Without Normative statements, CAN I come to a moral decision?

I have been told that Normative thinking mal-appropriates intellectual freedom. Normative statements are thought to be bad in psychological circles.

This is (A-normatively) both good and bad.

It is good, because I learn a great deal from exploring all the branching binary moral trees that develop as I let my intellect run woolly-wild in search of boundaries to check it.

It is bad, because those who deplore "Normativism," (in all its abusive forms,) review me as BOTH indecisive AND abusive. BOTH indecisive when I do not come to a moral decision and act, AND abusive when I do, early or late.

I regard this, at the very least, as a loss of freedom.

My question is this: Are these Psychologists documenting the fruits of all the investigation that this [in my opinion excessive] overhead of moral computation yields? I ask this question because many pursuits are justified in the name of research.

In Physics and Computational exploration, Research is a hack; attempting the impossible is a waste of time and money [together with the other resource factors of intellectual production.] - M.E.

If the moral dilemmas and happenstances predicted by this new and freer view of Moral Values actually occur in nature at frequencies of probability that exceed 1.25 x 10E-10 [the smallest useful probability for human application,] then they _must_ be documented for us to even have a bite at the apple of observation [logically speaking; this is not solely normative.]

I suppose that if we can NEVER observe them, then we can NEVER make a normative evaluation of them. Sadly, guilt can still be conceived, even if there is no preceptor to perceive moral law-breaking.

I am more concerned that this paralyzing assault on my system of moral navigation [replete with moral compass, moral grounds, moral values, moral standpoints and, for me at least, moral VIEWpoints,] may ask me to allow for a great many more things to be possible than those we can observe in Nature.

Take for example the old adage:

Why won't an Authentic Texan be caught DEAD in a Wolsey?

The authoritative answer is: Because you've got to CATCH one to kill him, and they take their hats of to die OUT OF PURE RESPECT!

I can contrive a situation in which an Authentic Texan is actually caught dead in a Wolsey as follows:

He is actually wearing a Wolsey. I catch him in a football field sized man-trap of a net, but he is alive in the middle, all unsuspecting, and has not taken off his hat at the same time as he has not yet triggered the mechanism. I then dispense with formalities, and double-tap him in the head with a long-arm, triggering the mechanism before his lifeless body hits the turf.

Magic has occurred: He is demonstrably "caught," in a state of DEAD, with his Wolsey still ON!

I don't worry about scenarios like this. They just don't happen in nature, and the moral games the Psychologists ask me to play, attempting to accommodate ALL POSSIBLE moral possibilities, eventuate moral emasculation.

More fun with "Perception is Reality." (9/10ths good:)

To use the test of perception, I ask the question "does this appear..."

"It's not WHAT you know, it's WHO you know!"
Hmmm... he doesn't _appear_ to know anything, but then he doesn't _appear_ to know anyone IMPORTANT either: can you REALLY tell, just by _looking_?

"Words have meaning!"
Do words _appear_ to have meaning? You simply cannot evaluate them superficially. This pithy saying is demonstrably not TRITE!

"Location, Location, Location!"
Does it _appear_ to be a good location?

"It's the Economy, stupid!"
Does it appear to be the economy?

"Appearances can be deceiving!"
Do these appearances _appear_ to be deceiving?
.
.
.

From this experiment, I guess I conclude that the phrase "Perception is Reality," makes a test of relevance to an individual. If his perception is superficial, an individual will be satisfied with superficial appearances. Since we ALL specialize in one way or another, ANY _large_ audience will be satisfied with a superficial explanation of a problem of even Byzantine complexity, as long as the subject is not one in which they _specialize_.

Verbal "sleight of hand," (slight of mouth?) becomes necessary for Politicians to justify even GOOD decisions when they are counter-intuitive. If incompetents mistake the exigency of "sleight of hand," for a license to lie, they will become subject to the oldest Political truism I know.

I attribute Abraham Lincoln (Honest Abe,) and I misquote for humor.

"You can keep ALL the people happy _some_ of the time, and you can keep _some_ of the people happy ALL of the time, but you can't keep ALL the people happy ALL the time!"

"Now is the winter of our discontent!" - Winston Churchill.

The Value of a conversation - an unsent letter

The following letter will remain unsent. It refers to tee-shirts. The design had a Republican RW&B elephant facing a Democrat RW&B donkey on the front, with the caption "Opponent is the dictionary antonym for Partisan," on the reverse in creative fonts. I printed up the tee-shirts and tried to give one to a friend. She pointed out that a partisan was a friend, and an opponent merely a foe. My idea of opponent politics as an antonym for partisan politics may be "romantic" but is not supported in the language of today. I cannot reproduce the white space of the printed copy here in cyberspace - I can be done, by my HTML is not up to it :-)

The White House Attn: David Plouffe 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Robert Johnson [address deleted] 01/18/2009 Dear Mr. Plouffe: I enclose a campaign Tee design that I developed out of the observation that I have weak party affiliations. It is literally the day after inauguration day, and as a citizen I have had no opportunity to evaluate President Obama as a leader. Coming from the standpoint that, as an American Citizen, it is to my advantage that ALL American Presidents do well, I use these presents to certify my goodwill before there is any opportunity for disagreement. While I qualify as swing vote (I voted AGAINST McCain because I did not think he could bring the GOP to heel in face of much needed change - his Maverick credentials and maturity notwithstanding,) I usually identify Republican. By examining the enclosed Tees, you may understand that I feel that Republicans are guilty of being too "partisan." To understand the "opponent" concept, it may be helpful to consider sports "rooting." In NFL Football, one is expected to "root, root, root, for the home team - if they don't win it's a shame..." similar to Baseball (the great American Pastime.) This is the Partisan practice, and a valid paradigm for applauding. The contrasting view is illustrated by European Soccer, where all attendees applaud superior efforts, without particular regard to Mascot and team. This correlates to the Opponent practice. In the Political arena, Opponent practitioners usually achieve their accomplishments in bi-partisan efforts where they "reach out across the aisle." While this is regarded as anti-gridlock by the polity, the opponent practitioners are usually viewed as potentially disloyal when evaluated as an ideologue. For their part, Partisans have more accomplishments, but disappear in the solidarity of Party, and "never" receive public accolades. In a related observation, there are Left-Wing liberals in both parties, but the greater proportion of them, affiliate Democrat. In the same way, I estimate that of the available Opponent practitioners, the greater proportion of them affiliate Democrat as well. Your reply will encourage me to request latitude to present the same design and explanation to a potentially less charitable audience (the GOP) - in a bi-partisan way. I hope to also use the opportunity to share an untested idea to differentiate Liberal/Conservative, starting from the definition of "liberal," that appeals to the Latin "Liber," freedom or liberty. I hope that President Obama will accomplish much of his Party Platform while in office. Thank you for your consideration. Yours Sincerely, (Robert Johnson)

Free Speech is RESPONSIBLE speech;

I've thought about it, and I'd like to return, and hold the author of the Baraketology "publicity move" responsible.

Bracket-ology assigns Scientific Value (with associated virtue,) to the bracket predictions of Analysts.

Barak-et-ology cloaks the bracket predictions of our current POTUS with like gravity.

This is why it appeared to be self-promotion in the eyes of some. To others it was disparaging,

...but not against their preferences. "Bracketology is non-scientific? Barak Obama is superstitious, in the religious, sense, and I do not MIND the assertion that he is unscientific."

An excellent prognosticator who _could_not_be_wrong_ would have difficulty meeting that standard of evaluation. The further POTUS goes without a miss, the farther up he climbs the figurative stairs to Haman's Gallows [Esth 3:4 - Eth 7:10; see also Book of Crib, Reflexive 6:6.] As a human being, he'll eventually make a mistake. I don't mind... the PR gaff is no worse than merely that, either.

I respect him. You may have enjoyed a similar experience to my own. By shared ideology or moral agreement, you've respected both the man AND the office of POTUS simultaneously. If you have not, please see me after class. If you are merely looking for an individual who has not, to contradict my opinion of our current POTUS, I'll enjoy the irony of political endeavor's difficulties, until I lose respect, or you gain the same.

On fertile minds and their occasionally odiferous offspring;

Fog - Carl Sanberg

The fog comes
on little cat feet.
It sits looking
over harbor and city
on silent haunches
and then moves on.

A Kitten - Evan Gross

The problem with a Kitten is that,
eventually it becomes a Cat,
at first wants to play,
then do nothing all day,
sitting around getting all fat.

Fucking with peoples' heads - Moi

The problem with fucking with peoples' heads is that,
eventually their fertile imaginations come up with theories...
"up with which you will not put!"

A Hell joke;

This guy is making an informed decision on Hell and Heaven, (on the advice of his Barrister,) so he goes down to Purgatory and takes the Demo tour. It consisted of three representative rooms.

In the first room, all participants were REQUIRED to assist in documenting tedium in its Dickensian superlative experience and manifestation.

In the second room, self loathing was being eternally gratified by ENFORCED self-flagellation.

The third room was populated by fools and vagrants, standing around in 6 inches of bull shit, telling jokes about Hell.

The man established that it was the same Devil running all three establishments. On contingency basis, he applied for priority placement in Room Three. As soon as he left, Satan came in an cracked the whip and shouted: "All right you lot. Management Tour is OVER. Back to standing on your HEADS... and no more jokes about HELL!"

Your taste is all in your Mouth: Baraketology;

"Spin" is a word synonymous with the corporeal nature of appearances in Politics. "Appearance is reality," is a mantra that has afforded me some humor in my time: "There's NO such _thing_ as BAD publicity!"
"Does this _APPEAR_ to be GOOD publicity?"
If I'm creative and it's still pertinent I'll exert myself to append some more.

In Basketball, "spin" is primarily employed gyroscopically to balance the ball on one finger for theatrics - someone once recommended smashing vertically down on the ball so balanced on the finger of a romantic rival :-) He wasn't in the mood for "spin."

The newly minted coin of flattery "Baraketology," telegraphs pointedly to me that no one person yet rules POTUS' PR...I don't think Plouffe really failed to anticipate that some would view the term as "confirmed self promotion, brazen and unabashed." Someone, somewhere is hockey checking Plouffe.

I think Politics' recent Jackie Robinson was badly served that day... it is to the advantage of all Americans for ALL American Presidents to do well.

In his day, Mr. Robinson faced ethnic hatred, brazen and unabashed: he was "beaned" first pitch if possible first time at the plate at every game until he'd "paid his dues." Baseball Stats had been popularized to level a player-trading arena early in the century. When public sentiments were so badly offended by the prominent trade of "The Bambino" from the Red Sox to the Yankees, Stats had been highlighted to even up comparisons; when Jackie Robinson was beaned, he was sent to first base, "hit by pitch." As such, "Whitey" sacrificed himself to a _stellar_ "on base percentage," just to mollify racial controversy. I'm not enough of an aficionado to know, but I am curious how the new Bill James stats system would have treated a non-ethnic player continually flinching from the opposing pitcher's collaboration with team orders.

POTUS has not yet accommodated insiders by becoming subject to spin in solidarity to poor Washington performance. I think it is tolerant of him to allow a pratfall in what is otherwise his favored personal constituency. He LIKES Basketball - "spin" is to no avail in the teamwork this sport teaches.

I'm personally moved to observe that, while I evaluated the move as a lose-lose PR-wise, the author of it certainly silenced me - I can't even say WHY I thought it was so stupid. The author really SHOULD get credit -

Free Speech is RESPONSIBLE speech

Truth, Justice and the American way - a Primer;

We have all heard the expression "He's just priming the pump." A comment like that is generally offered in warning that the specified individual expects to obtain far more in compensation than s/he invests. It makes no accounting of work; allow me to explain.

When you have standing water that has to be "shipped," it is usually urgent to alleviate the situation - it is a distress. If you put a pump leader down into the water and start the reciprocating valve, the boot will draw no pressure because the air involved expands and contracts, as well as flowing freely around the otherwise permissible allowance that tolerates movement at all. To gain purchase for mechanical advantage, it is necessary and proper to pour water from a preexisting supply to fill the line; once vacuum occurs (when the pump attempts to draw,) more water flows than was invested and the distress of people, having a standing lake or a displaced pool, can be answered.

The reason of our common warning is that the principle of pumping (like all else) can be abused. Even a spring fed well can only fill at a finite rate, and pumps are made to reliably exceed this, or they would be archeological oddities. When a friend or stranger offers up, "He's just priming the pump," he certifies an opinion that the operator - so far from being an incompetent charlatan - is a threat to reasonable usage, and has a slash and burn intention toward the resource.

Warnings are epidemic in American Society since the litigious 80s. The only advantage to be had from the cacophony of alarms is to turn them upon adversaries and use them as _characterizations_. They are unnecessary so often that the cry of "Fire" in a BURNING crowded theater is likely to obtain a callous audience; we are so fatigued with warnings that hyperbole is a diet.

Sylogistically, (under these conditions,) more warnings are not in order; what IS in order is difficult to say.

If we have a well primed pump, we need (procedurally,) to attend to the next priming, but on a schedule that employs such benefit as may be had from the hemorrhage. Put out a fire; irrigate a farm - don't pull the hose precipitously from the source and blow the high-turning engine unless emergency defines the situation and this answers the emergency appropriately. If there's enough water, don't neglect duty; just "don't be a _hero_!"

The pump is capable of work as advertised; what is needed is strategy to govern strong pumping tactics. My lament is that the characterization is so oft untrue that employment cannot be promised on a schedule - stories of primed pumps abusing things abound, but upon arrival the plundering fire department is always elsewhere.

As an anchor to my initial intention, I want to prime the pump for those who cannot articulate exactly what they mean by activities Unamerican.

Germans engineer, Chinese are patient to a fault. The British maintain appearances in face of all disaster and Americans innovate. To fail at innovation is not to fail to be American - it is simply to be excelled on your own turf.

To be Unamerican is harder to enumerate, and so I prime the pump. To define (I've cited before,) is to give rules that when unbroken cannot fail to answer, no matter what the appearance. Otherwise we list; I am articulate and even _I_ have trouble. My list is single thus far. I close by listing the one thing I can put my finger on.

It is Unamerican to impede illumination of truth in pursuit of Justice.

Add acid to water, not water to acid;

By feeling embarrassed for religion, against all reason, I feel that my apology can assist others. Superstition is in a class with Religionists that Numerology enjoys with Mathematicians and Astrology obtains in the regard of Astronomers. The Bible is not science, but as a self-consistent source for instructive axioms, it excels at self consistency when properly subjected to semiotics.

Semiotics IS a science. The codes of Hammurabi and Emperor Draco had content but were poorly regarded for their instruction. If semiotics make Hammurabi instructive, do they injure intellect when applied to other sources? Christians are humiliated into the humble attitude of students; they learn more than you expect.

Attending on my subject line, if Politics added to Bible is explosive and repugnant to the affections, Bible added to Politics generates a fair temperature, but deescalates tensions when received charitably and proffered in fairness of mind.

To call the Bible "water," is self consistent with their paradigm. If Politics is vitriolic, it is acerbic enough. Call it "acid" as an analogy for torture, and observe the purpose of diluting acid to govern application. I'll suggest that the other experiment has finally been completely tried; historically the results of the old one were not more disastrous than today.

Poe chose eloquently when he named his story "The Pit and the Pendulum."

When Agendas collude;

This arena, as I need to observe it, is not a religious vehicle - that is another audience. However, the fact that certain topics are not completely agreeable here, should adequately acquaint the mind with the idea that in THAT group of topics, there are things that are likewise not agreeable - I stipulate that Skinny is somewhat more restrictive than Phoenix; custom limits Skinny to discussions initiated by and from the Bible.

I knew of an individual that staunchly held that God was too reserved (in station and schedule) to be thought to be even trying adequately to communicate with his alleged creation. Telepathy?

I'd like to address those who agree as follows (in context of Governmental service as well:)

God and Satan BOTH obtain just powers by the consent of the governed.

When communicating with you people as a polity:

Is God attempting to obtain your consent (without assaulting your moral right to choose and liberty to disobey,)

OR

Is God being sarcastic?

Does he have a right?

Corrected link; Slashdot saves sites for just this reason;

The updated content is Nunn / Hamre report. For those who MUST have a URL that is not subject to reorganization for convenience, I've heard of an option - it would be a project for me to produce the relevant info - it exists. I observe that document in question is still not exhaustively searchable - Search "Voluntary," see that it doesn't "hit" and then view the first sentence of the third paragraph on the second page.

Pick your own word, and find another example to show that it isn't easy or quick... it's what mathematicians call "trivial."

I'll contact WIKILEAKS to let them know I hit them in a PR driveby - they RULE CORRECT that, GIVEN the CORRECT TITLE, THE manuscript PDF is so widespread that it CANNOT BE FALSIFIED.

Title: Securing Cyberspace for the 44th Presidency: A Report of the CSIS Commission on Cybersecurity for the 44th Presidency.

Egg on my face - NO promised JPG! ANTI-CLIMAX!

I can substantiate that I use twice saved picture data to attempt a forensic value to my observations occasionally, but this one I cannot prove. When I do so, I use the print screen feature of DOS, and paste in MSPaint. I then save the result to disk in one format, and turn around and "save AS" and specify a competing format. Jpgs save space, but bmps are hard to tamper with. Tifs attempt to store warts and all -RAW- data.

I apologize for being indeterminate about Wikileaks - they usually expect Journalists and persons in fear for their lives to be "on the line."

Below was relevant to a discussion of when a scheduled maintenance was done - As I recall I was not satisfied with Monday afternoon, so soon after the weekend, and yet mysteriously not at night :-)

Apologies I cannot reach back into history and show this one theatrically - For Court, a judge would accept the word of a data retrieval specialist that the pics were there - discussion as to whether they were the product of Photoshop and an admittedly creative imagination would follow.

I guess I figured this one would never really matter, and deleted language subject to misinterpretation and embarrassment :-(

A way to Evaluate The prospective Law Fairly;

My memory may deceive me, but I think I also wrote on this matter as well. The content may have gone un-ferreted away. My electronic rat-pack is occasionally unwieldy and hard to collect according to a single organizational convention - the more conventions, the more entropy - organization fugit:-)

The reason that the difficulty of searching the relevant .PDF is IMPORTANT, is that competitors in the Senate and House may have been mislead that language offensive to their agendas and preferences was totally absent - it may have merely been a part of the un-indexed portion. It's actually easier to tell a computer to index exhaustively than to half-assed do the job; Sen. Nunn isn't out of the woods yet.

If he didn't know, it's a little like Reagan's VP and Iran/Contra - he's damned for incompetence if he didn't know, and he's damned for collusion if he did. It is sufficient to know that the truth was hidden for the evidence to be politically damning.

I'll take a moment to note that I'm personally on board with Ollie in re Contras specifically - we can't let ANYONE emasculate America by casting psoitive mobility of purpose away for temporary political gain; We need our Military element of surprise.

The document itself needs to be evaluated by a team of individuals who communicate well; they'll have their best chances for efficient speed if both sides are forthcoming about their preferences. Points in the Report prepared for POTUS 44 should agree throughout. A good outline should do it; the table of contents would be helpful, but making your own outline, and then going back to compare is more reliable. I've had time enough to do it since Christmas last year, but truly "The urgent exercises tyranny over the important" - some of the stuff I've been into since then has even been important on it's own.

Once you have an outline, you ask if the Report is artful political double talk, or somebody did the heavy lifting and developed a conclusion. Then you use detectives and blackmail to find the relevant drawer we imagine is there somewhere, and compare the contents to the Report: It's no good to say "We didn't know about the report we made up our OWN Law..." The report has been "in the works" since 1999. Please lend your voice to mine if you have not yet written the House Committee on Unamerican Activities (Washington 20007.) Be substantive if possible.

NO ONE is EVER satisfied one hundred percent with any law at the time. History mellows our perceptions of them, and tests them for their merits. In fact no law can POSSIBLY satisfy all constituencies, so the final test of the language of the anticipated item will give important attention to fairness:

The Law itself should be written according to the agreed upon outline that best describes the report. No one writing the (potentially) Self-Consistent Non-double-talk oriented in-the-public-interest Report could single handed direct its language and outcome. The truth has it's way even with Politicians, and these were public servants. When the Report has been rendered substantive and self-consistent, a law that fulfills the requirements above would certifiably be worthy of Washington's attention. I'm not in favor of letting them off the hook. Make them admit defeat by failing passage if necessary. The system works, just not the way we WANT it to!

This isn't passive voice - I'm still looking!

I fixed it so you can just search "Nunn" for relevant material. Missing "sic"s may be ominous, but I'm tired; I'll get lazy later, and then it will be fatal. Meanwhile it's hard enough just to keep track of all the stuff that's correct.

I recently wrote friends as follows - the ink is still wet on the digital signature:-) Check as you would any patriot?

Those who might actually look at the text limit my dist list; otherwise, it sounds substantive.

compare with unabstracted paper by the Congressional Research Service. Slashdot's 5000 six sided dice rolled a "The first patriot act came out too d*** fast to have been an individual's effort, and we don't believe individuals actually certified the contribution each of his own therefore [breath here,] we think NSA politicos have a copy of similar ammo for the cannon in a drawer awaiting catastrophic excuse." I'm still digging for facts to cite the wisdom of the masses, but these seem exculpatory therefore subject to discovery... :-(

Rob(ert.)

--
Money doesn't make the world go around; if it does, where were all the bankers when it started? _God_ was there back then, and he's the one that made it happen!

Another paper is here. Sen. Nunn has a school of International Affairs named after him. If he turns out up to scratch, I'll owe his person and political reputation BOTH an apology. Meanwhile, President Obama's DCIA is a public policy guy with an Institute of his own - I can't imagine two INSTITUTES cannot adequately check and balance one another.

Truth is the FIRST casualty of War.

Database Backup Politics;

Those who need permission for better backups or backup schedules may employ the following true story for bureaucratic allegory.

In 1989 the cutting edge hard drives of the day were characterized by a qualified HDD QA engineer in the following manner:

If you took one of THESE drives and blew it up the size of the earth, the read/write head could effectively be compared to a 747 flying along at 500 miles an hour... (pause for effect) 10 feet off the Ground!

This should justify your needed attentions to backups in scheduling and placement - off-site for fires and catastrophe is the rule. IF you are in an essential service, THEN have an identical model unit elsewhere, with treaty type unbreakable contract to prioritize processing in time of imported Live Free or Die Hard type "fire sale."

Priceless Mirrored RAID configurations are considered the world unapproachable best for terra-byte databases. I don't know what mirroring requires regarding data transfer rates, but a small conventional bomb would "take care" of MOST of these emplacements. 6280 BPI tapes make a serviceable alternative for those with real concerns. Know that the curvature of the earth is what indemnifies the entire internet against the EM pulse of a nuclear device, and make off site arrangements accordingly. Relational databases compete with turtles and tortoises for Olympic speed of backing up. Curse the dark at leisure, and light candle database choices accordingly. Don't ask for your tapes back; test them for read integrity if you are serious, and then save them - corrupting a backup system in advance of destroying your plant is an available strategy.

Know the terms "Incremental Backup" and "Batch Backup," and appear knowledgeable accordingly. If responsible for results, experiment with incremental restores as necessary. I do this between wars and pandemic contagions, for a comparative experience on "Ivan, it could be worse."

Relational databases Should STILL be regarded as indispensable for real-time queries - Google News Archive is a batch system - you cannot vary number of fields and content; this estimator by itself still does not guarantee that the database is fixed width - exigencies lead database creators, authors and managers to economize overhead in money, time and CPU seconds for this reason; a good measuring stick for asking the impossible is access time, speed, latency and/or data transfer rate.

I appear paranoid or compulsive about backups accordingly. My best critics occasionally tease that I am not paranoid enough - they have my best interest at heart :-)

For a reality check, a billiard ball blown up to the size of the earth has peaks higher than Everest, and chasms as deep as sea floor trenches, all over the place - if the drive surface is THAT smooth, I'm impressed, not fearful. Bearings and wobble are the main concern; dust or dirt causes early catastrophic failure.

NSA 03.19.2004 - Regarding Ashcroft response to Clinton Attorney General;

I searched my drive for "swieee" because this is what I devised to call my Pareto-reinvented-wheel concept before I discovered Sweden's "ISO." "Swieee" was not in the text of the message as ASCIII, and I was long in discovering it as the filename. I can now search UNICODE, and EBSDIC is not an XP affliction. See humor at end.

5/9/2004
For The NSA
Office Of Public Affairs
Washington, DC, 20505

Robert B Johnson
4030 Valley View Lane #137
Dallas, Tx [sic should be TX] 75244

To Each Concerned Party:

Early in the month of April, I wrote a letter to the Dept Of Justice, asking The Attorney General’s Office to educate me about issues concerning Microsoft and its status as a monopoly. In contemplating that issue, I began to wonder what would be the effect on our economy, were Microsoft to be broken up. Clearly the reason the Bush Administration would prefer not to break them up, is that they are critical to our economy. As such, I wondered if we could put the question in perspective as follows: If Microsoft were militarily attacked, would the effect on our economy be such that we stalled out? By contrast, if they are actually not so critical as we might believe by default, could we then re-evaluate the possibility of [sic] bring anti-trust legislation to bear on them again?

The reasons that this is a worthwhile exercise, is that at Microsoft, there are no doubt foreign nationals employed. At some point, we should ask ourselves, are we prepared to say with confidence that they have not written in Easter eggs as part of the system. An example of one would be to go to a win98 machine, and set the screen saver to “volcano.” It is clearly a harmless one, but establishes proof by exception that it is a possibility. As such, the un-anticipated problems of outsourcing to foreign soil might already be with us.

The solution that I would devise would not necessarily be easy. However, the kernel should be very attractive on its own merits. When IBM built its early PCs, they set standards that eventually became the IEEE. If we were to have an open standards Organization, such as SWIEEE, any [sic] programer or company could write to those standards, without any fear of Microsoft changing the standard to build in obsolescence. Microsoft would benefit from this by modularizing, by cutting out much bureaucracy, and the playing field would leveled for all competitors.

Along these lines, we can observe that much phone support has moved overseas to India. As such, they have become peace hostages, and this is not bad. However, we have inherited alliance with Pakistan, and if they engage India in conflict, we cannot come to Pakistan’s aid, with losing critical Tech Support functions. It would seem more sensible for the US to have her Phone Support in Pakistan, and for India and Pakistan to exchange peace hostages of their own.

I am very interested in any reply you might have,

Yours [sic] Sincerley,

Rob Johnson.

If all the other states start a township in a Texas desert, they can have a corporate headquarters, an answering machine and a PO Box there; then the 5ts would be FORCED to acknowledge them as independent entities - the 5ts would be reduced to peer participation, and the joke would be over :-(

The Problem of Evil PROVES: There is (not) NO GOD!

The World Turtle Fund has graciously contributed for the StFU to publish:

Before Congress made the first law they were all sinners. Then Satan said "Thou Shalt NOT surely die," and God became a paradox. Since there was no help for it now, Congress began passing laws, and sinners began committing crimes.

Now we must render judgment. The question is this:

Does Being a law-giver make you a criminal?

Fox Urine for Islamic Extremists;

Rabbits and cats will reliably aver an area that has been tainted with Fox Urine. Check me for my prediction that the following, publically posted will keep random Islamic Extremists from coming around. I can't predict their behavior when backed by the strength of numbers though... here you are:

If a Muslim makes himself approachable to me, I will teach him as follows:
1. Observe in good context that Koran/Islam have no precedent for forgiveness. This is not a one day process. Let it harden and solidify in their mind (particularly if the information is new to them,) until they are prepared to defend and apply it. They should fairly note that there is precedent for Mercy. By application, they have an option to treat me mercifully.
2. After [x] time, observe in passing that the salvation of the Muslim must be a works based salvation, invoking all the same pejorative remarks that Baptists have made about Church of Christ since Campbell (relatively recent by the chronological standards of their history.)
3. Again, execute [evolution/add time.] Point out that IF the Muslim was ever looking for forgiveness, this ought to be a very attractive quality of Christianity for him to contemplate.
4. If he ever “darkens your door” to study, begin in Luke. The dumbness of Zacharias has a parallel story in the historical account of Mohammed's life. At your discretion, note that Jesus and John (the Baptist) were cousins, that John fulfilled prophecy, and that Jesus was not involved in the paradox of self reference. At the crucifixion, this was the John that Jesus asked to take care of his mother after his death.
5. Hope for all good and prosperous spiritual results. If it becomes the case, that through dishonesty of the heart you must offend them, because they are not listening to any reasonable argument, while pressing their own points home disproportionately, or retaliating in a fashion that is not commensurate, do so freely as follows:
 Paul wrote, of no less personage than himself, “Though we, or an angel from heaven preach unto you any other doctrine than that which we have preached, let him be accursed.” Upon reviewing the statement and its reiteration drive home the point - Mohammed specifically said it was an angel (Gabriel by name.)

Points to know:
The Haddith is a kind of Biography of Mohammed's life. In it, the Muslim finds a blueprint by example of acceptable behavior.
1. It condones pre-pubescent marriage
2. It recounts his marriage to a daughter-in-law.
One view of the order of the Koran is that it is composed of longest chapters first, followed by successively shorter chapters. This accounts for difficulties in order.
Islam is designed as a Theocracy. The Worldwide Caliphate is defined as a goal of most Islamists. Islamic countries that have separation of church and state are; Pakistan, Turkey, Iran and Iraq. Iran has a Clergy that is very influential in affairs of state. Pakistan already has nuclear weapons and a delivery capability.
There is a cultural thing in the Middle East, abbreviated "take offense." The one's who abuse this live in fear of "being taken." The rest merely employ it in a face saving game like China, Canada and Washington D.C.

In a Pharisee/Sadducee divide, Islam has both Shia and Sunni adherents. Investigating the views of each on the afterlife ought to be excellent fuel for discussion.
In other news, whereas La Vay/La Vey Satanism is legal in US since 1966, the Islamic brand of “Yezidi” Satanism is not yet recognized. If you ever need to know that they exist, Yezidis know the Koran/Quran and they are different from the “Little Satan” (Israel,) and the “Great Satan” (US of A.) Finally, the fact that you do not know Koran/Quran as well as Yezidis do will prove that you are not Islamic if that misrepresentation becomes an issue.

I referred to 'fixing' games;

I think we are all adults here. "Fixing" a football game does not refer to repair or healing. It is often suspected, but practically can't be done to deliberated success.

The Vegas Odds makers attempt to predict psychology of people - the numbers are more likely to reflect their attempt to get (manipulate public opinion)people to evenly divide over the outcome. Statistical predictions govern their House offerings - think about it this way:

IF you can statistically predict _which_ team will win, AND the people _always_ evenly divide, so that the winning team never has too many people betting on it, THEN your profit is governed by the ratio produced when you figure how often you are right (percentage) and divide it by how much over clinets' bets [investment?] the House returns (also percentage.)

Odds don't make percentages, and statisticians who use percentages tumble to the game before they finish the first computation.

The Commissioner of football is interested in promoting popularity of the game, attendance at stadiums, and advertising revenues. Gambling keeps interest up... Players gambling corrupts the fairness. This he will predictably oppose - you just can't see it any other way if you love football. If ever anyone _does_ succeed in "fixing" a game, the first thing you'll hear is "the fix is in!" This will not be the villain bragging about his accomplishment - It will be Vegas, warning each other they have a potential liability - the statistical favorite isn't fairly opposed. The bookies will reply with the correct response if competent: "ALL bets are off." Then they will refund your bet, and burn the tokens. In this way, Commissioner of Football and Vegas odds makers have a kind of symbiosis. This should not be mistaken for camaraderie. For that, you have to play the game.

If you cannot abide Pro-ball because of hatred of the fix, the beauty of College ball is also the thing that snobs will use to pan it. It's provincial. Colleges will actively recruit the best that they can find, but they have to 'cherche' as the French would put it. The Pro-ball clubs have only to read a roster to look for likely suspects; college recruiters have to watch tape and attend High School games form border to border. When college games are fixed, it is usually the same way, but there are no Vegas Odds makers to kill the process. The human cost is ever more than mom wanted to pay - it's still better than war.

4th of July food

Hot Dogs have suffered from a phallic reputation as long as I have been alive. I smile, and think the King of England would surely have been offended back then. Statistical remarks upon their contents are usually a muted protest of cleanliness and its measurement or enforcement - I know dry cereal (frosted [corn] flakes, Wheaties etc,) suffer the same malady. The human immune system is equally remarkable, and this stuff is cooked (denatured) beyond recognition. Hot Dogs have a high fat percentage. This makes them good to the taste - measurement experts (connoisseurs?) call it SATIETY.

To correct a misconception: Eating sugar (going through the Kreb's Cycle) actually can make you fat. Eating fat doesn't necessarily do that - it might pass undigested through the gut. In like manner, eating genetically modified Corn won't likely affect my own DNA makeup. Short stalk wheat has made it "growable" in places in the world where nothing else would. I'll still complain about the latest application of American cow food. Our Corn doesn't taste good anymore. This may make for excellent competition to Brazil's cane ethanol, but let's face it; the first drought Brazil hits, we'll ALL be in for it. Fortunately these genetically engineered masterpieces are like mules - stop manufacturing, and you get the virile stuff right back, just like before you started jacking with it. They truly DO have seed banks (a concept borrowed from Joseph's accomplishments in Egyptian history if you ask me.)

Satiety measures satisfaction. Other than that, Hot Dogs remind me of the joke in the movie "Payback." It alludes to the fact that Chinese food has good satiety, but soon evaporates in the metabolism. I don't suppose it would starve a person - in fact it can compensate for a glutted or jaded appetite. Whatever the case I'll close with "Porter's" line.

"Beating you up is like kicking a _Chinaman's_ ass; two hours later, you want to do it again!"

How should a person shop; Why follow a recipe; (Likely a long one.)

The rule that governs my posting is that it should be "substantive to _my_ mind." This may explain my attention to the calendar. In an employment contract this is usually referred to a "creative."

Libraries have a system for finding books on a certain topic, called the Dewey Decimal system. Books _could_ be alphabetized... not so groceries. As such, I do not feel mis-used when Grocers organize their stores so that I can find what I need more often than not, with brands helpfully organized together for price comparison etc. The rules that you have to pass a lot of items as advertising when shopping for common one-item trips, or eye level charging of producers for shelf space are a curious optimization of capitalism. More cashiers at X-mas might actually improve matters, but you can't put ALL the impulse buys on the sucker aisle (right beside the register.)

In cooking the object is to de-nature; consider a breakfast egg. For meats, speed of cooking is controlled by heat; if you cook too fast (with higher temperature,) the surface of the meat burns, while center remains rare. The theatrics of changing from cut to cut, portion to portion, how it turns out is not for me - "well done" at all times for all cuts - "dry" is abuse.

In Chemistry the statement "Extent of subdivision increases rate of reaction," is represented as a law. This is true of sugars, and also applies in context of cooking a roast - how soft do you want your preparation to turn out? Potatoes cook slow - either put them in sooner, or slice to proportionally appropriate size. If you don't know how fast carrots cook, relative to potatoes, you begin to see why a recipe is such a piece of engineering.

When delivering a meal to the table, bringing all the dishes in at the same time to completion is more complicated than "fixing" a Football game - it indicates artifice and virtuosity - Chefs just care enough at a young enough age to not care about the homosexual reputation and try... if they are good, the primadonna thing is usually encouraged like ballerinas and opera singers... oh well ;-(

If I was a Pimp facing prosecution, I'd start feeding my whores. Oatmeal for breakfast, and Chicken Noodle soup with rice for dinner.

For best ad/ab-sorption mix grain, carb and legume, like PBJs

For lunch, a variety from the following list of recipes. [This affords the benefit of shopping from a list - list out the meals you intend to prepare, and then type up the names of each part as bought from store, whether grain of rice or packaged pre-prepared meal;]

Entrees:
BBQ pork chops (I personally like KC Masterpiece - Mesquite or Hickory)
For baseballs, I prefer Ohio made Wilson - otherwise, I try to be pragmatic about "product placements."
Shake and Bake Pork Chops
BBQ boneless skinless chicken; Boneless skinless chicken thighs are usually worth the price unless your preparer is hardened to physical labor.
ham hock and beans
crock pot roast as meal - actually, by itself a shoulder roast or chuck roast can be thrown in the bottom of a dry crock pot and turned on. Cuts can make variety, but not enough for a steady diet. I don't even know any other cuts for roast - Never try to make Chili for company accept with ground Round. Ground Sirloin will do for my personal though,
Roast beef sandwiches - mayo OR mustard - mix them for disciplinary purposes only.
Campbell's Pork n Beans - with ground beef - I find ground Chuck to be an acquired taste, but it is VERY economical.
Bush's Baked Beans, Maple and Original - they don't really make a bad one though.
Broccoli Tuna Helper with green pea supplement
Tetrazinni Tuna Helper
Creamy Pasta Tuna Helper
Fetucini Alfredo Tuna Helper for variety
Zatarain's (sp?) Dirty Rice Mix

soups:
Cream of - Mushroom, Broccoli, Chicken.
Tomato
Chicken noodle
Minestrone

Vegetables:
Green Beans from a can; I do not prefer frozen Green Beans - they have nutritional virtue of _some_ kind, but I am not sure what kind.
Fresh Asparagus Spears (circumcised ones have hard part removed ;-)
Fresh Broccoli - Note: If you cook broccoli like asparagus (scalded by boiling water in an open frying pan,) certain Chinese will regard your preparations as superior - I like it that way too.
Cauliflower
Baby carrots
Peas
potatoes; fried, hashed, mashed, baked, scalloped, soup w/ celery seeds.

Sandwiches:
Deli sliced is available (oddly enough) at the grocery store Deli; purchase cheaply by the pound. (It's easier to cook for a small group than two or one.)

When sandwiching - keep iceberg lettuce on hand. Otherwise, this is where fast food economy of scale beats grocery store economy of scale - FRESH VEGETABLES. Add the advantages of no preparation and no dishes - Clinton was not only a genius of popular opinion - Keynes probably agreed.

Sandwich cheeses are;
American by slice - cheese food by Kraft is usu good to.
Provolone
(Very) Sharp Cheddar - less sharp must be for cooking something.
Cheese Whiz
Squeezy Cheese for variety - smoked is good.

To break patterns of Variety, use a spicy Ethnic food - the original use of spices was as preservatives, and Mexico makes effective use of spices to cure the staple of beans of blandness as far as possible. Indian food is available at buffets if you want to give your whores a field trip.

Indian Breakfast foods
Idlies w/ Sambar
Dosai w/ Masala

South Indian Dishes
Rice and Dahl w/ Madras curry powder - pearl onions, baby carrots etc is a treat.
Chicken Curry
Kaima
Chicken Biriyani - bought not homemade (it's wedding food like - Minestrone soup. Best made in cafeteria style batches.)

North Indian Dishes
Never been to Northern India - they cook breads like we cook potatoes, and use it to wrap curries.

Oh well, time to stop fantasizing about a steady income - I'm off to rent 1982's "Night Shift," by Belinda Keaton (Michael's sister?) Henry Winkler and Shelley Long were from a different generation. They probably had to live on nothing but Ramen Noodles before THEY made it - waitressing tips good, and Winkler broke out at an early age. Hmm... maybe not after all.

A picture of Me, making a mistake:

I sent the following to nsapao.gov near March 16, 2008. The lesson I learned is at the end.

i'd rather pretend CIA doesn't know its business than write something like this to nsapao at nsa.gov. if i wuz trying to send you electronic info from zimbabwe (where much technical research goes on,) i'd still be looking to send you an attachment - i might not have the nerve to launch the blueprints for a new pipe threader off to that other address as a pdf attachment, or i might not think it was up their ally. what i WOULD do is go to sourceforge.net and download bcrypt and put the executable and attending dll file in windows backslash system32 folder. at that point bcrypt -r filename becomes an internal command, executable from a dos prompt. if i forget to put the -r, it wipes the source file off my system, leaving only the encrypted .bfe file. As a passphrase my favored choice would be the first 56 chars of the public key I cannot retrieve for nsapao at nsa.gov from http://keyserver.veridis.com:11371/search?q=cia%40cia.gov&searchformsubmit=Search
website. bcrypt only takes 56 chars, sooooo.... there really ought to be a way for black hat to contact you - a plurality of 'breakme.txt.bfe' might not be all you'd get. i realize that you already know how encrypt anything you seriously need to, so the whole e-mail from me ought to be superflous. i do not know why i am compulsive about this kind of thing.
CC nsapao at nsa.gov
CC dallas at fbi.gov

Mistake is this: If WE put OUR public key up there, THEY can put a FAKE key up there where ours should be. Then EITHER we get an important message we can't decrypt, OR they get the relevant message and catch the defector before we even hear about him. RSA is good enough for most things, but won't do to fight a war anymore.

I've thought about it and: A web form demands free submissions. An email address invites encrypted submissions to negotiate payment for passwords. If financial inducements are necessary, spies can send to NSA email. Otherwise, CIA has a web form that uses SSL - no password needed on either end, even though the browser takes the microscopic data-packs and duly encrypts before sending packets everywhere on the web in pieces, like postcards mailed all over town, all going to the same address in Podunk. You can TRUST that thing if you really think they need to know. The weak link is perennially people not the box.

things I've learned since then:
- If NSA thinks the public knows and can use bcrypt, they will take it away.
- A blue editors markup pen, like a blueprint will not photocopy. Hollywood may make better use of this than 'anybody.'
- a color laser printer can reproduce a letter completely in editor's mark-up powder blue.
- a color photocopier can defeat the editor's magic wand.
- You should be able to discern how far down the road to sell-out I go, by counting occurrences of the passive voice. I will make mistakes :-)
- a reliable hack to avoid automatons that by-pass Google and search "@" signs, is to use character-spelled-out-bracketed-by-spaces. Automatons can't recognize the similarity.
- Open OfficeGL from open source provides a (likely two-fish algorithm,) encryption for it's PDF export facility - it's in the 'security' tab when you save/export. Call it 'padlocked,' and you can actually thwart online copying and adoption of credit for your shit. You can't stop theft of telepathic kaleidoscope pictures. I rely on pig-latin to encrypt my telepathic shit, and lose the password regularly. Other people call this forgetting; memory is an open invitation to the Russians to steal prototypes and competition grade sarcasm.
- I can't reliably read minds or download Bulgarian blueprints. Numbers and letters are hard too. As a pilot program, I expect this means the Russians are hard to read that way too. I CAN reliably channel 12th century judicial figures.
- Nomenclatures vary even within conventions. Just because a thing is derived from a pattern doesn't mean it can be reversed. IE: Take the Quaran and select the 2nd letter from all words, and put these letters in a file. This is now a hash of the Quaran. The problem for cryptanalysts is that somewhere out there, in time and space there exists at leats one other book, written in English, such that the second letter of every word in THAT book makes the VERY SAME hash. Learn at least this much. To be useful, hashes must be put in able hands. Other than that, it ain't encrypted - it's disorganized.
- A tip of the hat to Bruce Schneier's diligent efforts: If a guy can't verify his own algorithm (like XORing stuff,) he can't WRITE encryption. He relies on you not being able - he takes your honest buck, and doesn't worry about the actual guy out there who CAN. The ones that work depend completely on the password for entropy. The rest should be available so you can take it to an assembler guy and have him tell you what it does, just like taking a random pill to a pharmacy and asking the pharmacist "What's this?" The answer isn't crafted to deceive. Learn this much at least - if the password isn't long enough, it doesn't have enough entropy IN it to make encryption worth it. If a table is password protected, it OUGHT to be saved in a manner that makes the password part of the mess; if it's an ASCII file that takes your password for permission to look, I just electronically won't ask permission. Open Office's PDF's actually encrypt.

That ought to be ample grist for the mill.

Felicitations.

Maximize, Minimize and Optimize

Mathematics provides us with rigorous mechanics with which to discuss dictionary defined 'Maximize' and 'Minimize.' To abbreviate, Calculus studies this to such distraction that the fundamental theorem of Calculus is the definition of change. Max is changed until max limit is reached, Min is changed until min limit is reached.

Optimization is different, but not obviously so. Theoretically it is less specific, merely preserving the 'limit' qualification of change. The dictionary documents the characterization of 'best,' and the mechanics of how this might be attempted mathematically is the subject of my discourse.

Launching out to a sort of Gestalt, without a road map of my journey is my first effort.

1. Take a list of characteristics that together qualify the 'best' characteristic of the solution.
2. Maximized the desirable ones,
3. Minimize the undesirable ones.
4. (Not simply done.) Make the solution reflect the collection as perfectly as possible.

I am already prepared to invite scrutiny, so enamored am I of it's elegance. For example, the above 'definition,' (I know it's actually a listing,) adequately informs us about a Computer program that has been optimized; We are already asking was it optimized for performance, or speed of development, maintenance or distributive scalability. Performance itself invites a listing of what is to have been maximized and minimized. No listing? have a discussion.

In Africa there is a tribe somewhere that marks departure (as did Shakespeare,) with the protocol:

• Go in Peace!
• Stay in Peace!

Of course they greet one another VERY practically: I _see_ you!

I'm working on a one line felicitation. Until then,

CUl8r

Rock the 1st Amendment - these two had a CONVERSATION!

10:41 AM m: Hi, Goodbye and God Bless; you show 'away' status.
B: i think it permanently has me set that way
at least on my work computer...how have you been doing?
10:42 AM m: OK - sent packing by the institutional guys at Richardson on Waterview. No place to attend currently, how about you?

...time passes...
10:47 AM m: Apropos of next comment, I'm afraid if I attend where you are, I'll bring more trouble with me you can stand. I stayed at M (churchname) to face controversy - I left when it didn't face me. Lord said 'mark those who cause division.' I can't call that shot, BUT I can call 1 Cor 5:5.
10:49 AM B: we're doing well, visited with M over the weekend
D stayed over for a few days...he really enjoyed his vist
we're doing well at Lavon...we have a meeting scheduled for the first week of April...
10:50 AM but it looks like I'll be in Amarillo and Lubbock that entire week
[URL deleted]
m: "go to the righteous and say to him, 'it shall be well with thee.'"
B: you can click on the meeting to see the topics each day
10:51 AM I would like to be there for the Humanism study, but I'll get them recorded
10:52 AM m: OK... it'll be good to hear about those who 'worship and serve the creature more than the creator,' from others... I'll try to attend publicly.
10:53 AM B: i thought the Waterview group was more open....they weren't welcoming?
10:55 AM m: They had already had problems with stalkers. I documented what happened in a letter to the Eldership. This side of Heaven, I attempt to keep records. see more at [URL deleted]
10:58 AM B: I've found that I need a news fast every now and then... [specifying going without news, not speedy delivery thereof.]
most of the news is depressing because we know what the outcome will be when all of their plans get put in place...we've seen socialism fail before
10:59 AM m: Gmail has a 'settings' setting that specifies https if you need.
B: so I'm trying to do other things...I've tilled up a section of the backyard to plant some food...
11:00 AM and just trying to rearrange the way we live so that we can start paying off more debt and get somewhat self-sufficient
m: glad to hear your South African Aggie training isn't going to waste. T ought to do well if civilization fails... I don't think things are THAT dark.
B: I'm thinking in about 10-15 years, we may want to move to a freeer country
11:01 AM m: freeer than here? everywhere else is worse... this one just failed to start out Utopian perfect.
B: we have more laws than any other country on the planet
m: Nation of laws :-)
11:02 AM B: laws that run counter to liberty
m: Enforcement might be an optimization experiment on use of human judgment.
11:03 AM B: I'm not much for believing in secret conspiracies...but there are several open conspiracies...the Republicans and Democrats both believe that government is the answer
11:04 AM there are several other countries that will let a farmer plant their crops instead of being concerned for a mouse's habitat
m: The Ocean is deeper than top 6 feet, but that's where most of the action is... otherwise, my Masterlock company satisfies RICO every time they put one together.
Other than that, how do you establish the elastic clause without the ICC?
11:05 AM B: [URL deleted]
I was reading that yesterday...it discusses some of that
11:06 AM m: BTW, the RICO language is specific - they have to commit 'criminal' to get arrested.
11:07 AM B: I like to think that language means something and when something is written down in something like the Constitution, it's not meant for special interpretation
but that's how government keeps growing...change the language to fit their whims...and all of a sudden it becomes constitutional
m: Taking an opposing perspective, how many things are not 'of private interpretation?'
11:08 AM B: when there is a clear definition, you can't change it...there are absolutes
if the sky is blue and someone decides that green can sometimes have a shade of blue in it and everyone should accept that the sky is now green....because they were told to do so in a court of law by a judge....
m: I can derive a lot abusable from anything... Masterlock is a problem when I use it attached to a hasp on YOUR door!
11:09 AM B: that's not interpretation...that's changing language to suit a judge's own whim...or congress, or the executive branch
11:10 AM it's nothing new...those in power want more power...all for the "good", of course
m: I use the language 'I resist your language.' I consent to the law that it is good. Casuistry can be attacked as 'obfuscating the law.'
11:12 AM If there are too many laws, selective enforcement is the problem, no matter how many more Congress heaps up on top. Let them make all they want...
B: selective enforcement means that we can be enslaved to the state and they can threaten more...
m: Specifically 'obfuscation the law' is illegal.
B: look at the number of people who were nominated by Obama....
11:13 AM many made the laws and guidelines that the IRS uses...
and they couldn't even keep up...Ron Kirk is a prime example of someone in politics who tried to do something good
m: His DCIA is a public policy guy... do you fear this as National emasculation?
[The opinion offered should be defended as one who views Russian, Chinese, Indian and Myanmar foreign policy things worthy of diplomatic investigation. Myanmar is not Burma - Mynamar is possibly _THE_ WORST government on earth at present. There are those living in the past who call it Burma - I respect their view that the Burmese people own the destiny of that nation. You _have_ to love the people of a country to even _want_ to help them. These unmuzzled national guard-dogs are not soft-hearted - they are seasoned in a Machiavellian furnace of kindness until they cannot lose their temper. The chest thumping and posturing is reserved for political performance.]
B: he donated his speaking fees to charity
11:14 AM yet, he was penalized because he "earned" the fees and is therefore subject to being taxed on them...
even though the money never went through his hands...
the organizations sent the money directly to the charities
m: Ron Kirk didn't keep his head in wealthy company, observed that they didn't pay taxes without observing the exact arrangements under which this is done... he got in TAX trouble for that reason.
11:15 AM B: the idea that the government owns a person is what the entire tax system is based on
11:16 AM you're time belongs to the state and as a result, when you earn something with your time, it's taxed
as Bastiat says, it's just theft
m: The articles of Confederation didn't suffer this failing... I'm teasing you, I still love you bro, but whassup?
11:17 AM B: wasn't the constitutional convention called to modify those articles...not scrap them...
:)
i better get back to work...it's been good hearing from you again
11:18 AM m: You may be right... I'm just looking at a less specialized version of the same picture. It embarrasses me on behalf of God. Stay in Peace?
B: you might want to visit out at J (churchname) sometime too...I know that they are a small group that's out that way.
11:19 AM P was going there Sunday evenings
you bet...take care and enjoy the rest of the week!
m: You too... bye for now.

The difference between 'Incensed' and 'Inflamed.'

I am anew in possession of a power vehicle for rhetoric.

...the man has just been found LONG dicking one of the potential mates of a soldier returning from the wars. The soldier is too calloused to honor her with nausea. He tell's another that 'this thing is just beginning... they're laying the groundwork for the times later in life when they wish to deter my wrath and vengeance for their crimes.' He then addresses the father, his daughter standing by with unopened 18th b'day present with incongruous bow perfect is contrast to her noodle kneed shame. 'I'm more interested in HER than in your leavings,' he states blackly. 'She might as well have her tubes tied... there will be no grand-daughter to petition you for gifts of cash and kind to barter for an Academic education. I'll be doing well to provide for her in her old age, at this point. Do you suppose that they will print some new currency for us to spend that will not fail on inflation and stock crashes?' He rounds on the leader in disgust. 'Be vigilant now and in your old age,' he warned him. 'I give my troth I will invent new ways to give you hell.' The response was unashamed and worded to inflame his passions. 'Hear that you fellas? Warn them in hell he's a'comin.' he said. He then turned on the soldier and growled out 'I'll see you in hell personally!' The soldier was unphased, and laughed a little laugh. 'You ALL heard him. Give me your messages Immediately. I'll expect no warning when you cancel the postage...' he turned to her directly and intoned, 'I hate the FUCK out of it when they warn them I am coming!'

I am Incensed You are Inflamed.

A different approach to improvements on the Electoral college.

I have never been truly satisfied with ranking as a way to be rational. It makes for self consistent theory, and while the theory adequately models some realities, I am prepared to argue that the model should model, not actively direct. (Go Adam Smith!)

As such, the rational political _basis_ for breaking up the Left-Right continuum into coalition parties attends a jaundiced bias to my judgment. I may be prepared to recommend it in future anyway, given time for observation in Canada and Germany. Last Election cycle, Canada nearly implemented a Coalition Government, and while I was happy to see Conservatives win out, I had anticipated following the coalitions for adherence to platform promises. Israel has demonstrated over it's short history that even a coalition government can be militarily decisive - I simply can't claim to adequately analyze their news.

If my language is grandiose, please put it down to sophistry - I am enamored of a new idea. The question relates to a methodology, and I don't feel very audacious about it yet - it's a question.

Can rational political voting be studied, modeled or improved by a suggested experiment?

Traditional "Rational Voting," behavior is established by ranking (assigning ordinal value to) ideologue listings of Party positions. If this is so, this allows improvements of weighting and multiplying now sorted weight by intensifiers - if ranks are wrong after weighting, what happened? I'll admit something did happen, but it may no longer qualify for the traditional moniker "rational."

This system can theoretically be extended out to Senators, Congressional Representatives, State and Local government participants, until the rational condensate qualifies for representation by the electoral college system.

That's school environment language for saying take the lists below, decide which things you like in each column, and decide how much you like them. One way to quantify "how much," would be to specify how much money you would spend on each one. Then compare the positions of the candidate you are evaluating on each, and add up the money you agree about on the "plus" side ONLY. The compare the same procedure on the other candidate, and the two added up numbers are supposed to tell you which candidate you "really" want - a rational decision.

My suggested experiment is similar but aims to be instructive anyway:

What if, instead of Party Specific Lists (an abbreviated illustration below)

Republican Democrat

Gun rights Gun Control
Anti-abortion/limits Government subsidized abortion
Tax Reductions for economic stimulus Direct Deficit Spending for economic stimulus
.
.
.
Publius Cato

...we made one authoritative questionnaire listing, used language official to all relevant parties for each item, and had EVERY candidate fill it all out. This would allow a quicker rational count by the average citizen accomplished by personally weighting each issue, and reviewing some "representative" report of his available candidates for ballot casting. The time saving might not be easily observed - citizens typically limit the informed _qualification_ of their vote on time, not the vote count itself. What might be better observed is the true net effect of rationally defined ballot casting.

Does this appear to be a good experiment? What political ground zero would be the best starting place for such an effort? The Libertarians? A PAC or Citizens' advocacy group?

I spoke too soon... 5t Syndicate had seen before :-)

All successful Governmental executives become Machiavels in office if they are not already corrupted to the values of the system on arrival. To fail in your Machiavellian studies is to fail to execute influence successfully. To call a newcomer virgin, innocent or politically chaste is not pejorative, but election must surely be followed by congress, or it is never consummated.

To have observed that another antonym of virgin is corrupt implies a discussion of perspective on political activism. There are those who advocate change from without - they usually lack influence or connections and fail. There are those who advocate change from within - they are usually corrupted to the values of the system before understanding it sufficiently to effect improvement. This means that politically, change is hard.

That change is hard by definition is not a bad thing; inertia argues against precipitous decisions. Lax applying liberals can do less harm that way, and close applying conservatives are not much impeded.

The system Works - Gridlock may equate to a stalemate in Chess;

Systems that officially do not work, may be an artifact of observation. Chess, like Rubik's cube has many more stalemates available than definitive solutions. A system that does not work does not work; a system that cannot work cannot work - if a system is temporarily in a Turing status of stalemate, it may be the case that time is all that is needed to bring it to definitive resolution. If this is the case, this is catastrophically different from not working - optimize on time.

see more at here.
and here also.

To disabuse you of delusion:

Script:
"There's more ways to skin a cat than puttin' it's head in a boot jack, and pullin' on it's tail!"
.
.
.
"You can't skin cat that way."
"You just TRY it!"

As far as Mantras of the Eastern variety, I have _never_ seen one that reliably arrived at enlightenment better than the (possibly profound if reflexively applied,) "Owa tay-goo Siam."

Audacity invites scrutiny.

The way for logicians and politicians to be audacious is the make absolutist comments. IE: "There is literally _Nothing_ that cannot be abused."

The New Obstructionism 'tout en haut.'

We have seen href before that "Change is hard." While this may be more true of political change than anything else, this invites a new discussion: The New Obstructionism: Is it new, and is there only one?

This false Dichotomy could be used reliably demonstrate the value of both the first amendment and the cliche statement "Never talk about religion and politics."

'Touched by scandal;' fraternity or office - NSA 03_05_08

he Skulls fraternity has been touched by scandal as much as any last century. I appealed to Peter Jennings' on air comments to say that the Skulls are an historically influential fraternity. The movie "The Good Shepherd," documents their influence in founding CIA. I append my observations to NSA on this topic below - dates unedited. While I have observed that Dick Cheney probably used and was used by them, I cannot say this is without precedent. The US Diplomatic Corps member who returned from China in politically good health, became a notable DCIA, and later was influential in affairs with Russia historically, was named the same as the Baked Bean king before he became neauveau riche with Barbara Walker Bush. His Diplomatic abilities cannot have hurt his efforts, but history veils the story of his father in law, Prescott Walker. Unclear to me are details available to journalist or editor at Huffington Press, but the story published on July 4th of 2008 made it clear that Bush 43's grandfather had been a Skull. Without being clear if he used Skull connections or if the Skull name was tarnished by mere association, the article clearly shows that treason caused scandal to touch Prescott Walker. My point is this; Peter Jennings stated that Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43, John Kerry and Bill Clinton were all members of a fraternity that should be regarded as historic. Cheney is likely knowledgeable of them, and Obama cannot be one since he has never attended Yale. I have no access to membership records, but Kennedy names should also be available. Letter to NSA is dated and appended below ---------------------NSA 03/05/08 ----------------SIC-----------------------Robert B Johnson [address deleted] 03/05/08 Dear Mr. McClellan: Your address is not easily available online. I have never avoided government service, not even getting out of jury duty, but childhood injuries and failing to obtain a Four Year degree ruled out a career with the government for me. I imagine that it is a requirement to work in your office that one be able to recognize a conspiracy. I know that these are not all organized to harm, but are generally thought to be sinister. An example of an elitist conspiracy that was not organized to harm, is that of the founding fathers in 1787. I am thinking of our current written Constitution, not the Articles of Confederation. These were patriotic and God fearing men, and their efforts are historic. Likewise, I think the Masons, de-mystified by the "National Treasure," movies were a patriotic lot. As such, I am going to embark on a discussion of the Skulls, de-mystified in "The Good Shepherd," with some respect and admiration. I know that your organization competes with CIA, but I am not trying to play one off against the other. I would be quite comfortable sharing information like this with them, and I sometimes write them directly. The Skulls is a Yale fraternity. It's membership may or may not be public, but I note that the late Peter Jennings took the trouble to verify that our Presidents for very many years have come from among their ranks. I do not know if Vice President Cheney was ever tapped, but I expect he knows of the existence of this fraternity, and that it represents an exclusive alumni network even among Yale graduates. I suspect that the members of the Skulls would find their reputations subject to vilification if they were accused of conspiracy. Since the Skulls are historically influential, it is worth bringing to the attention of the NSA. I can postulate a comical theory that might trammel the proliferation of no-bid contracts from our current Whitehouse: people who want to vilify the Skulls are blackmailing Vice President Dick Cheney. He is loyal and patriotic, and I do not see how he could speak against them without gravely offending the President. Some jokes are funnier than others, and I would tell that one freely in an airport. Since our debt now approaches 9.4 trillion dollars http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ (the largest debt since the invention of money per Craig Kilburn,) I am concerned that this has become a matter of National Security. If Mr. Cheney were supplied with a whistle blower, I am sure he would be more than happy to right size our government's spending on the Iraq war, particularly if this were accompanied with documentation. I can clearly see that the war is not an option, and we must maintain a credible threat to Iran as well, or we lose all credibility in the Middle East. In order to maintain a credible deterrent to Iran, I would observe that the comparative advantage of the US over Iran lies in food production and water. If they moved to sow our land with salt, it would be bad for the global food supply, not just Iran's or ours. The Middle East draws its water from the Tigris and Euphrates whose headwaters are in Turkey, and our ally Israel buys part of it. Since I am talking about the debt please also consider the National Security consequences of China refusing to renew all the Treasury Bonds it buys. One day we are paying interest, the next we stop paying the military and start paying China. That makes an excellent credible deterrent against US, not against THEM! In response to this I suggest that we enlist Chinese co-operation in the war on terror. They are constitutionally opposed to Hegemony. Make the case that Iran's "world wide Caliphate" a Hegemon. If this can be documented I expect that Robert Spencer, who wrote "The truth about Muhammad: Founder of the World's most intolerant religion," http://www.amazon.com/Truth-About-Muhammad-Intolerant-Religion/dp/1596985283/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1204819925&sr=1-2 would be able to do so. We are constitutionally opposed to piracy. I believe that all terrorists, those who commandeer ideology, airships and spaceships, are all pirates. I do not think that anyone who laughs at the constitution is worth worrying about. On the opposite side of the argument, it's pretty hard to prove an ideology has been commandeered, much less arrest someone for doing so. I have no reservations about sharing this information with you, and hope it comes to your personal attention. Yours Sincerely, Robert B Johnson

The reason of Senator Nunn's knowledgeability.

Senator Nunn received no messages from me, but I wrote CIA email division 12/22/08 (near X-mas) in hopes of having the relevant report reviewed by others for timely proactive efforts: ________________________ All following subject to -SIC- ______________________________Last night I was up till the less than wee hours trying to make heads or tails of The CSIS commission on Cybersecurity. Link http://media.csis.org/isf.pdf for a copy.

UPDATED 03-21-09 near 2100hrs Central (standard or daylight? figure it OUT!) How many of you guys think I deliberately used the wrong link back when I published this? I certify I can PROVE I haven't changed the text of the very LINK! I have a copy of the report. I certify in disbelief that the report at the link enumerated above is NOT the one in question. I certify with trepidation that Wikileaks declined in encrypted conversation to make the report unrescindable electronically. Relevant .jgp to come.

Just like the Chinese constitution, my eyes glazed over at some of it. The salient information I got was that Sam Nunn and John Hamre are likely the ones who have the 'internet patriot act,' in a drawer ready to go. This is a conspiracy theory of mediocre acceptance, but I may have made the purchase. Below are observations I made at 0230 hrs; page 2. (document is indexed by page number.) 1st page is indexed by words regulate cyberspace paragraph (unpopular with me) AVOID; - prescriptive mandates - unnecessary costs - stifling innovation - over-reliance on market forces (low price?) Acquisitions Policy to improve security RECOMMEND; - by ONLY secure products and services (mandate?) - develop standards in partnership with industry (over reliance on market forces?) Authenticate digital identities paragraph mandate (ok by me but impractical) strong authentication (RSA) for ACCESS to critical infrastructure. (my suggestion - control USE, not access) certifying sender ID is hard. certifying source is (hashing) easy. To factor RSA I need four PCs. One to look thru 10 exponent 30 or so. One to hit mid-range for selectively chosen keys. One looking higher, one looking lower (sic - rule is check only up to square root.) Does this affect signing? I never really mastered digital sigs. Capabilities: educate to research train to competence R&D will build capabilities for cyberspace - I'd say arena, they said domain. Bush 43 Administration introduced Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative. (CNCI) CSIS commission 'shared info' with CNCI and saw relevant changes. If there is substance ask for a list of them.

American Foreign Policiy in Context of POTUS post Carter.

I have written before on the relative virtues of Bush 41. In the 5ts I have denoted him as EEEPOTUS, which make me laugh, because of the historic IEEE. Useful in this nomenclature is the observation that, like dental plaque, each after-market machination of intrigue (aka conspiracy) must re-organize every 4 years. Wiki and Academia have no need to change their convention - Adams will always be the best 4th President we have ever known. Since his son had long since set precedent of hating "junior," I differentiated between them from the start; I initially used his honorary doctorate from Yale, and prefer it.

I now approach the idea of documenting more generally the virtues of POTUS's since the Iranian Embassy days, following the Shah's depose.

Carter was a Peanut farmer. His administration was despised historically for having 'no element of surprise.' His peace making efforts deserve their appellation legendary, however efficacious they are. He has employed the 'lack of surprise,' like a Federal Judge, inviting scrutiny of Justice in his own way over time. If the proceeds of farm labor are more visible, they are popularly called perishable; the relative value in an eternal perspective of his efforts in the merchandise of wisdom are no easier to know now than they will be after 50 years of history. Judgment day should be interesting for me in that regard personally.

Despite Carter's unavoidable work ethic, overseas his Pacifism was regarded as license, and the Actor Reagan brought a John Wayne quality to the discussion of the Red Phone and 'the button,' that made the Ayatollah order the release of the subjects of the Yellow Ribbon song the day of Reagan's election, if not 30 seconds before.

[My first experience of the communication available by Rock Stars and music artists as individuals, was a John Denver monologue containing the phrase 'literally ached for people to sing to.' More on Denver later - I think Reagan himself called upon the Yellow Ribbon vehicle.]

Reagan's Rapturist fatalism stood him in good stead as he faced down the Khrushchev type adherents of Leninism and Stalinism. Bush 43s has not been so well employed by history. My thoughts on the cold war ending are (here.) They both seem to have been the type to keep a diary, not a journal (historical tip of the hat to Dr. Dobbs. Don't know who started the "peer reviewed" custom.)

Reagan used the cliche wisdom of "surround yourself with capable people," in the capacity of a VERY able judge of character. His choice of VP was perhaps more luck than inspiration, and qualified as one of his more considered and defensible decisions. I have often laughed about the reputation of Bush 41's Quayle.

Bush 41 as noted above, bringing us to EEPOTUS, Arkansas' Bill Clinton. [I call "Double E's" "Lighting Jocks" as much as anything.] If Arkansas lacks refinement in its culture, they may assist me in re-wording the observation that the Rodham fortune joined those of Heinz and Walker in political and patriotic duty when he married. [I'm told his VP's room-mate was the same Jones as we know from the 5ts as a law grad Texan, if thespian enough.] In terms of neaveau riche, (sp?) Clinton did not do as well as Bush 41 at etiquette, and excelled because of efforts poured into his education overseas. He Politically cherry picked oxford and Cambridge, collecting the Rhodes scholarship along the way (no doubt to pay the bill, as most will do,) doing in England what is more commonly attempted (done?) in the US Ivy Leagues by playing Harvard off against Yale (Bush 43.) Clinton's economic successes may be attributed as much to his comprehension of the Keynesian system, as anything else. I named the 5t 'ASK' protagonist Adams Smith_Keynes to counterpoint (music term) the apparent poles in Economic thought there - Smith is far more intuitive. Clinton's VP was Gore, who loved the ARPANET/DARPANET 'thing,' so much he raised money for it in political ways that defy all other convention. If the internet (or affectionately "teh interweb,") cannot actually surmount a nuclear blast, it can credibly attempt it, by lying in the shadow of the earth's curvature for EM pulses and glass lakes. VPs win elections less than most classes statistically - Senators don't fare much better.

Since we have talked about politically active fortunes, it is appropriate to note others who "are commended to a certain attention by their command of resources." Bill Gates is not only in a class with Dick Cheney by being perpetually half-way through academia (I am but another,) He is notable as having "almost as much money as the Prince of Monaco." He should not be regarded as alone; The Waltons and the Buffets of the future will be influential too (subject to interest and aptitude.) I'll contemplate an entry on the "Trumps" of the world later.

Clinton was succeeded by Bush 43. It is hard to say authoritatively that he will be the worst President in US history, but his debt exceeds Reagan's without commensurate compensation. I suppose that Republicans wanted Bush 41s successes to be repeated so much that Jeb and George were equal choices in the class, and George won out by Texas Governor credentials. Cheney was Bush 41s Secretary of State or Defense (crs?) and a "known good Machiavel." As noted by Peter Jennings (most influential Canadian ever?) before his passing, the time of Yale frat Skull credentials had not passed, and Cheney probably had Skull credentials just like W. Without other status, he was reduced (by this theory) to passing out no-bid contracts to various Skull beneficiaries/benefactors, and Reagan's observation that wartime biases political influence to the executive (war on drugs - Harvard "long war" standing,) was employed slavishly [passive voice?] Mistakes were made. W was too peripheral in his attentions to the constitution, and the "Straight Shooter" reputation he enjoys in Europe may be a charitably abbreviated "Straight Shooting simpleton." I estimate that by not keeping his oath, troth or vow to "defend the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic," knowledgeably (or at all?) W failed to retain respect in person, possibly damaging the dignity of the office so profound was the ignominy.

To suggest that ANY politician could have withstood INACTION after 9/11/2001 would be irresponsible. Time and place do not allow good analysis; Dr. Ross Anderson was able to state that we should give attention to Piracy law before the attack on Iraq, but I am unable to prove time and venue, or satisfactorily infer audience. For my own part, I am sure that I could be relied on for an authoritative "I do not know," for a long time thereafter. If our intention was to frame a war on terror and not a Protestant Crusade, all Terrorist States were legitimate targets - Libya was legitimate, and has bureaucratically stipulated co-operation since.

Bush 43 went back to "finish the incomplete nature of his father's efforts," is a valid constituency. These overlook the disparity in territorial area of Kuwait and Iraq, disregard the defensive v naked aggression discussion, and fail to acknowledge Shia/Sunni differences - Kurds are a political convenience to them. Iran/Iraq "balance," should probably attempt to learn lesson from the nearly forgotten "Iran/Contra" _affair_ and determine before proceeding further exactly who and what is an ally.

The Oil finance motive is a stereo-typical red-herring to me. I simply can't use it effectively to improve my understanding on the situation. Beyond that, "if something is Political, and you add _more_ Political, it's still _Political_." :-) Oil as an industry has not profited from the conflict - Halliburton profited spectacularly (from Skull connections?) from a conflict they didn't START.

The Patriot Act was probably written by NSA politicos who doubted Orwell's sanity, pre-issue. Sen Sam Nunn can speak authoritatively on efforts to duplicate the feat in an internet context (in my opinion.) I may not find his agenda agreeable (wse have never spoken,) but he is knowledgeable. The unwarranted wire-taps will likely fail muster under Supreme Court spotlight, if ever their constitutionality is questioned. Mathematically, they proliferate haystacks, and are more appropriate for use in localized Narcotics investigations and Mafia trials. [trivia; codes fall to statistical analysis and serve their purpose in an electronic context when used in _conjunction_ with cipher based encryption. Mafiosa (?) use codes to distraction, and a few cribs should make old Mafia trial transcripts VERY informative under that magnifying glass. Pranksters can well envision hilarity for Politicos who must decode a truly controversial message from a source. Ciphers prevent wide distribution, and they are "off the ether" so badly that they need newsprint both to know and tell after that :-)] [SSL is easily turned on. Any server on earth can "entropically enhance" packet content if they choose - password protection is for tables and databases, not data streams.]

I mention these things not entirely at random - they are important aspects of the Bush 43 administrations. I'll owe "dear journal" a Political run-down of the second 43 later - I have notes from Sen Hitchison's voting record.

Write one and owe two more? I better quit digging.

The 'NoDelete' lifestyle.

I am not sure when I first came to contemplate what I now refer to as the "no delete" lifestyle. I know this much, that it was chronologically near the time I contemplated the exhaustive algorithm that there is no God. By referring back to my efforts (defined in technical terms as "aplogetics," by Webster's,) we can see that I was also aware that the exhaustive algorithm is one way to refute espionage charges. Another illuminating illustration in email was that in which "the crime committed shall have been committed in Montana, and I have never _been_ to Montana." Montana is the State where the speed limit is "reasonable and prudent." It is not politically possible to speed on the open highway there, without having an accident. Other than that, it is known for its irreverent (if patriotic,) militias. I have never actually been to Big Sky Country, but it ought to give me a good idea of "how to truly _appreciate_ rural Texas:-)" The idea was original with me that long ago. It has curious applications. I am not sure how, but the most recent thing it has taught me is that Sam's gift of Terra byte Hard Drives to Travis was not a waste... he was simply avoiding being a Guinea Pig - if Travis has good success with them, Sam will adopt them later, when the "early adopter tax" (for that article) is revoked. Random bullet points would be: - There is a high qualification of ethics and moral character on all communications if the intention is NEVER to delete. - There is a certainty that the recipient cannot misrepresent my content (potentially not even my intentions) if I keep time and date stamped records. - There is certainty that (if I keep all electronic responses) I will be sure of the context of the conversation. - Snail Mail is easily maintained if Word Processed originals are kept in a marginally organized file system, even when hard copies are printed and mailed. - There is an Open Source application available that makes a printer available that merely converts the potentially printed output to a (link-less and flat) PDF. Saved as a .pdf file, this will do for online receipts, online statements, one-off miscellany etc. - There should be a sanguine acceptance that otherwise "normal" friends can review my intentions as a "Weasel." - Backups on a schedule are an obligation. Media and off site storage can be creatively (safety deposit box for example) maintained, but data sections of HDD become importantly different from program and cache areas. - Open Source makes applications available that capture and index ALL WEB pages viewed by a given _browser._ Different instances of the same browser continue to collect, but necessary privacy can be maintained by using varied browsers. Ex. Security professionals recommend a "prudish" browser for Banking and VPN accesses, where the common browser is reviewed as "promiscuous" by choice.These capture files may be stored in "hidden" files on HDD. Back up these files pre-indexing - They are gold-mines on occasion. - Bookmark files are worth backing up - restoring them is child's play, and bookmark lists are as individually useful as a personal library or a personal list of known local vendors; the yellow pages should be a SECOND choice. - A tour of bookmarks might give you an idea of what your online mall looks like when you are bored. EX; News - Abcnews, BBCnews, CNN might be my news outlets of choice. I should not conclude anything about a reader simply by observing them - intent does not follow observation. However, if the website for Houston ABC affiliate is not on the list, you can reasonably conclude that Mr. X does not go there more often that convenient google search can serve. - Privacy becomes _not_ LESS important, but MORE so - google searches become limited and confined if online preferences are too closely collected, mentally similar to having roadblocks put up at non-arterial roadways in a city, if I do not use them for a year. By having strongly developed identity, I find I want it to leak less, and have well discovered boundaries. - Identities can proliferate. I used to attempt to be rigorous that I did not give out any "valuable" email address from my promiscuous browser - only the "spam" account. Loosely developed, I have an email address for church and close acquaintance, friends and professional obligations. I match this flagship id with name on spam account, differing only by domain. Other ids include - school account, google alert account (these alerts can collect unmonitored for weeks if necessary - I don't want them to confuse my personal stuff.) There is a limited effect of desiring to use my school and flagship interchangeably, commonly answered by forwarding relevant emails from one to the other before proceeding. Separate from google alert account (but possibly _unnecessarily_ so,) I have a subscription account.) Beyond this I maintain some idea of copyright by keeping my (Dallas County registered) "Sole Proprietorship," name as an email address. Gmail provides its service free of charge, but ethics demand that I make responsible use of the ~7 GB of disk space. For my spam account, I employ the Hotmail domain, for the consideration of a fee - this absolves me of guilt for using it solely for spam, and frees me from checking it AT LEAST ONCE every 30 days or it closes by default. Gmail's rule on this is more generous at 90 days, and monthly backups of POP3 files adequately answer this consideration. Gmail provides a blog along with the email - (probably within the same disk space.) Yahoo does not, but offers so-called "throw-away" accounts for paying members. Gmail answers this with "+ operator" accounts. To employ a +-operator accounts, use flasgship+_xyz_@gmail.com as the address you provide. Best applied this might take the form of jack.spratt+amazon_spam@gmail.com when signing up at an amazon.com affiliate. The filter "amazon_spam" sorts all the relevant "incoming" out, and can be told to delete, bypass inbox, forward, mark as read or other creative things. The effect is that I can research at the time of my choosing all vendors to whom amazon.com has passed/sold my email address. In the end, this can be an empty accomplishment - junk mail is junk mail however personalized. Among friends, +-operators are better employed in the capacity of "distinctive ring." Yahoo domain free accounts do not appear to "die" on the schedule of the others. Hotmail does not make itself available for offline backup - possibly by the theory that if I cannot back it up I will use it MORE? They compensate with online storage for paid accounts, if bandwidth considerations are not a problem. - Bandwidth considerations mean that BLOGs will -always- be most recent entry at the top. If they were to be presented like a book, chronologically ascending EVERY request would NECESSITATE exhaustive download - this is possible to a fee based service, but not rational for a free one. - Gmail also provides a service such that emails originating in the flagship account may be arbitrarily portrayed as coming from any email account of my choosing. Since other accounts can be forwarded to this flagship in the first place, this allows me to "dump in," but _NOT_ later "undump" other stuff, if I want to make it searchable by my google online engine - this is their bread and butter, I expect that it is the best there is. Since the other account can have "from" names (both given-name and sir-name) changed upon presentation of password, the other account can be named "noreply," or "other random name." - NOTE: This is not an anonymizer, and should not be confused with one. Anonymizers are a service industry and good ones are available - don't reinvent the wheel. - Mozilla browser has an Open Source facility _plug-in_ called "Enigmail" available. If you have an adventurous friend who consents to do so, encryption is conveniently available; you simply must consent to learn the ropes. I have personally "fubar-ed" mine - oh, well :-| - Apple's "Safari" browser has a Windows version that makes its browser history very searchable, if the "ctrl-L" "wonder-bar" of Firefox is not to your taste. It also has a "privacy" mode that stops collection/recording on demand, temporary to the end-of-session. I am not sure how to force it to make itself available offline for backup. - XP has made th "Outlook Express" email management system available as part of the OS to make backups of POP3 stuff - NOTE: It's practically a HACK to find the Outlook Express file for backups. I personally have never used Open Source "Thunderbird," but I hear good things. Some day maybe I'll be between streams for that one :-) I think both "email CLIENTS" (as they are called,) make alternate "profiles" available. I usually use this to keep separate accounts separate - OS _profiles_ are sufficient to keep users from getting mixed up. - Data wrangling is not a wasted skill - 2GB of data (even at 100Mbps - the common HDD data transfer rate,) is nothing to sneeze at. Duplicate email attachments and non-ascii data can build up faster than you might prefer. A DVD burner is a good thing to have around, keeping in mind that you don't "zip" more than 2GB at a time, or it won't address correctly. MP3s don't zip worth cussing about, neither do .jpgs. Other things vary for mathematical reasons - zip many files together anyway, if its merely an organizational thing. - For encryption if it is available (I use all open source.) AES is slow, but Govt standard. Blowfish is fast, but nobody uses it - it and Twofish are used by applications more than individuals. 1024 RSA is no longer for a war - short term it's as good as any, and worth polluting keyspace by my estimation. As Jesus said - he that hath ears to hear, let him hear. - For Word Processing, Open Office (GL) is available and works with most formats. It provides for free PDF generation, including "padlock" capability, on the "security" tab. Any convention will work - a "cheap" one is "filename sans extension=password." - Passwords are worth proliferating - a "green install" of "Password Safe" on a thumb drive makes the program available on ANY Windows platform - I use it easily at FedEx-Kinkos. Others are available Open Source is platform independence is an issue - perforce database becomes independent of application. Online IF you use grouped passwords THEN these groups compartmentalize. Like the Titanic, compartments must be kept intact, but if Human Memory must be relied upon, total fragmentation is not a requirement. The principle applied by the interloper is to "try" each successfully compromised password on all uncompromised accounts, in efforts to identify patterns and redundancies. NOTE: Thumb drives have taken the place of Floppies - sneaker net still works, and keeping empty thumb drives around could be electronic paper clips. 2GB are 4 for $25 at Fry's very recently. Liquid Paper is as good as Sharpie if black will not mark one - the oldest economy for floppies was blank labels. ----------------Brain dump = too tired to taz-------------------------

Note: sincere practitioners will understand a different value of flash media.