in the mainstream media, they’d be all over this like white on rice.

Only the ephemeral is of lasting value

Monday, July 27th, 2009

I ran across that as a quote some years ago, and it stuck with me because of the antinomy. It also came to mind when I read this article.

The Hazards of Gambling

Monday, July 20th, 2009

The Cunning Plan: Go to the dog track with sufficient money to bet on every possible winning combination.

The Anticipated Result: Profit!

What could possibly go wrong?

This reminds me of a Colorado lottery jackpot some years ago … you had to choose six numbers in the range from 1 to 42 to win. If I remember correctly, the cards that you used for selecting your numbers had eight rows of five numbers, and a ninth row with the last two numbers. In the drawing in question, the numbers in each corner of the layout were drawn, along with two others that fit into an obvious and fairly regular geometric pattern.

Because the pattern was fairly regular and obvious, more than one person had the winning numbers. I couldn’t verify this with a web search, but I believe that seventeen winners shared a ten million dollar jackpot. Given the dollar amount in question, I don’t believe that any of the winners were given the annuity option; I think they were all required to take cash. They didn’t get that much, because the cash prize is the amount it would take to buy an annuity for the listed prize amount, so they were all sitting around in the interview looking somewhat glum while saying that they were happy things turned out that way.

I imagine the British couple at the dog track had the same reaction (immediate glee followed by disappointment) to their dog track escapade. They’re worse off, however, since they actually suffered a loss, which the lottery winners didn’t.

Want a stimulus plan that stimulates the economy?

Sunday, July 19th, 2009

Look back to what George Bush did in 2003. Bizblogger compares the Bush and Obama stimulus plans from one year prior to implementation to six months after implementation.

It’s surprising how similar the initial conditions are, and how different the outcomes are (but only if you don’t understand economics, which appears to be a category that includes the Democrats in Congress).

A Day To Remember

Sunday, July 19th, 2009

It was forty years ago today that Teddy Kennedy went for a swim. Would that his passenger had survived, rather than him. He’d probably be remembered more fondly, and the country would be better off.

Oh, yes, we’ll be more popular and respected now

Wednesday, July 15th, 2009

It’s all this smart diplomacy – spurn the handshake of an ally (scroll down), then shake the hand of … well, not an ally.

Wednesday Weirdness

Wednesday, July 15th, 2009

Jeff Atwood documents the slide into tastelessness exhibited by advertising for an online game. I remember seeing all of those ads, but I didn’t notice that they were all for the same game.

Can there be tasty tastelessness? That’s what human-flavored tofu would appear to be. What’s the market for that, anyway? Vegetarian zombies?

Does your cat go after the mice in your (home) office? Get a kitty inbox so you can get work done. After all, workplace safety is very important.

I’ve heard that smoking is a filthy habit that costs too much money, but twenty-three quadrillion dollars? I guess this is how the Democrats are planning to fund their new healthcare plan.

Conspiracy theorists ahoy! Because of the lack of documentation on President Obama’s background, an Army major fought deployment to Afghanistan on the basis that Obama was not legally the Commander-in-Chief. His orders have now been revoked, and his attorney, Orly Taitz, is claiming that because the Army hasn’t defended its position in court, it must be unable to defend it.

“Do you know what this means?” Taitz asked in a telephone interview with Military.com Tuesday, about an hour after hearing from Maj. Stefan Cook, the officer fighting his deployment to Afghanistan. “It means the Obama administration has blinked. They have no cards to play with. The moment I filed a lawsuit, they didn’t even fight!”

“Can you imagine what are the consequences? This is disastrous” for the administration, she said. “We’ll have no military. Because anytime any Soldier, any Sailor, any Airman does not want to follow any orders, all he has to do is call an attorney and say ‘I don’t want to follow this order because I question the legitimacy of the commander in chief.’ “

Feeling stimulated yet?

Wednesday, July 8th, 2009

There are already calls for another stimulus bill, because the first hasn’t been too effective. Why hasn’t it? A. J. Strata has a big hint here.

The bottom line: in order to have an effective stimulus (monetary or physical), you have to hit hard enough and fast enough to have a noticeable effect. Since the first stimulus bill was a government programs package, rather than an actual stimulus bill, very little of the money has been used yet, so no stimulus has occurred, nor is one likely to.