September 01, 2008
FACTCHECK THIS!
Cousin Big Tom has showered me with links to factcheck.org to bolster some of his assertions. In reply, I labeled them a "liberal 'gotcha' shop." This did not go down well:
Here's an edited version of my response to him explaining my reasoning.
Hi Jim,
I think I know why you "badmouthed" factcheck.org as a "liberal gotcha shop".
You clearly want to obfuscate the truth similar to the garbage being spewed by Rush Limbaugh. when he doesn't like something and wants to discredit it, he just attributes it to the "liberal media". Limbaugh wouldn't know the truth if it bit him in the ass!
If you are truly interested in getting to the truth, take a look at the site. if you want to be a buffoon like Rush Limbaugh then don't waste your energy looking at the website.
In case you were unable to find the mission statement as the factcheck.org website here it is:
I think I know why you "badmouthed" factcheck.org as a "liberal gotcha shop".
You clearly want to obfuscate the truth similar to the garbage being spewed by Rush Limbaugh. when he doesn't like something and wants to discredit it, he just attributes it to the "liberal media". Limbaugh wouldn't know the truth if it bit him in the ass!
If you are truly interested in getting to the truth, take a look at the site. if you want to be a buffoon like Rush Limbaugh then don't waste your energy looking at the website.
In case you were unable to find the mission statement as the factcheck.org website here it is:
Here's an edited version of my response to him explaining my reasoning.
Hi TD,
Factcheck.org is well known to me. My buddies send me stuff from there all the time. I'm never impressed, and almost always find them liberal.
They can say they are non-partisan, but they are not. Sample any topic - it's 10 to 1 anti-McCain/Republican/Bush/conservative. The few shots they do take at liberals are aimed at fat whoppers that nobody believed in the first place.
Most of their “gotchas†are meaningless stuff that they get from politicians spouting off extemporaneously. All pols are guilty of engaging in “stump hubrisâ€, turning their dull stories into something more heartwarming or relevant to their particular audience. Anybody who takes any politicians word over their actions is a fool.
Their source of funds, the Annenberg Foundation, originally started by a buddy of Reagan, is, like most do-gooder foundations, overwhelmingly liberal, and happily funds these kinds of advocacy groups that masquerade as impartial. PBS is lousy with Annenberg funded shills.
Annenberg also funded the “education†program that recently tried to cover up the cozy relationship between Barack Obama and William Ayers, the unrepentant “anarchist†and bomber, now comfortably collecting a government paycheck at the University of Illinois, injecting socialism and “revolutionary†action into teacher training and grammar school curriculum.
Look at the resumes of the people on the page you sent me. Not a business owner or wage earner among them. Would you hire any of them? Could they survive and produce in a competitive environment, rather than as over-schooled protest stooges?
Did they bother to factcheck the recent news story that twisted the facts about how and why so many businesses in America pay no tax? The one that calculated the amount of tax "avoided" by multiplying the top tax rate by the gross sales? And how the liberal members of Congress jumped all over this report, using it as a justification to call for higher corporate tax rates? Or that the AP had to issue a massive correction, amounting to contradicting the entire story? I didn't find anything on their site when I searched for 'taxes', which I take to mean that as far as factcheck.org is concerned, the article is A-OK.. Seriously, Tom, you're defending people who believe this is how the corporate tax system works? And you trust them to filter your information stream?
I don't listen to Limbaugh, since I work during the day. When I do occasionally hear him, I find him factual and honest, especially compared to the LA times or network news. He's mostly boring, though, because he's like listening to a SoCal weather report - same old thing over and over. But he's up-front about his point of view, so you can be sure you know what he's saying is advocacy, and can judge for yourself accordingly. He also knows that he's going to get every syllable he says contradicted and spun by twongs like MediaMatters and FO, so he has to be on top of his game. That's how they sucker people like you into sending them money - making a perfectly harmless and mostly entertaining guy like Rush into a an evil demon who must be stopped.
I'm a habitual news and opinion reader and blog browser because I want facts and truth, regardless of the political stripe of the source. There are a number of "conservative" sources, people and organizations I find laughable or pathetic. And there are several "liberal" sources that are usually first out with good new information and interesting analysis. The ones I like best immediately correct themselves when they are wrong, and are always gracious doing so.
Factcheck.org is well known to me. My buddies send me stuff from there all the time. I'm never impressed, and almost always find them liberal.
They can say they are non-partisan, but they are not. Sample any topic - it's 10 to 1 anti-McCain/Republican/Bush/conservative. The few shots they do take at liberals are aimed at fat whoppers that nobody believed in the first place.
Most of their “gotchas†are meaningless stuff that they get from politicians spouting off extemporaneously. All pols are guilty of engaging in “stump hubrisâ€, turning their dull stories into something more heartwarming or relevant to their particular audience. Anybody who takes any politicians word over their actions is a fool.
Their source of funds, the Annenberg Foundation, originally started by a buddy of Reagan, is, like most do-gooder foundations, overwhelmingly liberal, and happily funds these kinds of advocacy groups that masquerade as impartial. PBS is lousy with Annenberg funded shills.
Annenberg also funded the “education†program that recently tried to cover up the cozy relationship between Barack Obama and William Ayers, the unrepentant “anarchist†and bomber, now comfortably collecting a government paycheck at the University of Illinois, injecting socialism and “revolutionary†action into teacher training and grammar school curriculum.
Look at the resumes of the people on the page you sent me. Not a business owner or wage earner among them. Would you hire any of them? Could they survive and produce in a competitive environment, rather than as over-schooled protest stooges?
Did they bother to factcheck the recent news story that twisted the facts about how and why so many businesses in America pay no tax? The one that calculated the amount of tax "avoided" by multiplying the top tax rate by the gross sales? And how the liberal members of Congress jumped all over this report, using it as a justification to call for higher corporate tax rates? Or that the AP had to issue a massive correction, amounting to contradicting the entire story? I didn't find anything on their site when I searched for 'taxes', which I take to mean that as far as factcheck.org is concerned, the article is A-OK.. Seriously, Tom, you're defending people who believe this is how the corporate tax system works? And you trust them to filter your information stream?
I don't listen to Limbaugh, since I work during the day. When I do occasionally hear him, I find him factual and honest, especially compared to the LA times or network news. He's mostly boring, though, because he's like listening to a SoCal weather report - same old thing over and over. But he's up-front about his point of view, so you can be sure you know what he's saying is advocacy, and can judge for yourself accordingly. He also knows that he's going to get every syllable he says contradicted and spun by twongs like MediaMatters and FO, so he has to be on top of his game. That's how they sucker people like you into sending them money - making a perfectly harmless and mostly entertaining guy like Rush into a an evil demon who must be stopped.
I'm a habitual news and opinion reader and blog browser because I want facts and truth, regardless of the political stripe of the source. There are a number of "conservative" sources, people and organizations I find laughable or pathetic. And there are several "liberal" sources that are usually first out with good new information and interesting analysis. The ones I like best immediately correct themselves when they are wrong, and are always gracious doing so.
Posted by: JBD at
03:04 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 749 words, total size 7 kb.
PEER REVIEW OF THE MIT/MBTA "HACK" - PART 3
I followed up my pulpit-pounder below with these afterthoughts:
And The Goose replies:
I just read the vulnerability assessment that some are touting as being more damaging to MBTA than what was going to be presented at DefCon, and the mean old lawsuit liberated it unintentionally, oh the irony.
I must say, I expected more. It's a lot of "could have", "might be", "if they", and "with the right equipment and software."
It reads mostly like a basic review of the well-understood features and cost trade-offs of the system, which leads me to believe that OF COURSE MBTA knows what the vulnerabilities are, and that they decided to live with them.
The solution these guys propose is ludicrous - they have no idea how tough it would be to maintain a centralized account database with real-time access. The system would fall to its knees any time they had any kind of telecom problem. Talk about your angry customers - imagine a whole station shutting down at rush hour if the data line or server goes down. MBTA made the right choices.
And their comments about the crummy "physical security" makes my point. For the cost of zero dollars and no software or hardware or other high tech stuff, any mook can walk in and steal cards out of an unlocked room. You can bet some employees are dealing them out the back door as well. But identifying personnel-caused problems is easy, and I'm sure the MBTA is well aware of those. Fixing them, in a union town like Boston, is a real challenge.
And even at the $600 maximum per cloned card, the risk of fencing them to the losers who would buy them makes it almost certain that you'd get caught.
This is a righteous beef the MBTA has.
You want irony? This paper is marked "CONFIDENTIAL". Why all the 'free speech' attitude then? What's yours is mine, right?
And I see from his DefCon bio that one of the kids has patents pending. Good for him. Hope nobody hacks his inventions, but if they do, I bet he sues. Or else why get a patent?
I must say, I expected more. It's a lot of "could have", "might be", "if they", and "with the right equipment and software."
It reads mostly like a basic review of the well-understood features and cost trade-offs of the system, which leads me to believe that OF COURSE MBTA knows what the vulnerabilities are, and that they decided to live with them.
The solution these guys propose is ludicrous - they have no idea how tough it would be to maintain a centralized account database with real-time access. The system would fall to its knees any time they had any kind of telecom problem. Talk about your angry customers - imagine a whole station shutting down at rush hour if the data line or server goes down. MBTA made the right choices.
And their comments about the crummy "physical security" makes my point. For the cost of zero dollars and no software or hardware or other high tech stuff, any mook can walk in and steal cards out of an unlocked room. You can bet some employees are dealing them out the back door as well. But identifying personnel-caused problems is easy, and I'm sure the MBTA is well aware of those. Fixing them, in a union town like Boston, is a real challenge.
And even at the $600 maximum per cloned card, the risk of fencing them to the losers who would buy them makes it almost certain that you'd get caught.
This is a righteous beef the MBTA has.
You want irony? This paper is marked "CONFIDENTIAL". Why all the 'free speech' attitude then? What's yours is mine, right?
And I see from his DefCon bio that one of the kids has patents pending. Good for him. Hope nobody hacks his inventions, but if they do, I bet he sues. Or else why get a patent?
And The Goose replies:
I will answer your questions as best I can.
"Is what they did actually technically difficult?"
The work the students did was rather difficult, but they did have help from two sources. The first is from this story. The OysterCards use the same chip as the CharlieCards. A Dutch group already found exploits for the OysterCard. The students probably started their project because of the Dutch research. The CharlieCards also use a layer of security above the OysterCards. It is an encryption algorithm called Crypto-1. A group at the University of Virginia had already found weaknesses in the algorithm. The students state in their report they used these flaws to crack the encryption faster.
Even with these two sources, the students still had to figure out how the MBTA implemented these and other security measures. For instance, the turnstiles issue challenge/response pairs to verify the cards. The challenges are supposed to be random, but instead they are based on the number of clock cycles since the machine powered on. Thus, you can narrow down your guesses. Once you know the correct value and as long as the turnstile does not go through a power cycle, then you know what the next challenge value will be. Another example is the 6 Bit checksum. A hacker would only have to try a maximum of 64 cards before they got it right (2^6 = 64). The student's suggestion to increase the checksum to to 16 Bits is not unreasonable. So the student's work was not easy, but the hardest part was already done for them (finding weaknesses in the encryption algorithm).
"Can this process be easily duplicated?"
Replicating this hack would actually be quite easy. The students had planned to release open source software to do most of the dirty work. A person would only need to buy a RFID encoder. The software would take care of the encryption, checksum, challenge/response pairs, and any other tasks. The user would need zero knowledge of how the hack works (kind of like using a blue box).
"How could this profitably be exploited?"
I don't think the students planned to make a profit from this. Same with phreaking or using slugs, this probably was not intended to make a profit. After all hacking is said and done, I would equate this to getting free stuff from a vending machine. The information is out there. It isn't hard to do. But most people still get their stuff legitimately. Some one could do the trick repeatedly and sell the snacks for profit. Like wise, some one could make a bunch of phony CharlieCards and sell them for a profit. I think it is highly unlikely. Even Transport for London isn't worried (from the Guardian article), "We run daily tests for cloned or fraudulent cards and any found would be stopped within 24 hours of being discovered,' it said in a statement. 'The most anyone could gain from a rogue card is one day's travel."
"What are the possible losses to the MBTA from others actually trying to exploit the flaws vs. the cost of fixing the flaws?"
The loss in revenue would be trivial, probably similar to people just jumping over the turnstiles. I will admit that most of the "fixes" the students suggested were absolutely hilarious. A giant central database designed to track cards worth, on average, eight to ten dollars is just absurd. However, using a better encryption algorithm or a longer checksum is not unreasonable. I am assuming the changes would be in software. That is probably a terrible assumption. If the changes had to be in hardware, then any change would be prohibitively expensive.
It would not be worthwhile for the MBTA to update their system. It is more cost effective for them to sue the crap out of anybody who tries to break it. This is the old Security through Obscurity philosophy. If nobody knows how it works, then it can not be hacked.
I am really glad you found one of the students has patents pending. I find that hilarious. Most computer science types and especially hackers are disgusted with patents. And the big "CONFIDENTIAL" splayed across their report is rather contradictory to their Free Speech defense. I had originally heard about the OysterCard incident from Bruce Schneier. He is regarded by many as the Security Guru.
And with that, we'll consider this subject throughly analyzed, until such time, if and when, more comes from the source."Is what they did actually technically difficult?"
The work the students did was rather difficult, but they did have help from two sources. The first is from this story. The OysterCards use the same chip as the CharlieCards. A Dutch group already found exploits for the OysterCard. The students probably started their project because of the Dutch research. The CharlieCards also use a layer of security above the OysterCards. It is an encryption algorithm called Crypto-1. A group at the University of Virginia had already found weaknesses in the algorithm. The students state in their report they used these flaws to crack the encryption faster.
Even with these two sources, the students still had to figure out how the MBTA implemented these and other security measures. For instance, the turnstiles issue challenge/response pairs to verify the cards. The challenges are supposed to be random, but instead they are based on the number of clock cycles since the machine powered on. Thus, you can narrow down your guesses. Once you know the correct value and as long as the turnstile does not go through a power cycle, then you know what the next challenge value will be. Another example is the 6 Bit checksum. A hacker would only have to try a maximum of 64 cards before they got it right (2^6 = 64). The student's suggestion to increase the checksum to to 16 Bits is not unreasonable. So the student's work was not easy, but the hardest part was already done for them (finding weaknesses in the encryption algorithm).
"Can this process be easily duplicated?"
Replicating this hack would actually be quite easy. The students had planned to release open source software to do most of the dirty work. A person would only need to buy a RFID encoder. The software would take care of the encryption, checksum, challenge/response pairs, and any other tasks. The user would need zero knowledge of how the hack works (kind of like using a blue box).
"How could this profitably be exploited?"
I don't think the students planned to make a profit from this. Same with phreaking or using slugs, this probably was not intended to make a profit. After all hacking is said and done, I would equate this to getting free stuff from a vending machine. The information is out there. It isn't hard to do. But most people still get their stuff legitimately. Some one could do the trick repeatedly and sell the snacks for profit. Like wise, some one could make a bunch of phony CharlieCards and sell them for a profit. I think it is highly unlikely. Even Transport for London isn't worried (from the Guardian article), "We run daily tests for cloned or fraudulent cards and any found would be stopped within 24 hours of being discovered,' it said in a statement. 'The most anyone could gain from a rogue card is one day's travel."
"What are the possible losses to the MBTA from others actually trying to exploit the flaws vs. the cost of fixing the flaws?"
The loss in revenue would be trivial, probably similar to people just jumping over the turnstiles. I will admit that most of the "fixes" the students suggested were absolutely hilarious. A giant central database designed to track cards worth, on average, eight to ten dollars is just absurd. However, using a better encryption algorithm or a longer checksum is not unreasonable. I am assuming the changes would be in software. That is probably a terrible assumption. If the changes had to be in hardware, then any change would be prohibitively expensive.
It would not be worthwhile for the MBTA to update their system. It is more cost effective for them to sue the crap out of anybody who tries to break it. This is the old Security through Obscurity philosophy. If nobody knows how it works, then it can not be hacked.
I am really glad you found one of the students has patents pending. I find that hilarious. Most computer science types and especially hackers are disgusted with patents. And the big "CONFIDENTIAL" splayed across their report is rather contradictory to their Free Speech defense. I had originally heard about the OysterCard incident from Bruce Schneier. He is regarded by many as the Security Guru.
Posted by: JBD at
02:05 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1094 words, total size 10 kb.
PEER REVIEW OF THE MIT/MBTA "HACK" - PART 2
I replied:
Part 3 here.
Wozniak & Jobs and the rest of the phreaks certainly should have been at least cited & fined. Using a blue box is the same as using a slug, or doing what I used to do on coin pay phones pre-DTMF (which is what the Blue Box generated) which was to short the coin box cover to the mouthpiece mic in the receiver with a piece of wire (which made the same connection that a coin in the slot did), then flash the hook switch with the phone number you wanted to call. This activated the stepper switch in the central office the same way that the number bumps on the old dial phone contacts did. Stealing is stealing.
Impersonating a celebrity is just pranking, but if you cause harm somehow while doing so, you're liable, regardless of your intentions. Telling the MBTA that you had a hack to their card system, and that you were going to publicize it, moves from threat to action. So what else could the MBTA have done, given that they found out about the DefCon preso shortly beforehand, other than what they did? Ignore it, wait for the reaction, then say what? "Yeah, we knew we had holes, so what? Take your best shot, geeks." No, they had to protect the integrity of their system and confidence of their users and play hardball. Yeah, it gets messy, and irony aside, the unintended consequences cut both ways. Streisand effect notwithstanding, you don't let punks push you around, and you don't ignore threats to public transportation post-9/11. A picture of Barbara's back porch is trivial, and her overreaction deserves mocking. MIT students dangling a challenge in front of an internet full of bored geeks is trouble no matter how restrained you are.
And regardless of the EFF and the rest of the chatterers, wrong is still wrong. Thinking it's cool, and enjoying the theatricality of it all, doesn't make it right. This is one of the tropes I dislike most about the socialist thinking displayed here, that anything that can be taken is free. This includes the assholes that think they have the absolute right to download music, movies, and other property, and unlock iPhones, and that somehow the tenets of free speech inoculate misbehavior - like the people who praise taggers as artists - and that each individual defines his own morality, and any restraints imposed at all are somehow oppressive. Remember how angry people were when Apple 'bricked' their unlocked iPhones? Sorry, kids, wrong is wrong, and all your inane pop philosophy won't make it right. Read the fuckin' contract, Weezer, and violate it at your peril.
Now answer me some questions, none of which were fielded in all the back and forth, we-said they-said of all the articles I've read:
Is what they did actually technically difficult, or was it like I said, simply brute-forcing their way through every possible combination to finally find a hole (they even use the term "brute force" several times)? Is their code work original, or just simple applications of basic routines? We do stuff like this every day (RFID cards, readers, encryption, etc), and though the code stuff is not my expertise, it still looks to me like they just read the manuals and stole some configuration information. What is it that they did that is such a big deal? And how is it different, in impact to the system, from simply stealing keys or cards?
And just how vulnerable is the system? Can this process be easily duplicated? What kind of smarts and resources would it take?
How could this profitably be exploited? How likely would it have been that somebody would have used the exploits and actually tried to defraud the system? The way I see it, somebody would need a "warcart" and equal good luck, resources, and free time to crack the code, then either start cloning cards and selling them at a discount, or...what?
Even if somebody did do this, internal audits would identify cards being used that had no equivalent cash or credit card income. And, if somebody was selling cloned cards, how long would it take to make back their "warcart" investment, plus the cost of the cards, the card coders, etc? And what is the likelihood that they would get caught quickly once they started fencing these cards? This stuff happens in movies all the time, which is where I think some of the commenters get their "expertise", but how often does it happen in real life?
Or maybe they just go malicious, and use their access to corrupt the system. How is that different from non-technical damage caused by things like smoke bombs, trashcan fires, graffiti, superglue in the locks, or other forms of vandalizing and denying access?
So my point is this - even if they did find flaws, what are the possible losses to the MBTA from others actually trying to exploit the flaws vs. the cost of fixing the flaws? Hence my lock and key analogy. Every lock has a key, keys can be stolen & copied, every lock can be picked or hammered open, every cash box or turnstile can be forced, every inside employee is a potential breach. It seems to me that MBTA and the other municipalities that run these systems know what the risks are, and realize that the cost of implementing a system that is immune to all possible attacks, however far-fetched, is far greater than the possible losses due to hacked cards. And the possible losses from hacked cards is probably nothing compared with losses from counterfeit bills, stolen credit cards, insider theft, and plain old vandalism. When the MBTA wrote the specs and got bids for this system, security was just one of the dozens of performance metrics and cost considerations they reviewed. You spend your time and money where it does the most good. Is what the MIT guys did really worth worrying about?
The MIT kids could have done a public service, got the same geek glory, and avoided problems by quietly informing the MBTA of their findings. But they succumbed to the lure of fame and the rush of hacking 'the man'. Now it's higher costs at the turnstiles to cover the legal fees and cost of the code patches, which they will have to spend even if the likelihood of somebody actually using the hack is nil.
I also have no love for the smelly hippie underground types who celebrate these guys, and who justify their petty anarchy as a righteous application of free speech, and who get clean modern subsidized transportation and then bitch about it, and who couldn't graduate high school but pretend they are all some kind of movie super-hacker heroes, exposing the greedy incompetent bureaucrats. Look at the comments in the Wired article - the rage at Mitt Romney, the leftist cant, the absolutist indignation at this terrible, horrible, useless system that somehow gets all these people where they want to go. Not a one of them could begin to develop or implement any part of the system, but they spout off like they are experts, and condemn the people in charge as evil morons. OK, Sparky, what's your plan? They never have one. It's all ephemeral should-be and why-not and if-only, all fantasy and wish-come-true, flying cars and lightsabers, solar farms and recycling. Don't like the Boston subway system as it is? Then walk through the slush, butthead.
The common wisdom is that these 3 guys will now immediately be hired as high-paid security consultants. Is what they did that big a deal? And would you hire somebody that exhibited this kind of judgment, knowing it would cost the taxpayers and the university big money? I think they are more likely to end up as DefCon celebrities, writing blogs and spinning yearns, criticizing but never actually producing. Because making something work is hard, breaking it is easy.
Impersonating a celebrity is just pranking, but if you cause harm somehow while doing so, you're liable, regardless of your intentions. Telling the MBTA that you had a hack to their card system, and that you were going to publicize it, moves from threat to action. So what else could the MBTA have done, given that they found out about the DefCon preso shortly beforehand, other than what they did? Ignore it, wait for the reaction, then say what? "Yeah, we knew we had holes, so what? Take your best shot, geeks." No, they had to protect the integrity of their system and confidence of their users and play hardball. Yeah, it gets messy, and irony aside, the unintended consequences cut both ways. Streisand effect notwithstanding, you don't let punks push you around, and you don't ignore threats to public transportation post-9/11. A picture of Barbara's back porch is trivial, and her overreaction deserves mocking. MIT students dangling a challenge in front of an internet full of bored geeks is trouble no matter how restrained you are.
And regardless of the EFF and the rest of the chatterers, wrong is still wrong. Thinking it's cool, and enjoying the theatricality of it all, doesn't make it right. This is one of the tropes I dislike most about the socialist thinking displayed here, that anything that can be taken is free. This includes the assholes that think they have the absolute right to download music, movies, and other property, and unlock iPhones, and that somehow the tenets of free speech inoculate misbehavior - like the people who praise taggers as artists - and that each individual defines his own morality, and any restraints imposed at all are somehow oppressive. Remember how angry people were when Apple 'bricked' their unlocked iPhones? Sorry, kids, wrong is wrong, and all your inane pop philosophy won't make it right. Read the fuckin' contract, Weezer, and violate it at your peril.
Now answer me some questions, none of which were fielded in all the back and forth, we-said they-said of all the articles I've read:
Is what they did actually technically difficult, or was it like I said, simply brute-forcing their way through every possible combination to finally find a hole (they even use the term "brute force" several times)? Is their code work original, or just simple applications of basic routines? We do stuff like this every day (RFID cards, readers, encryption, etc), and though the code stuff is not my expertise, it still looks to me like they just read the manuals and stole some configuration information. What is it that they did that is such a big deal? And how is it different, in impact to the system, from simply stealing keys or cards?
And just how vulnerable is the system? Can this process be easily duplicated? What kind of smarts and resources would it take?
How could this profitably be exploited? How likely would it have been that somebody would have used the exploits and actually tried to defraud the system? The way I see it, somebody would need a "warcart" and equal good luck, resources, and free time to crack the code, then either start cloning cards and selling them at a discount, or...what?
Even if somebody did do this, internal audits would identify cards being used that had no equivalent cash or credit card income. And, if somebody was selling cloned cards, how long would it take to make back their "warcart" investment, plus the cost of the cards, the card coders, etc? And what is the likelihood that they would get caught quickly once they started fencing these cards? This stuff happens in movies all the time, which is where I think some of the commenters get their "expertise", but how often does it happen in real life?
Or maybe they just go malicious, and use their access to corrupt the system. How is that different from non-technical damage caused by things like smoke bombs, trashcan fires, graffiti, superglue in the locks, or other forms of vandalizing and denying access?
So my point is this - even if they did find flaws, what are the possible losses to the MBTA from others actually trying to exploit the flaws vs. the cost of fixing the flaws? Hence my lock and key analogy. Every lock has a key, keys can be stolen & copied, every lock can be picked or hammered open, every cash box or turnstile can be forced, every inside employee is a potential breach. It seems to me that MBTA and the other municipalities that run these systems know what the risks are, and realize that the cost of implementing a system that is immune to all possible attacks, however far-fetched, is far greater than the possible losses due to hacked cards. And the possible losses from hacked cards is probably nothing compared with losses from counterfeit bills, stolen credit cards, insider theft, and plain old vandalism. When the MBTA wrote the specs and got bids for this system, security was just one of the dozens of performance metrics and cost considerations they reviewed. You spend your time and money where it does the most good. Is what the MIT guys did really worth worrying about?
The MIT kids could have done a public service, got the same geek glory, and avoided problems by quietly informing the MBTA of their findings. But they succumbed to the lure of fame and the rush of hacking 'the man'. Now it's higher costs at the turnstiles to cover the legal fees and cost of the code patches, which they will have to spend even if the likelihood of somebody actually using the hack is nil.
I also have no love for the smelly hippie underground types who celebrate these guys, and who justify their petty anarchy as a righteous application of free speech, and who get clean modern subsidized transportation and then bitch about it, and who couldn't graduate high school but pretend they are all some kind of movie super-hacker heroes, exposing the greedy incompetent bureaucrats. Look at the comments in the Wired article - the rage at Mitt Romney, the leftist cant, the absolutist indignation at this terrible, horrible, useless system that somehow gets all these people where they want to go. Not a one of them could begin to develop or implement any part of the system, but they spout off like they are experts, and condemn the people in charge as evil morons. OK, Sparky, what's your plan? They never have one. It's all ephemeral should-be and why-not and if-only, all fantasy and wish-come-true, flying cars and lightsabers, solar farms and recycling. Don't like the Boston subway system as it is? Then walk through the slush, butthead.
The common wisdom is that these 3 guys will now immediately be hired as high-paid security consultants. Is what they did that big a deal? And would you hire somebody that exhibited this kind of judgment, knowing it would cost the taxpayers and the university big money? I think they are more likely to end up as DefCon celebrities, writing blogs and spinning yearns, criticizing but never actually producing. Because making something work is hard, breaking it is easy.
Part 3 here.
Posted by: JBD at
02:00 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1329 words, total size 9 kb.
PEER REVIEW OF THE MIT/MBTA "HACK" - PART 1
I asked The Goose to comment on this story and on my comments. Here's his reply:
Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs once used a Blue Box to get a free long distance phone call to the Vatican. Woz then impersonated Henry Kissinger and asked to speak with the Pope.
Shouldn't they both be arrested for stealing and harassment? Shouldn't Woz be arrested for impersonating a diplomat? Shouldn't Joe "Joybubbles" Engressia and John "Cap'n Crunch" Draper also be convicted for developing and distributing this technology? Probably not.
The key difference between now and then is the internet. Back then, information about hacks and exploits traveled very slowly. You either had to know somebody directly or be subscribed to local electronic magazines. In today's world, these three students can instantly reach an audience of millions. The MBTA is worried about the speed with which this information will spread. Of course, the MBTA shot themselves in the foot. From the article:
"Ironically, the document reveals more about the vulnerability in the MBTA system than the slides that the restraining order sought to suppress contain. The vulnerability assessment report is now available for anyone to download from the Massachusetts court's electronic records system."
I will agree that this is not really protected under Free Speech. That is a pretty flimsy and rushed defense. But I believe the MBTA should have been much more discreet about this. They have only succeeded in propagating the Streisand Effect. There is a bunch of "he said, she said" in the Wired article, but it seems that the trio of students were trying to cooperate with the MBTA. Making a big stink of this has brought the EFF and a host of others to the defense of the students.
So while the students' actions are unfavorable, I think this whole thing has been blow out of proportion. The only punishable action, I think, was the social engineering they committed. Unfortunately, the handful of articles I read regarding this court case were quite vague on what actions constituted "social engineering". Some say they broke into secure areas; others say they distracted guards while another student scanned a turnstile. Breaking and entering is not tolerated, even for student shenanigans.
So, to summarize, I don't think the students actions were particularly bad or evil (except for the supposed breaking and entering). I think the MBTA could have handled this better. I also think the Free Speech defense is bologna and be should thrown out (which it won't because Free Speech cases always take forever).
That is what I think.
Part 2 here
Shouldn't they both be arrested for stealing and harassment? Shouldn't Woz be arrested for impersonating a diplomat? Shouldn't Joe "Joybubbles" Engressia and John "Cap'n Crunch" Draper also be convicted for developing and distributing this technology? Probably not.
The key difference between now and then is the internet. Back then, information about hacks and exploits traveled very slowly. You either had to know somebody directly or be subscribed to local electronic magazines. In today's world, these three students can instantly reach an audience of millions. The MBTA is worried about the speed with which this information will spread. Of course, the MBTA shot themselves in the foot. From the article:
"Ironically, the document reveals more about the vulnerability in the MBTA system than the slides that the restraining order sought to suppress contain. The vulnerability assessment report is now available for anyone to download from the Massachusetts court's electronic records system."
I will agree that this is not really protected under Free Speech. That is a pretty flimsy and rushed defense. But I believe the MBTA should have been much more discreet about this. They have only succeeded in propagating the Streisand Effect. There is a bunch of "he said, she said" in the Wired article, but it seems that the trio of students were trying to cooperate with the MBTA. Making a big stink of this has brought the EFF and a host of others to the defense of the students.
So while the students' actions are unfavorable, I think this whole thing has been blow out of proportion. The only punishable action, I think, was the social engineering they committed. Unfortunately, the handful of articles I read regarding this court case were quite vague on what actions constituted "social engineering". Some say they broke into secure areas; others say they distracted guards while another student scanned a turnstile. Breaking and entering is not tolerated, even for student shenanigans.
So, to summarize, I don't think the students actions were particularly bad or evil (except for the supposed breaking and entering). I think the MBTA could have handled this better. I also think the Free Speech defense is bologna and be should thrown out (which it won't because Free Speech cases always take forever).
That is what I think.
Part 2 here
Posted by: JBD at
01:37 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 432 words, total size 4 kb.
OUT, OUT DAMN SPOT!
This article on the lack of sunspots in August - as in zero, zip, zilch, nada, bupkis - also forthrightly states some incontrovertible scientific data that adds more evidence to my previous posts asserting that, to whatever extent that temperatures around the globe have risen in the last century, the cause is neither increased carbon/CO2 nor anthropogenic (man made)
Here are the facts, my friends:
Whoa, really? The sun affects the earth's temperature?
And what's this? An ozone layer angle!
Best thing about this article is that there was no attempt to neutralize or downplay the essential scientific message in order to better fit the prevailing journalistic wisdom (also know as 'doing an Associated Press'.) No dissenting quotes from some oleaginous carbon-trading bureaucrat, no misleading headline (LACK OF AUGUST SUNSPOTS TOO LATE TO SAVE NEW ORLEANS FROM DEVASTATING HURRICANE). Just the facts and scientific analysis.
Time to feed Al Gore to the poor.
Here are the facts, my friends:
The event is significant as many climatologists now believe solar magnetic activity – which determines the number of sunspots -- is an influencing factor for climate on earth.
Whoa, really? The sun affects the earth's temperature?
In the past 1000 years, three previous such events -- the Dalton, Maunder, and Spörer Minimums, have all led to rapid cooling. One was large enough to be called a "mini ice age".
Us Viking-types are digging this.Svensmark, who recently published a book on the theory, says the relationship is a larger factor in climate change than greenhouse gases.
[...]
Usoskin, who notes the sun has been more active since 1940 than at any point in the past 11 centuries, says the effects are most important at certain latitudes and altitudes which control climate.
Apparently these guys never got Al Gore's memo, or they were out milking their reindeer when Gore was getting his Nobel in nearby Norway.[...]
Usoskin, who notes the sun has been more active since 1940 than at any point in the past 11 centuries, says the effects are most important at certain latitudes and altitudes which control climate.
And what's this? An ozone layer angle!
The sunspot cycle has strong effects on irradiance in certain wavelengths such as the far ultraviolet, which affects ozone production.
Best thing about this article is that there was no attempt to neutralize or downplay the essential scientific message in order to better fit the prevailing journalistic wisdom (also know as 'doing an Associated Press'.) No dissenting quotes from some oleaginous carbon-trading bureaucrat, no misleading headline (LACK OF AUGUST SUNSPOTS TOO LATE TO SAVE NEW ORLEANS FROM DEVASTATING HURRICANE). Just the facts and scientific analysis.
Time to feed Al Gore to the poor.
Posted by: JBD at
11:39 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 322 words, total size 3 kb.
August 31, 2008
CHEW ON THIS, BUSH DERANGEMENT SYNDROMERS
Here's a good list of his accomplishments, which I believe will outshine his lukewarm budget and party leading performance.
Overall, I think GWB has been a B-minus President.
All A's for tax cuts
Cs and Ds on domestic programs, mostly for the RINO-istic "compassionate conservatism" and for letting the Democrats & RINOs spend away the surplus with nary a veto.
a solid B on the Iraq war, pulling it up from a C with the Surge
an A-minus on the War On Terror in general - need to clean up the Homeland Security bureaucracy some.
a B on immigration (that he didn't really earn)
a D on joining with the RINOS to squander the Republican majority he inherited
an A-minus for international relations - all the right people "hate" us, but recent elections in France, Germany and Italy, and the outright love we get from the former Soviet republics, is ample indication to me that America is still the big dog. Would have liked more pressure on the Saudis, Iran, Syria and the Palestinians, but he had his hands full with the big fights in Afghanistan & Iraq.
a B-minus on promoting his agenda and managing the cabinet departments to support that agenda - the State Department especially, with its nest of career internationalists, served him poorly.
UPDATED 9/1/08 - Added a few things I thought of later.
Overall, I think GWB has been a B-minus President.
All A's for tax cuts
Cs and Ds on domestic programs, mostly for the RINO-istic "compassionate conservatism" and for letting the Democrats & RINOs spend away the surplus with nary a veto.
a solid B on the Iraq war, pulling it up from a C with the Surge
an A-minus on the War On Terror in general - need to clean up the Homeland Security bureaucracy some.
a B on immigration (that he didn't really earn)
a D on joining with the RINOS to squander the Republican majority he inherited
an A-minus for international relations - all the right people "hate" us, but recent elections in France, Germany and Italy, and the outright love we get from the former Soviet republics, is ample indication to me that America is still the big dog. Would have liked more pressure on the Saudis, Iran, Syria and the Palestinians, but he had his hands full with the big fights in Afghanistan & Iraq.
a B-minus on promoting his agenda and managing the cabinet departments to support that agenda - the State Department especially, with its nest of career internationalists, served him poorly.
UPDATED 9/1/08 - Added a few things I thought of later.
Posted by: JBD at
03:11 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 234 words, total size 2 kb.
A FAMILY TRADITION OF POLITICAL BRAWLS
Cousin Big Tom pokes my hornet's nest with this little reminiscence:
I don't remember this incident in particular, but I do recall many similar politico-religious contretemps at family gatherings. My Old Man was usually the lone Republican in a sea of Democrats.
RFM, who passed away in late 1988, was a quick-minded bantam Black Irishman. A life-long practical Roman Catholic and staunch anti-abortionist, he was born in Flatbush, Brooklyn and was raised in Richmond Hill, Queens, New York, 3rd child of Bernard James McMahon and Mary Agnes Harrington McMahon. He served as an Army Signalman in the Philippines in WWII, then moved to California and was educated at UCLA (where he met my Mom at the Newman Club, the campus Catholic center) following his BS with an MBA from USC. He pursued a career as a CPA, insurance man and certified financial planner.
He delighted in, among other things, baiting his in-laws the Dunns - Viking-sized, hypertensive, and uber-smart (several CPAs, a college professor and lawyers - matriarch Mammy graduated as an MD from Syracuse University in 1908 ) - and his older brother, my Uncle Bernie. Bernard James McMahon Jr. was another bantam Black Irishman, with a Bing Crosby cool & calm demeanor, a decorated war hero with an Ivy League education and a career in union negotiating and as a consultant to political campaigns. Tough adversaries? You bet.
Never phased my old man, though. My earliest recollections of dinner table political debates center around Nixon vs. Humphrey (with George Wallace draining votes from both sides) in that tumultuous year of 1968. An extremely close election, roiled by the assassinations of RFK and MLK and the ensuing race riots, plus the hippie anti-war riots at the Democratic Convention in Chicago.
The Dunns and my Uncle Bernie (who passed away in 1998 ) considered Nixon a crook and a buffoon, and my old man flayed Humphrey as more of the same FDR/JFK/LBJ corrupt big-government liberalism run amok. I remember his using the riots at the DNC in Chicago as a microcosm of the country, and blamed all the turmoil on FDR, JFK, LBJ and the Democrats and their Godless liberalism. Hindsight allows us to see that they were both right to varying degrees.
My old man certainly felt betrayed by Nixon, and not just for Watergate – China, wage & price controls, the EPA, running from Vietnam, etc. But Nixon won re-election in a landslide due to his populist politics, then of course succumbed to his epic hubris over Watergate. Continued populist tinkering and Cold War tensions during the Ford and Carter helped generate the famous 70’s stagflation that ushered in the Age of Reagan.
My Old Man was delighted with Reagan, of course, and was not shy about rubbing his in-laws noses in the financial and international successes his administration stacked up. Though my Old Man did not live to see the fall of the Berlin Wall, I’m sure he would have not be surprised, given his politics & beliefs.
So I’m happy to pick up the flag of conservative values and politics and continue the debate with the mostly Obamafied and reliably Democrat Dunns, and with Uncle Bernie’s double-smart son Mike McMahon and his wife Kitty. Let the JBD blog serve as our dinner table, and feel free to dish it out, but be ready to take it as well. I’m not as quick and talented a debater as my Old Man, so I rely on the brainiacs on the Right to spot me facts and arguments.
First salvo follows shortly, and concerns Mike Mc’s very effective point that he used several times during the Irish McMahon party to blunt my Republican fervor – what happened to the budget surplus that Bush inherited from Clinton?
Short answer – RINOs – Republicans In Name Only – politicians who campaign and win elections as Republicans, but then govern like typical Democrats.
Do
you remember the heated arguments over politics (and other matters) that my mother and your dad had at some of the family get togethers?
One Thanksgiving at your parents' house, we were all sitting at the dinner table and Uncle Bob [JBD - he's referring to Robert Francis McMahon, your host's Old Man] made a comment relating to rape suggesting that women get raped because they are asking for it.
My mother blew up and slammed her fist down on the table. Uncle Bob had really pulled her chain. Grandma Irene [JBD - known to us all as Mammy] buried her face in her hands. By the time we left your house my mom and your dad were getting along fine and I know that they cared very much for each other.
One Thanksgiving at your parents' house, we were all sitting at the dinner table and Uncle Bob [JBD - he's referring to Robert Francis McMahon, your host's Old Man] made a comment relating to rape suggesting that women get raped because they are asking for it.
My mother blew up and slammed her fist down on the table. Uncle Bob had really pulled her chain. Grandma Irene [JBD - known to us all as Mammy] buried her face in her hands. By the time we left your house my mom and your dad were getting along fine and I know that they cared very much for each other.
I don't remember this incident in particular, but I do recall many similar politico-religious contretemps at family gatherings. My Old Man was usually the lone Republican in a sea of Democrats.
RFM, who passed away in late 1988, was a quick-minded bantam Black Irishman. A life-long practical Roman Catholic and staunch anti-abortionist, he was born in Flatbush, Brooklyn and was raised in Richmond Hill, Queens, New York, 3rd child of Bernard James McMahon and Mary Agnes Harrington McMahon. He served as an Army Signalman in the Philippines in WWII, then moved to California and was educated at UCLA (where he met my Mom at the Newman Club, the campus Catholic center) following his BS with an MBA from USC. He pursued a career as a CPA, insurance man and certified financial planner.
He delighted in, among other things, baiting his in-laws the Dunns - Viking-sized, hypertensive, and uber-smart (several CPAs, a college professor and lawyers - matriarch Mammy graduated as an MD from Syracuse University in 1908 ) - and his older brother, my Uncle Bernie. Bernard James McMahon Jr. was another bantam Black Irishman, with a Bing Crosby cool & calm demeanor, a decorated war hero with an Ivy League education and a career in union negotiating and as a consultant to political campaigns. Tough adversaries? You bet.
Never phased my old man, though. My earliest recollections of dinner table political debates center around Nixon vs. Humphrey (with George Wallace draining votes from both sides) in that tumultuous year of 1968. An extremely close election, roiled by the assassinations of RFK and MLK and the ensuing race riots, plus the hippie anti-war riots at the Democratic Convention in Chicago.
The Dunns and my Uncle Bernie (who passed away in 1998 ) considered Nixon a crook and a buffoon, and my old man flayed Humphrey as more of the same FDR/JFK/LBJ corrupt big-government liberalism run amok. I remember his using the riots at the DNC in Chicago as a microcosm of the country, and blamed all the turmoil on FDR, JFK, LBJ and the Democrats and their Godless liberalism. Hindsight allows us to see that they were both right to varying degrees.
My old man certainly felt betrayed by Nixon, and not just for Watergate – China, wage & price controls, the EPA, running from Vietnam, etc. But Nixon won re-election in a landslide due to his populist politics, then of course succumbed to his epic hubris over Watergate. Continued populist tinkering and Cold War tensions during the Ford and Carter helped generate the famous 70’s stagflation that ushered in the Age of Reagan.
My Old Man was delighted with Reagan, of course, and was not shy about rubbing his in-laws noses in the financial and international successes his administration stacked up. Though my Old Man did not live to see the fall of the Berlin Wall, I’m sure he would have not be surprised, given his politics & beliefs.
So I’m happy to pick up the flag of conservative values and politics and continue the debate with the mostly Obamafied and reliably Democrat Dunns, and with Uncle Bernie’s double-smart son Mike McMahon and his wife Kitty. Let the JBD blog serve as our dinner table, and feel free to dish it out, but be ready to take it as well. I’m not as quick and talented a debater as my Old Man, so I rely on the brainiacs on the Right to spot me facts and arguments.
First salvo follows shortly, and concerns Mike Mc’s very effective point that he used several times during the Irish McMahon party to blunt my Republican fervor – what happened to the budget surplus that Bush inherited from Clinton?
Short answer – RINOs – Republicans In Name Only – politicians who campaign and win elections as Republicans, but then govern like typical Democrats.
Posted by: JBD at
01:53 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 770 words, total size 6 kb.
MY IRISH FAMILY - GOD LOVE THEM ALL
I'll have more on this once I have a chance to write it up, but our party with McMahon relatives from Ireland exceeded all expectations.
The McGuigans of Monaghan County, Ireland, with their various husbands, wives and close relations, plus my Dad's cousin Mary (Dehn) Van Dessel and her brother and sister-in-law, are on a tour of America, and were good enough to find the time to come to our house for some Mexican food, margaritas and socializing.
Man, are these people the salt of the earth. Full of life, love, humor and happiness, almost all with more than 3 kids and as many grandkids (one pair had 3 grown kids and now are raising 3 foster kids!) they couldn't have been more delightful.
Cousin Big Tom provides some pictures. Note that My Sainted Mother is the at the center of most of the group shots, which is fitting, since it was her hard work on the family genealogy and her decade-long efforts to contact and meet family members, that made this party possible. Thanks, Ma.
Up the Irish!
The McGuigans of Monaghan County, Ireland, with their various husbands, wives and close relations, plus my Dad's cousin Mary (Dehn) Van Dessel and her brother and sister-in-law, are on a tour of America, and were good enough to find the time to come to our house for some Mexican food, margaritas and socializing.
Man, are these people the salt of the earth. Full of life, love, humor and happiness, almost all with more than 3 kids and as many grandkids (one pair had 3 grown kids and now are raising 3 foster kids!) they couldn't have been more delightful.
Cousin Big Tom provides some pictures. Note that My Sainted Mother is the at the center of most of the group shots, which is fitting, since it was her hard work on the family genealogy and her decade-long efforts to contact and meet family members, that made this party possible. Thanks, Ma.
Up the Irish!
Posted by: JBD at
01:10 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.
GAS FROM SHIT
Here's a twist on the idea of homeowners who create their own electricity selling what they don't use back to the untility.
Does this mean we will soon be getting bids from various energy startups to buy the output from our sewers?
Well, no, but certainly the municipal sewer system will.
I now invite suggestions for the name of the gasoline made this way.
Does this mean we will soon be getting bids from various energy startups to buy the output from our sewers?
Well, no, but certainly the municipal sewer system will.
I now invite suggestions for the name of the gasoline made this way.
Posted by: JBD at
12:07 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 67 words, total size 1 kb.
August 30, 2008
OBAMA'S SPEECH CONFIRMS HIS CARDBOARD CELEBRITY
I didn't watch it, but I read every word. Don't whine; I don't watch the Republican speeches either. I don't want to sit through 20 minutes of partisan cheering and applauding when I can read the content in 5 minutes.
So in no particular order, here's my take:
The content of this "historic" speech was by and large Democrat campaign boilerplate, with occasional head-fakes and lip-service to “moderate†positions. For instance, I could have written this line for him 2 years ago, it is so predictable, and such a political chestnut:
Sure, BO, whether they can make the grades or not. OK, how you going to pay for that? He says he will:
Exactly what GWB did in the “No Child Left Behind†program. The difference: teachers know that when Democrats say “accountability†they don’t mean actual countable metrics, like the much-hated “test scoresâ€, they mean “whatever the teacher wants it to be.â€
40 years of this approach to education has given us the expensive mess we have today. We know for sure that more teachers = more Democrat union members = higher budgets = less accountability and performance.
But some of the items on his "laundry list" of "change we can believe in" were laugh-out-loud whoppers. Let's look at the best examples, like this one where he tries to head-fake people into thinking he'll follow in GWBs fiscal footsteps.
Gee, Obama knows which small businesses and start-ups will be successful, and which will create high-paying jobs! Wow, nobody in history has ever been able to do that. If you're that smart, BO, don't waste your time in Washington, get into the capital markets and make it happen!
Do you really think that his tax program will give tax cuts to 95% of all “working families� First off, define "working families" The hardest working families in my experience are the ones who generate the most income. I guarantee they won't get a tax cut from Obama.
And depending how you do define them, the huge majority of "working families" and the “middle class†people already pay practically zero Federal income tax, so even if they do get a "cut" it is meaningless.
Note also that he phrased it “I will cut taxes – cut taxes - …†double emphasis even in the written version of the speech, because he knows that in the minds of the undecided voters, cutting taxes is the right thing to do. But he doesn’t want to actually do it, so he adds half a dozen modified limited takebacks to remove any actual significance.
And how about this little bit of talking out of both sides of his mouth:
To say the least, I disagree, and I think practically all Americans do.
Businesses do not have a responsibility to create American jobs; they will create, staff and locate only as many jobs as will contribute to profits. Governments can increase the incentive for businesses to hire Americans by making it more profitable and less costly – eliminate minimum wage and capital gains taxes, and get rid of the ridiculous union-serving workplace and benefits requirements.
The jobs that rightly belong to Americans only are those that require citizenship and residence. Profitable businesses “look out for†only their good workers, because if they don’t, they lose the good ones to the competition, and fail due to the bad workers they don't (or can’t) get rid of.
The “rules of the road†depend on who makes those rules. Do you want Obama and his supporters making those rules? That’s what the election comes down to. He’s never run a business, risked any of his own money, hired anyone with his own money, fired anybody, or had to show a profit. That is the essence of “inexperience.â€
And before you say it, same goes for John McCain. That's why I believe Senators should not be President - they are legislators, not executives. Though between the two of them, I would grudgingly pick McCain over Obama/Biden, simply because of his military ethic and successful wife. It will depend greatly on who he picks for his VP - Romney or Pawlenty or another governor would help, but another Senator like Lieberman would not.
More doublespeak:
We can protect ourselves from harm if we can own guns, support our local cops, jail violent criminals and execute murderers. How safe are Obama’s constituents on the South Side of Chicago? For all his “community organizingâ€, violence there is worse than when he first started.
Parents are responsible for their child’s education. The federal government has no role
Nobody is against clean water or safe toys, The Federal government certainly has its (very limited) role in this area. Obama as President would expand that role far past what it should be.
Schools, roads – county and state responsibilities, not federal. Science and technology – government at any level should not be an investor, and should be involved in regulating only to the most limited extent possible.
OK. That’s enough – the rest of the speech is equally sophomoric and pointless. This is not the speech I thought - hoped - he would give, applying his rhetorical gifts and his historic symbolic iconic self to wrest the Democrats away from the liberal nutcases and bring them back into the main stream. He didn’t, a fact attested to by the report of the media reporters joining the crowds in a standing ovation. If they loved it, then you know for sure that we’re still dealing with the McGovern – Mondale – Dukakis – Clinton – Gore – Kerry – Biden ethos – an ethos that says, loud and clear, that government is the answer, I am the government, do as I say, give me your money, and I will decide how to spend it.
No.
So in no particular order, here's my take:
The content of this "historic" speech was by and large Democrat campaign boilerplate, with occasional head-fakes and lip-service to “moderate†positions. For instance, I could have written this line for him 2 years ago, it is so predictable, and such a political chestnut:
“to provide every child a world-class educationâ€
Sure, BO, whether they can make the grades or not. OK, how you going to pay for that? He says he will:
“recruit an army of new teachers, and pay them higher salaries and give them more support. And in exchange, I'll ask for higher standards and more accountability.â€
Exactly what GWB did in the “No Child Left Behind†program. The difference: teachers know that when Democrats say “accountability†they don’t mean actual countable metrics, like the much-hated “test scoresâ€, they mean “whatever the teacher wants it to be.â€
40 years of this approach to education has given us the expensive mess we have today. We know for sure that more teachers = more Democrat union members = higher budgets = less accountability and performance.
But some of the items on his "laundry list" of "change we can believe in" were laugh-out-loud whoppers. Let's look at the best examples, like this one where he tries to head-fake people into thinking he'll follow in GWBs fiscal footsteps.
I will eliminate capital gains taxes for the small businesses and the start-ups that will create the high-wage, high-tech jobs of tomorrow.
 I will cut taxes - cut taxes - for 95% of all working families. Because in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle-class.
Gee, Obama knows which small businesses and start-ups will be successful, and which will create high-paying jobs! Wow, nobody in history has ever been able to do that. If you're that smart, BO, don't waste your time in Washington, get into the capital markets and make it happen!
Do you really think that his tax program will give tax cuts to 95% of all “working families� First off, define "working families" The hardest working families in my experience are the ones who generate the most income. I guarantee they won't get a tax cut from Obama.
And depending how you do define them, the huge majority of "working families" and the “middle class†people already pay practically zero Federal income tax, so even if they do get a "cut" it is meaningless.
Note also that he phrased it “I will cut taxes – cut taxes - …†double emphasis even in the written version of the speech, because he knows that in the minds of the undecided voters, cutting taxes is the right thing to do. But he doesn’t want to actually do it, so he adds half a dozen modified limited takebacks to remove any actual significance.
Now,
many of these plans will cost money, which is why I've laid out how
I'll pay for every dime - by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens
that don't help America grow. But I will also go through the federal
budget, line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work and
making the ones we do need work better and cost less - because we
cannot meet twenty-first century challenges with a twentieth century
bureaucracy.
Do you really believe that a Chicago machine politician is going to go through the Federal budget line-by-line to eliminate waste and fraud, so much so that he will be able to pay for tax cuts for the middle class? And that he'll be able to push it through Congress? Of course not. Then why did he say it? Simple - so he can point to it from now on to the election every time he gets asked what he will do about the size and cost of government.And how about this little bit of talking out of both sides of his mouth:
It's a promise that says the market should reward drive and innovation and generate growth, but that businesses should live up to their responsibilities to create American jobs, look out for American workers, and play by the rules of the road.


To say the least, I disagree, and I think practically all Americans do.
Businesses do not have a responsibility to create American jobs; they will create, staff and locate only as many jobs as will contribute to profits. Governments can increase the incentive for businesses to hire Americans by making it more profitable and less costly – eliminate minimum wage and capital gains taxes, and get rid of the ridiculous union-serving workplace and benefits requirements.
The jobs that rightly belong to Americans only are those that require citizenship and residence. Profitable businesses “look out for†only their good workers, because if they don’t, they lose the good ones to the competition, and fail due to the bad workers they don't (or can’t) get rid of.
The “rules of the road†depend on who makes those rules. Do you want Obama and his supporters making those rules? That’s what the election comes down to. He’s never run a business, risked any of his own money, hired anyone with his own money, fired anybody, or had to show a profit. That is the essence of “inexperience.â€
And before you say it, same goes for John McCain. That's why I believe Senators should not be President - they are legislators, not executives. Though between the two of them, I would grudgingly pick McCain over Obama/Biden, simply because of his military ethic and successful wife. It will depend greatly on who he picks for his VP - Romney or Pawlenty or another governor would help, but another Senator like Lieberman would not.
More doublespeak:
Ours is a promise that says government cannot solve all our problems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves - protect us from harm and provide every child a decent education; keep our water clean and our toys safe; invest in new schools and new roads and new science and technology.
We can protect ourselves from harm if we can own guns, support our local cops, jail violent criminals and execute murderers. How safe are Obama’s constituents on the South Side of Chicago? For all his “community organizingâ€, violence there is worse than when he first started.
Parents are responsible for their child’s education. The federal government has no role
Nobody is against clean water or safe toys, The Federal government certainly has its (very limited) role in this area. Obama as President would expand that role far past what it should be.
Schools, roads – county and state responsibilities, not federal. Science and technology – government at any level should not be an investor, and should be involved in regulating only to the most limited extent possible.
OK. That’s enough – the rest of the speech is equally sophomoric and pointless. This is not the speech I thought - hoped - he would give, applying his rhetorical gifts and his historic symbolic iconic self to wrest the Democrats away from the liberal nutcases and bring them back into the main stream. He didn’t, a fact attested to by the report of the media reporters joining the crowds in a standing ovation. If they loved it, then you know for sure that we’re still dealing with the McGovern – Mondale – Dukakis – Clinton – Gore – Kerry – Biden ethos – an ethos that says, loud and clear, that government is the answer, I am the government, do as I say, give me your money, and I will decide how to spend it.
No.
Posted by: JBD at
10:38 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1324 words, total size 9 kb.
BIG TOM AND THE BIG TENT
Following our last exchange of smackdown over GWB, my cousin Big Tom put down his Democrat sword for a moment to expand on his decidedly more nuanced political beliefs.
This may make you sick to your stomach but my candidate was actually Hillary Clinton. If she were president they could have put Bill in charge of the White House interns to give him something to keep him busy. [JBD - bada bing! Jonah Goldberg calls this "fishing in the intern pens" Much as I think Hillary is as unqualified to be President as either Obama or McCain, at least you knew what you were getting from her - a full frontal assault on the taxpayers of feminist-liberal-big government-national health care socialism. It is not a change, only an acceleration, of what has gone on in DC in the last 16 years. One of my problems with Obama is that he has pretty much the same agenda, but will not admit it, lest he lose his "hope and change" cachet. I'm sure it's one of the things that torques Hillary as well.]
All my siblings and their families have been Obama supporters for quite a while. Even my brother, Mike who is a registered Republican is supporting Obama. This may be because he is upset with the Republican party and the direction that it has been going [JBD - you and me both, Professor Mike]. Mike also likes the fact that Obama is being supported by lots of small dollar contributions and won't be owing to the special interest groups. [JBD - Debatable campaign hype - see Obama contribution breakdown here vs. McCain here. And Obama refused Fed matching funds, so he's got to raise more from the fatcats. Also note the story of the ABC reporter & film crew getting arrested by the Denver cops for filming the Democrat fatcat lobbyists coming out of a meeting with Democrat senators. You guys support arresting reporters standing on a public sidewalk?]
Barb is in love with Obama. She and I had some very heated discussions a few months ago relating to the racist [Rev Jerimiah] Wright, obama's spiritual leader. [JBD - sounds like a combo of liberal guilt, adoration of the MLK promise (regardless of its current bowdlerization), and liberal lawyer birds-of-a-feather. You out there Barb? Want to have your say?]
I tend to be conservative when it comes to law and order matters and I believe in the death penalty. With social issues I tend to side more with the liberals. [JBD - I would trade the death penalty for drug law reform (to get the harmless loadies out of jail) and a return to punitive prison for violent offenders only. Make the white collar and "victimless" criminals work off their crimes in service to the people they offended. Too many people in jail who should not be there, too many criminals get our early as a result, borderline cases get criminal training while in the joint, and the prison guard union is too politically strong because of its size.]
Once in a while I vote for a Republican including the Senior Bush. I don't like the extremes of either party. I can't stand Jerry Brown, Jessi Jackson, Al Sharpton and others that are like them. [JBD - Bush 41 got a raw deal on his loss to Clinton, thanks to Perot. Gov. Moonbeam Brown signed my Cal State diploma, and it kills me every time I think of it. Race baiters Jackson & Sharpton are the bowdlerizers of MLKs vision I mentioned above, who got rich pushing the politics of victimization that made Obama the nominee.]
Jimmy Carter is a good man but was a very ineffective president. I did like his wife's sexy southern accent. But the Christian conservatives of the Republican party scare the hell out of me the most. I refer to them as the Christian Taliban. They tend to not be very tolerant of those that don't share their religious beliefs. They display the "you are either with us or against us mentality". [JBD - You do yourself a disservice equating the two. Daffy and intolerant as the Pat Robertson and Lou Dobson crowd can be, they are mostly harmless in a free society, and certainly don't represent or run the Republican party, any more than Code Pink or PETA runs the Democrats. Calling them the Taliban makes the God-botherers much worse than the are, and diminishes the evil that is Islamic fundamentalism in everyday real life practice. No beheaded hookers or gays on Robertsons trophy wall.]
I would have voted for Mitt Romney over Obama but the Christian Taliban would never vote for a member of a "cult" so he didn't have a prayer of getting the Republican nomination. [JBD - He came close. The Christian extremists alone did not have the yank to sink him. He's a dull, too-handsome guy with the perfect background, and I would have voted for him in a heartbeat. We may still get him for VP.]
Mc Cain on the other hand has been pandering to the Christian conservatives to get their vote. Unfortunately it hurts him with people like me.
One of my partners XXXXX (a Japanese-American Mormon) is a Republican and he has commented that what works best is when the President and the majority in congress are from different parties. That way it makes it tougher to get legislation passed.
{He and I} tend to agree about most thing but then he ends up voting with the Republicans and I with the Democrats. [JBD - like the last two year - gridlock is good.]
If Obama is elected I think he will have a very tough time getting elected again in four years. He will have the very difficult task of keeping the different factions within the Democratic party happy. [JBD - That's my preferred scenario - Obama wins now, and his crowd over-reaches badly, and the voters swing back to a Republican congress in 2010, setting up a Republican majority in 2012.
Look at the "open mic" comments on Fox news by Jessie Jackson. all because Obama had the audacity to tell young blacks how to stand up and be a man. Something Bill Cosby has been doing for years. i really liked the fact that Obama pissed off Jessie Jackson. It was at that point that I started thinking I might actually vote for Obama. [JBD - just a typical turf war in the politics of victimology.]
All my siblings and their families have been Obama supporters for quite a while. Even my brother, Mike who is a registered Republican is supporting Obama. This may be because he is upset with the Republican party and the direction that it has been going [JBD - you and me both, Professor Mike]. Mike also likes the fact that Obama is being supported by lots of small dollar contributions and won't be owing to the special interest groups. [JBD - Debatable campaign hype - see Obama contribution breakdown here vs. McCain here. And Obama refused Fed matching funds, so he's got to raise more from the fatcats. Also note the story of the ABC reporter & film crew getting arrested by the Denver cops for filming the Democrat fatcat lobbyists coming out of a meeting with Democrat senators. You guys support arresting reporters standing on a public sidewalk?]
Barb is in love with Obama. She and I had some very heated discussions a few months ago relating to the racist [Rev Jerimiah] Wright, obama's spiritual leader. [JBD - sounds like a combo of liberal guilt, adoration of the MLK promise (regardless of its current bowdlerization), and liberal lawyer birds-of-a-feather. You out there Barb? Want to have your say?]
I tend to be conservative when it comes to law and order matters and I believe in the death penalty. With social issues I tend to side more with the liberals. [JBD - I would trade the death penalty for drug law reform (to get the harmless loadies out of jail) and a return to punitive prison for violent offenders only. Make the white collar and "victimless" criminals work off their crimes in service to the people they offended. Too many people in jail who should not be there, too many criminals get our early as a result, borderline cases get criminal training while in the joint, and the prison guard union is too politically strong because of its size.]
Once in a while I vote for a Republican including the Senior Bush. I don't like the extremes of either party. I can't stand Jerry Brown, Jessi Jackson, Al Sharpton and others that are like them. [JBD - Bush 41 got a raw deal on his loss to Clinton, thanks to Perot. Gov. Moonbeam Brown signed my Cal State diploma, and it kills me every time I think of it. Race baiters Jackson & Sharpton are the bowdlerizers of MLKs vision I mentioned above, who got rich pushing the politics of victimization that made Obama the nominee.]
Jimmy Carter is a good man but was a very ineffective president. I did like his wife's sexy southern accent. But the Christian conservatives of the Republican party scare the hell out of me the most. I refer to them as the Christian Taliban. They tend to not be very tolerant of those that don't share their religious beliefs. They display the "you are either with us or against us mentality". [JBD - You do yourself a disservice equating the two. Daffy and intolerant as the Pat Robertson and Lou Dobson crowd can be, they are mostly harmless in a free society, and certainly don't represent or run the Republican party, any more than Code Pink or PETA runs the Democrats. Calling them the Taliban makes the God-botherers much worse than the are, and diminishes the evil that is Islamic fundamentalism in everyday real life practice. No beheaded hookers or gays on Robertsons trophy wall.]
I would have voted for Mitt Romney over Obama but the Christian Taliban would never vote for a member of a "cult" so he didn't have a prayer of getting the Republican nomination. [JBD - He came close. The Christian extremists alone did not have the yank to sink him. He's a dull, too-handsome guy with the perfect background, and I would have voted for him in a heartbeat. We may still get him for VP.]
Mc Cain on the other hand has been pandering to the Christian conservatives to get their vote. Unfortunately it hurts him with people like me.
One of my partners XXXXX (a Japanese-American Mormon) is a Republican and he has commented that what works best is when the President and the majority in congress are from different parties. That way it makes it tougher to get legislation passed.
{He and I} tend to agree about most thing but then he ends up voting with the Republicans and I with the Democrats. [JBD - like the last two year - gridlock is good.]
If Obama is elected I think he will have a very tough time getting elected again in four years. He will have the very difficult task of keeping the different factions within the Democratic party happy. [JBD - That's my preferred scenario - Obama wins now, and his crowd over-reaches badly, and the voters swing back to a Republican congress in 2010, setting up a Republican majority in 2012.
Look at the "open mic" comments on Fox news by Jessie Jackson. all because Obama had the audacity to tell young blacks how to stand up and be a man. Something Bill Cosby has been doing for years. i really liked the fact that Obama pissed off Jessie Jackson. It was at that point that I started thinking I might actually vote for Obama. [JBD - just a typical turf war in the politics of victimology.]
Posted by: JBD at
10:25 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 468 words, total size 9 kb.
COOL BUT IMPRACTICAL
Here's another great example of non-govenrment funded innovation.
While something like this won't make a dent in energy use per se, it is moving us in the right direction. It's guys like this who will solve the big problems, having already conquered little ones.
And the help he needed came not from government grants or do-gooder foundations, it came from family, friends, like-minded entrepreneurs, and savvy sales people who, like the SolidWorks guy who gave him a free license for advanced CAD software, can recognize a future player when they see one.
While something like this won't make a dent in energy use per se, it is moving us in the right direction. It's guys like this who will solve the big problems, having already conquered little ones.
And the help he needed came not from government grants or do-gooder foundations, it came from family, friends, like-minded entrepreneurs, and savvy sales people who, like the SolidWorks guy who gave him a free license for advanced CAD software, can recognize a future player when they see one.
Posted by: JBD at
10:11 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 95 words, total size 1 kb.
August 18, 2008
THE FROSTING ON SADDAM'S YELLOWCAKE
Cousin Tom comes to Saddam's defense re: my fisking of the WMD crack in the Bush Presidential Library post.
He forwards the "facts" from liberal gotcha shop Factcheck.org. They maintain that the tons of yellowcake can't be counted as WMD because"everybody knew they were there." Weak beer, girls.
After 3+ years of listening to whining about Joe Wilson's "brave" revelation about Saddam not seeking yellow cake in Africa, is there any doubt that, if asked, practically every American would have said, "No, Saddam had no uranium"? Much less over 500 tons?
But most careful and unemotional observers knew that this huge trove of dangerous stuff had been, and was still there, and I certainly didn't say that this was a new discovery in my comments below. In fact I pointed out that the US knew it was there for years. So did IBD in the story that Factcheck disses, and so did most of the bloggers they denigrate.
The only people who were surprised by this are the ones who get their news from Katie Couric, or whover else it is that Tom relies on for his talking points.
The point is Saddam had the WMD, and a history of developing and using it, and sought more of what he had, and was actively reaching out for ways to expand and complete his development programs and delivery systems when we came in and took him out. Left unmolested, what would Saddam have done with this stuff over the last 4 plus years? Not nothing, that's for sure.
That this huge deposit fell off the liberal media radar, and is now pooh-poohed as "old news", reveals the thin charge of "Bush Lied" for what it is - a canard, and a sign of non-serious thinking.
And my point that Bush easily could have used this event for some payback, but was too classy and careful to do it, is unchanged. Just like he could have made a big splash with pictures of the giant stash in Iraq, but knew that it would be too tempting a target for terrorists to pass up. So he took the cheap shots and kept it quiet, until we could sneak it out (hey, how did a moron like Bush he get that much stuff get past our vaunted media, anyway?) and sell it to an ally.
What other WMDs did Saddam have? What did Israel blow up in Syria earlier this year - smuggled out WMD from Iraq? Only time will tell, but don't expect to hear it from the media. They have moved on from Iraq, since the body count is not big enough to sell ads anymore.
Who can possibly depend on a media that goes out of its way to hide stories that liberals & Democrats consider bad news? If they will stifle stories as easy to verify as John Edward's ongoing affair, what else are they holding?
I don't really care, since I don't make decisions and vote based on what the current media spoon feeds.
OK, Tom, what else ya got?
He forwards the "facts" from liberal gotcha shop Factcheck.org. They maintain that the tons of yellowcake can't be counted as WMD because"everybody knew they were there." Weak beer, girls.
After 3+ years of listening to whining about Joe Wilson's "brave" revelation about Saddam not seeking yellow cake in Africa, is there any doubt that, if asked, practically every American would have said, "No, Saddam had no uranium"? Much less over 500 tons?
But most careful and unemotional observers knew that this huge trove of dangerous stuff had been, and was still there, and I certainly didn't say that this was a new discovery in my comments below. In fact I pointed out that the US knew it was there for years. So did IBD in the story that Factcheck disses, and so did most of the bloggers they denigrate.
The only people who were surprised by this are the ones who get their news from Katie Couric, or whover else it is that Tom relies on for his talking points.
The point is Saddam had the WMD, and a history of developing and using it, and sought more of what he had, and was actively reaching out for ways to expand and complete his development programs and delivery systems when we came in and took him out. Left unmolested, what would Saddam have done with this stuff over the last 4 plus years? Not nothing, that's for sure.
That this huge deposit fell off the liberal media radar, and is now pooh-poohed as "old news", reveals the thin charge of "Bush Lied" for what it is - a canard, and a sign of non-serious thinking.
And my point that Bush easily could have used this event for some payback, but was too classy and careful to do it, is unchanged. Just like he could have made a big splash with pictures of the giant stash in Iraq, but knew that it would be too tempting a target for terrorists to pass up. So he took the cheap shots and kept it quiet, until we could sneak it out (hey, how did a moron like Bush he get that much stuff get past our vaunted media, anyway?) and sell it to an ally.
What other WMDs did Saddam have? What did Israel blow up in Syria earlier this year - smuggled out WMD from Iraq? Only time will tell, but don't expect to hear it from the media. They have moved on from Iraq, since the body count is not big enough to sell ads anymore.
Who can possibly depend on a media that goes out of its way to hide stories that liberals & Democrats consider bad news? If they will stifle stories as easy to verify as John Edward's ongoing affair, what else are they holding?
I don't really care, since I don't make decisions and vote based on what the current media spoon feeds.
OK, Tom, what else ya got?
Posted by: JBD at
07:44 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 516 words, total size 3 kb.
August 10, 2008
BUT...BUT...WARREN BUFFET SAID THE DOLLAR WAS TANKING!?!
The Sage of Omaha has been badmouthing and buying against the dollar all throughout George Bush's term. He does it to 1) make money and 2) blame the problems on Bush.
This is particularly rich:
And the banks gave money to people who could not afford it because Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac kept buying up the sub-prime loans. And why did that happen, class? Because the Democrats running these institutions kept changing the rules so that they could make money.
Add to that the push to end "redlining" high-risk applicants, and you end up with what we have now - organizations like Buffet's holding worthless paper backed by defaulted properties. And they need the Fed (meaning you and me, brother) to bail them out with legislation and a weak dollar.
Well, looks like he's going to get caught short himself now.
Watch for his position on the dollar to crumble just like what happened to all the other Democrat-inflated markets - mortgages, oil, ethanol and construction.
When you blow up a bubble to get rich, you get soaked when it bursts.
It's good to shake the losers out of the system every once in a while. Unfortunately, lots of decent hardworking people get caught in the backwash.
Hey Chief, better nail down those European sales before the rate of exchange turns over.
This is particularly rich:
Both Mr. Buffett and Mr. Munger agreed that home buyers that were misled on mortgages and are facing a crisis, such as foreclosure, deserve some help. Mr. Buffett said that mortgage papers should include a single sheet that says, in simple words and bold type, the terms of the loan and what could happen to house payments and interest rates if things change.
He also said that he had written a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson in which he suggested that people taking out a mortgage should be provided a one-page document that is headlined “WARNING†in red, and describes in-depth the maximum rate they could face in the future.
Anybody who has signed mortgage papers knows full well that all this language is already there. More disclosure forms won't keep people from buying more house than they can afford if the banks will give them the money.And the banks gave money to people who could not afford it because Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac kept buying up the sub-prime loans. And why did that happen, class? Because the Democrats running these institutions kept changing the rules so that they could make money.
Add to that the push to end "redlining" high-risk applicants, and you end up with what we have now - organizations like Buffet's holding worthless paper backed by defaulted properties. And they need the Fed (meaning you and me, brother) to bail them out with legislation and a weak dollar.
Well, looks like he's going to get caught short himself now.
Watch for his position on the dollar to crumble just like what happened to all the other Democrat-inflated markets - mortgages, oil, ethanol and construction.
When you blow up a bubble to get rich, you get soaked when it bursts.
It's good to shake the losers out of the system every once in a while. Unfortunately, lots of decent hardworking people get caught in the backwash.
Hey Chief, better nail down those European sales before the rate of exchange turns over.
Posted by: JBD at
07:50 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 379 words, total size 3 kb.
CHILDREN CRY "FREE SPEECH!" WHEN CAUGHT STEALING
So a trio of bright kids and their professor, with unlimited time and the resources of a premier technological university behind them, "hack" a system that is designed to provide easy, reasonably secure access for millions of people who just want to ride the train.
Change "smartcard" to "locks" and see if you still think this is free speech. "See, you use a 10-lb sledge hammer and a cold chisel, and you can easily access the internal workings of any turnstile! We hacked the MBTA and got free rides!"
Or "We paid a hooker to 'social engineer' a security guard while we made copies of his keys!!! PWNED!!! Let's do a PowerPoint about it for DefCon!!! Or maybe call that Apatow guy and see if he wants the story!!! Free speech lives!!!"
Why shouldn't they be arrested for trespassing and theft? Why shouldn’t the professor get fired for promoting illegal activity? Why didn't they just call the MBTA security people ahead of time and propose that they do the same analysis? Juvenile attitudes, that's why. Had they acted responsibly, they'd still be heroes to the geeks, but would also be thought trustworthy by the adults who make this world work. Time to spank them in court - hope the MIT Alumni are pleased about how their donations are being spent.
And nobody is going to hire these guys now. Their "hack" wasn't original, or clever, or even a true "hack" - it's a combination of trespassing and trying every combination on a bike lock until it opens. No customer will pay for 100% security against all possible attacks, and these guys had all the time and resources they needed.
But based on the laughable "warcart". I think this is viral. What no Pez dispenser and D&D logo?
The Goose replies here.
Change "smartcard" to "locks" and see if you still think this is free speech. "See, you use a 10-lb sledge hammer and a cold chisel, and you can easily access the internal workings of any turnstile! We hacked the MBTA and got free rides!"
Or "We paid a hooker to 'social engineer' a security guard while we made copies of his keys!!! PWNED!!! Let's do a PowerPoint about it for DefCon!!! Or maybe call that Apatow guy and see if he wants the story!!! Free speech lives!!!"
Why shouldn't they be arrested for trespassing and theft? Why shouldn’t the professor get fired for promoting illegal activity? Why didn't they just call the MBTA security people ahead of time and propose that they do the same analysis? Juvenile attitudes, that's why. Had they acted responsibly, they'd still be heroes to the geeks, but would also be thought trustworthy by the adults who make this world work. Time to spank them in court - hope the MIT Alumni are pleased about how their donations are being spent.
And nobody is going to hire these guys now. Their "hack" wasn't original, or clever, or even a true "hack" - it's a combination of trespassing and trying every combination on a bike lock until it opens. No customer will pay for 100% security against all possible attacks, and these guys had all the time and resources they needed.
But based on the laughable "warcart". I think this is viral. What no Pez dispenser and D&D logo?
The Goose replies here.
Posted by: JBD at
06:16 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 308 words, total size 2 kb.
THE GEORGE W. BUSH PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY FISKING
My cousin Big Tom sends along a copy of the yawn-inducing bit of Bush Derangement Syndrome known as The George W. Bush Presidential Library. The original "zingers" are in bold, my responses in italics. As usual, my links to the supporting news stories are in orange.
-The Hurricane Katrina Room, the construction of which will be delayed and mismanaged. Because the contract for the construction was awarded to the New Orleans local government, who promptly spent the money on hookers and joyrides on the dozens of water-damaged school buses unused during the evacuation.
-The Alberto Gonzales Room, where you won't be able to remember anything. Except how bad things were under Janet Reno. How many farmhouses full of kids did Gonzales burn down? How many Cuban kids did Gonzales kidnap at gunpoint and send back to Castro? Gonzales fired 8 US Attorneys after 6 years of service and a careful review process; how many did Clinton fire on his first day in office?
-The Texas Air National Guard Room, where you don't even have to show up. Except for the 300+ documented hours compiled over 6 years of service of actually piloting a complicated, hard to fly fighter jet aircraft. Not exactly like steering a switftboat up a river.
-The Walter Reed Hospital Room, where they don't let you in. Except for the thousands of service personnel who actually do get treated properly every year. Unlike, say, the people who were promised housing in the abandoned projects that the Barack Obama supported.
-The Guantanamo Bay Room, where they don't let you out. Unlike Clinton’s Terrorist Pardon salon, where a few well-placed dollars gets you pardoned for life, regardless of how many crimes you committed, or how many deaths your partners caused.
-The Weapons of Mass Destruction Room, which no one has been able to find. It’s right behind those 550 tons of yellowcake uranium that were just secretly shipped out of Iraq.
N.B: Bush knew about this stash for years, and could have trumpeted it as proof positive of the WMD danger, and in the process, crammed Joe Wilson and "the sixteen words" down the throats of all his critics. He didn't do that, though, because he wanted to avoid giving the terrorists a ripe target inside Iraq, unnecessarily endangering our troops, and risking a "dirty bomb" disaster. Now it will be safely reprocessed for energy by an ally.
-The National Debt Room which is huge and has no ceiling. Except that it's Congress who controls deficit spending and the national debt, not the President. And if debt is bad, tell me which economy you'd rather live under - the Nixon/Ford/Carter high-tax high-inflation 70's, or the Reagan/Bush1/Clinton/Bush2 80-00's?
-The 'Tax Cut' Room with entry only to the wealthy. Because you have to pay taxes to get a tax cut. Since the top 10% of wage earners pay over 55% of all taxes, it’s a small room.
-The 'Economy Room' which is in the toilet. Actually, the room was clean, beautiful and healthy for 6 years - it’s the outhouse shipped in by Reid-Pelosi a year and a half ago that you smell.
-The Iraq War Room. After you complete your first tour, they make you go back for a second, third, fourth, and sometimes fifth tour. Only if you re-enlist, which, like when you first signed up, you volunteered to do.
-The Dick Cheney Room, in the famous undisclosed location, complete with shotgun gallery. Since being in his undisclosed location didn’t prevent the full story of his shotgun mishap making the news, John Edwards should be sure not to rendezvous with his mistress there. And Cheney’s hideout is not near as good as that undisclosed location where Obama is stashing all the bus-maimed bodies of his former advisors and associates.
-The Environmental Conservation Room, still empty. No, it’s there, it’s just crammed so full with Al Gore that there’s no room left.
-The Supremes Gift Shop, where you can buy an election. Then I suppose the dead and imaginary Democrat voters in Chicago and Milwaukee want their tax money back? Or like all losers, is it just easier to blame the referee?
-The Airport Men's Room, where you can meet some of your favorite Republican Senators. Anybody die there, like at Chappaquiddick? Any illegitimate children result while cheating on a wife with cancer? Any hurricanes hit before evacuating a major city? Can I get a discount mortgage there if I’m a friend of the janitor?
-The 'Decider Room' complete with dart board, magic 8-ball, Ouija board, dice, coins, and straws. These probably produce just as good a result as fellatio.
The museum will also have an electron microscope to help you locate the President's accomplishments. Yes, it’s right over there behind the 27 million freed Iraqis. You can use it to see the list of terrorist attacks on our soil since 9-11.
W. himself will ride his bike over periodically to clear brush and look after the grounds. And this is bad because? Oh, yes, of course, everything George Bush does is bad.
I heard John McCain wants to build a library attached to the Presidential Library, using the same faulty plans and materials. I’ll bet he’d be more than satisfied with the same record of increasing security, peace, prosperity and freedom, despite the ongoing rattle of the Democrats pounding their sippy cups on their high chairs.
Both buildings will be built on shaky foundations. No, the foundations are fine. Everything looks shaky to Democrats, because their always trembling in rage at the injustices all around them. They don’t actually do anything, they just tremble. In rage. And then write about it in newspapers and magazines.
The lobby of McCain's library will feature a full-sized statue of him wearing flip-flops. Those must be Obama brand flip-flops.
-The Hurricane Katrina Room, the construction of which will be delayed and mismanaged. Because the contract for the construction was awarded to the New Orleans local government, who promptly spent the money on hookers and joyrides on the dozens of water-damaged school buses unused during the evacuation.
-The Alberto Gonzales Room, where you won't be able to remember anything. Except how bad things were under Janet Reno. How many farmhouses full of kids did Gonzales burn down? How many Cuban kids did Gonzales kidnap at gunpoint and send back to Castro? Gonzales fired 8 US Attorneys after 6 years of service and a careful review process; how many did Clinton fire on his first day in office?
-The Texas Air National Guard Room, where you don't even have to show up. Except for the 300+ documented hours compiled over 6 years of service of actually piloting a complicated, hard to fly fighter jet aircraft. Not exactly like steering a switftboat up a river.
-The Walter Reed Hospital Room, where they don't let you in. Except for the thousands of service personnel who actually do get treated properly every year. Unlike, say, the people who were promised housing in the abandoned projects that the Barack Obama supported.
-The Guantanamo Bay Room, where they don't let you out. Unlike Clinton’s Terrorist Pardon salon, where a few well-placed dollars gets you pardoned for life, regardless of how many crimes you committed, or how many deaths your partners caused.
-The Weapons of Mass Destruction Room, which no one has been able to find. It’s right behind those 550 tons of yellowcake uranium that were just secretly shipped out of Iraq.
N.B: Bush knew about this stash for years, and could have trumpeted it as proof positive of the WMD danger, and in the process, crammed Joe Wilson and "the sixteen words" down the throats of all his critics. He didn't do that, though, because he wanted to avoid giving the terrorists a ripe target inside Iraq, unnecessarily endangering our troops, and risking a "dirty bomb" disaster. Now it will be safely reprocessed for energy by an ally.
-The National Debt Room which is huge and has no ceiling. Except that it's Congress who controls deficit spending and the national debt, not the President. And if debt is bad, tell me which economy you'd rather live under - the Nixon/Ford/Carter high-tax high-inflation 70's, or the Reagan/Bush1/Clinton/Bush2 80-00's?
-The 'Tax Cut' Room with entry only to the wealthy. Because you have to pay taxes to get a tax cut. Since the top 10% of wage earners pay over 55% of all taxes, it’s a small room.
-The 'Economy Room' which is in the toilet. Actually, the room was clean, beautiful and healthy for 6 years - it’s the outhouse shipped in by Reid-Pelosi a year and a half ago that you smell.
-The Iraq War Room. After you complete your first tour, they make you go back for a second, third, fourth, and sometimes fifth tour. Only if you re-enlist, which, like when you first signed up, you volunteered to do.
-The Dick Cheney Room, in the famous undisclosed location, complete with shotgun gallery. Since being in his undisclosed location didn’t prevent the full story of his shotgun mishap making the news, John Edwards should be sure not to rendezvous with his mistress there. And Cheney’s hideout is not near as good as that undisclosed location where Obama is stashing all the bus-maimed bodies of his former advisors and associates.
-The Environmental Conservation Room, still empty. No, it’s there, it’s just crammed so full with Al Gore that there’s no room left.
-The Supremes Gift Shop, where you can buy an election. Then I suppose the dead and imaginary Democrat voters in Chicago and Milwaukee want their tax money back? Or like all losers, is it just easier to blame the referee?
-The Airport Men's Room, where you can meet some of your favorite Republican Senators. Anybody die there, like at Chappaquiddick? Any illegitimate children result while cheating on a wife with cancer? Any hurricanes hit before evacuating a major city? Can I get a discount mortgage there if I’m a friend of the janitor?
-The 'Decider Room' complete with dart board, magic 8-ball, Ouija board, dice, coins, and straws. These probably produce just as good a result as fellatio.
The museum will also have an electron microscope to help you locate the President's accomplishments. Yes, it’s right over there behind the 27 million freed Iraqis. You can use it to see the list of terrorist attacks on our soil since 9-11.
W. himself will ride his bike over periodically to clear brush and look after the grounds. And this is bad because? Oh, yes, of course, everything George Bush does is bad.
I heard John McCain wants to build a library attached to the Presidential Library, using the same faulty plans and materials. I’ll bet he’d be more than satisfied with the same record of increasing security, peace, prosperity and freedom, despite the ongoing rattle of the Democrats pounding their sippy cups on their high chairs.
Both buildings will be built on shaky foundations. No, the foundations are fine. Everything looks shaky to Democrats, because their always trembling in rage at the injustices all around them. They don’t actually do anything, they just tremble. In rage. And then write about it in newspapers and magazines.
The lobby of McCain's library will feature a full-sized statue of him wearing flip-flops. Those must be Obama brand flip-flops.
Posted by: JBD at
01:16 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 972 words, total size 10 kb.
August 03, 2008
DON'T LIKE OBAMA'S POLICIES? WAIT A MINUTE...
Looks like BHO's not only tacking right, he's sprinting.
Let's list some other changes Obama's made from liberal policies to centrist in the last few weeks:
Arianna is not amused.
Let's list some other changes Obama's made from liberal policies to centrist in the last few weeks:
Off-shore drilling (notice how he waited until congress had adjourned for 5 weeks before mentioning that). I'm sure Nancy Pelosi plotzed when he dropped that little comment.
Gun ownership.
Public campaign funding.
Late term abortions.
Troop withdrawal based on conditions, not timetables.
Gun ownership.
Public campaign funding.
Late term abortions.
Troop withdrawal based on conditions, not timetables.
Arianna is not amused.
Posted by: JBD at
10:34 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 79 words, total size 1 kb.
WHY LOOIE BOUGHT A CAMARO
Wow, look at those bitchen' special effects!
Posted by: JBD at
09:56 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 12 words, total size 1 kb.
SAWDUST INTO GO-JUICE
Imagine converting all those wood chips generated by tree chippers into gas instead of piling them up, spreading them around bare spots in the park, or “composting†them.
Well, imagine no more:
Well, imagine no more:
Posted by: JBD at
09:54 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.
THE IRISH ARE COMING
The Goddess of Love kicks out the jambs and throws open the doors to McMahon's Irish Pub on the occasion of a visit of relatives from The Old Country. And I quote:
Guess who's bartending?
Brace Yourselves — It’s an Irish Invasion!
Dia dhuit Teaghlach [hello family]
Some wonderful family from the Emerald Isle is headed out west to sightsee and visit family.
Those coming are:
Teresa and Tony Fitz Patrick and their son Ronan
Marie and Seamus McKenna
Kathrina and Sean Casey
Tom and Ann McGuigan, Kevin and Eileen
Mikey McGuigan whose wife will not be with us since she plans to visit their older son who is working in New Zealand for a few years.
Jim and Rosemary Dehn (Mary Dehn’s brother and sister-in-law)
Mary Dehn Van Dessel is the gracious hostess for this contingent and will be showing them the Grand Canyon, Phoenix, and lots of Southern California. With their busy schedule we have managed to reserve one evening for our own version of a céilÃ. [A céilà is a social gathering featuring Irish music and dance]
Although these relatives are from the McMahon branch of the family tree, we don’t want to leave out the Dunn branch! So please come join the fun.
When: Thursday, August 28th
Come by anytime after 4:00pm. We will try to eat at 6:30pm, but want lots of time to visit.
Bring photos to share and a camera to capture the fun of the evening.
We look forward to seeing you – it will be a brilliant time!
If I have forgotten someone for this email, please forward.
Jim & Lynnette McMahon
Dia dhuit Teaghlach [hello family]
Some wonderful family from the Emerald Isle is headed out west to sightsee and visit family.
Those coming are:
Teresa and Tony Fitz Patrick and their son Ronan
Marie and Seamus McKenna
Kathrina and Sean Casey
Tom and Ann McGuigan, Kevin and Eileen
Mikey McGuigan whose wife will not be with us since she plans to visit their older son who is working in New Zealand for a few years.
Jim and Rosemary Dehn (Mary Dehn’s brother and sister-in-law)
Mary Dehn Van Dessel is the gracious hostess for this contingent and will be showing them the Grand Canyon, Phoenix, and lots of Southern California. With their busy schedule we have managed to reserve one evening for our own version of a céilÃ. [A céilà is a social gathering featuring Irish music and dance]
Although these relatives are from the McMahon branch of the family tree, we don’t want to leave out the Dunn branch! So please come join the fun.
When: Thursday, August 28th
Come by anytime after 4:00pm. We will try to eat at 6:30pm, but want lots of time to visit.
Bring photos to share and a camera to capture the fun of the evening.
We look forward to seeing you – it will be a brilliant time!
If I have forgotten someone for this email, please forward.
Jim & Lynnette McMahon
Guess who's bartending?
Posted by: JBD at
09:50 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 249 words, total size 3 kb.
105kb generated in CPU 0.0813, elapsed 0.131 seconds.
28 queries taking 0.1172 seconds, 71 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
28 queries taking 0.1172 seconds, 71 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.