You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Privacy Issues’ category.
I wanted to put some thoughts down on this, since it has begun at least locally to become a major thrust of conversation… Has America lost its Exceptionalism?
Be wary, that is a very general question, and the wisest answer so far to date, has been Rick Jensen’s: “Which definition of American Exceptionalism are we going to use?”
So all “Exceptionalism” arguments are circular, because we are comparing bananas with apples and oranges, to see they all are better than watermelons… (they aren’t; watermelons rule; btw)
But,… what if we made up a new definition, one in which America was defined as being its people’s right to self determination?…. Simply put, it steals from our Declaration of Independence and states along Jeffersonian lines, that people have the right to go in the direction in which they want.
If that becomes one’s definition, then not only is our nation non-exceptional, but it is working hard to become as unexceptional as possible.
At the crux of this change, is the probably this facet: Those rights and values that used to be held up as true for people, have now been usurped by big business, or multi-national corporations…
One could take it one step further, that at one time America was exceptional… With a wide open frontier growing faster than regulating authorities could keep up, best practices could evolve and become powerful, before the squelching counter-force of the status quo could take its effect….
In real life, we are facing the return of the status quo, as being defined as ruled by an elite, in all that has changed over the last 14 years. I would mark the tipping point (based on my viewing stand) as tipping in 2007… Other’s may use different markers and put their finger before or afterwards, but the playing field has seriously changed based on Conservative principles which originally emerged out of the 1994 Gingrich neo-Conservative movement… Some of the changes occurred through their emphasis on lack of regulation, some through their pro-financial legislation, and some through their Conservative Court decisions…
But all have been enacted to embrace restraints and control over democracy, by those landed class having tremendous amounts of money at their disposal. Ironically, for them to have the freedoms expressed in the Declaration of Independence, they must suppress yours….
What we are looking at transpiring over just the past few years, is a return to a ruling class, just like in Ireland, where the subjects have no rights at all, and if any amenities are to be given, it is only to keep them alive to keep the profiteering economic engines continuing to spit out money for its owners…
A topic recently discussed here was Wal*mart and speculation that some corporate pressure would now be upcoming to re-invest a bit more of America’s resources back into food stamps because one of its landed-gentry (the Waltons) was now foundering.. in other words, it is deemed to be good landed-gentry policy to put the boot into ones people, but only as far until one feels the effect applied to oneself, and then and only then, does the pressure get let off.
Under old American thinking, that never could have happened. The majority would revolt through elections and the landed gentry would be forced to pull the idea off the table until another opportunity.
In arguments of this structure and magnitude the future use of adjectives such as “good” and “bad” to describe the two sides, is misleading. For in any type of disagreement, one always sees oneself as representing the good they wish to represent, and the other with opposing belief, sees them as evil…
Therefore a more thorough distinction must be used. Rich and poor is too general and too relative. The most accurate definition I can think of how to delineate the two opposing parties, is that one employed by the Wall Street activists of the 1% versus the 99%… That is such a convenient piece of language. Realistically, of course the area between 90-99% would be full of people who had some fingers in some pies on both sides… And quite probably a more accurate delineation would be to draw the line at the 15% mark, at which a very clear line evolves between being either self-sufficient, or a supplicant… But, for reference primarily due to its common use, it just makes sense to continue using the 1%–99% divide. That polarization helps illuminate the major discrepancies and make arguing points for each side, .. much easier. .
What we have seen since the century mark passed us with no Y2K disaster….. is the 1% making giant inroads into our government, our communications, our economy, and our employment….
Money can do that.
If one is wealthy, one can a) hire people to craft legislation, b) pander it through Congress and state legislatures surreptitiously attached to campaign contributions, and c) hire scholars to invent and trumpet the advantages of each of those bills. This creates a one-sided argument against which no one is immune… Those too poor to pay cash, those too poor to take off work, those too tied down to drive down to Washington or one’s state capital, have their side eclipsed. The legislator could be one of the most benign to the principles of the Constitution, but if he is lied to and provided glowing accounts of how his vote will resonate glowingly among all voters, without a contrarian opinion, he is doing whatever they say.
Not to absolve their blame, but it is just as if you, saw me every day and said “how are things going” and I said “not so good”, you’d feel concerned and want to help. But on the other hand if you stood in a checkout line with a mom and two kids using WIC paper to get necessary nutrients, and asked… ” how are things going”,… their negative answer would roll off your back… Not because you are callous; but because you don’t know them. Excessive wealth has insulated our Congress, in fact, I would go out on a limb and say it has insulated the entire DC belt-way. They just don’t know what average America goes through anymore.
When your most pressing problem is that you were invited to two important functions and have to figure out which one to snub and turn down, your prowess of representing your constituents is in question…. You have effectively been insulated from your constituent’s priorities… As long as big money is allowed to be involved, it will happen to all we send there.
Against this, one would think that our communications industry would be implored to exploit for its own power, the divide between the ruling high gentry and the peasants supporting them. Truth was, it WAS that way post-WWII. Perhaps their healthily dislike of the government came from seeing up close and personal it’s inefficiencies during the fog of WWII, but clear evaluations did take place inside our major media over the McCarthy Hearings, Civil Rights, the Vietnam War, and Welfare and Poverty. People always got a perspective different from the official government’s opinions. And newspapers were far more partisan way back then, on both sides.
But big money bought them all. Big money owns them all. Instead of competition, we have homogenization. with nothing ever wrong being pinned on big money…. We have arguments of why taxes need cut; no one ever sees arguments of why they should be raised even though the paper receives 9 to 1 letters in favor of raising taxes… Our media no longer represents American thought; it represents corporate mouthpieces, as was recently evidenced by NBC cutting away from the collapse of the USA to gargle over a troubled Justin Bieber in its networks competition over Neilsen ratings and getting the most “Likes” on Facebook..
When the reality of events shows Big Money in its correct light, the media does everything to discount it. Whereas the media was once considered a courageous fourth element of government, it is now the house slave, whose whole survival depends upon the whim of his master… When one questions the slave if his master is a nice man, one can certainly pre-guess the only response one will get….
So when a wealthy power grab bill comes up in Congress, every media outlet sugar coats it. UMMM Sugar Rush!!!! There is some good, there is no bad. The top wealth has quenched all argument. Of course the arguments burn inside of us. Our frustrations grow. For we see the reality. But as in Eastern Germany, we tend to keep it too ourselves, since we must assume we are the only ones, and thinking such is dangerous…..
Besides government and communications, big wealth has taken over our economy. When we sell low, they bought. They own everything. When one owns everything, what is best for one, is not best for all others. Hence, bundling securities in 2006-2007 which meant bundling very bad loans and selling them as very safe investments to all the world’s governments, was partaken without anyone having the right to answer, … “um did you say those were … “bad loans?”
The how to “how this happened”, was that the very wealthy thorough their influence in Congress and through squelching all dissent in the media, were able to remove previous laws that required that risk to be disclosed. There is a valid reason why such a deep crash never occurred in the interim between itself and the Great Depression. It was illegal to do so. But once pursuing those policies known to lead up to a great crash became unregulated and therefore legal, guess what? We got exactly the same result as when we tried it the last time….the 1920’s.
Other economic factors are its result of Big Wealth’s interference. Big wealth is the reason our college debt is too high. Big wealth is the reason no new manufacturing investment is now taking place. Big wealth is the reason our government is cutting jobs instead of growing them. Big Wealth is why your take home pay has gotten smaller, and now buys much less… Big Wealth is why Unions are less effective, being mostly illegal unless they apply by the tight rules Big Wealth has set for them…
But mostly all three of these came about by your fear of losing your job. Big Wealth is your boss. He may be your bosses’ bosses’ boss but Big Wealth controls you in your job. Don’t believe me? Just perform this test… Stand up in your next meeting and publicly say… “Occupied Wall Street was right about everything and dead on….”
i’m not going to dare you to do so, because I already know the answer. You can’t say that, unless you don’t care whether you work there or not. “Freedom is just another word… for nothing left to loose”… If you have nothing to lose, only then are you free to speak your mind. If you stand to lose your job for doing so, face it, you are silent for that reason… If you are afraid to speak your mind, then essentually all your freedom is gone. Stripped away. It may exist on paper, but your freedom today is not guaranteed in any way.
Sad thing… is that it used to be. In my lifetime, one could keep one’s job and be a communist… whatever…. Son, as long as you doing your work? Then that’s ok.
But today one can never say that at one’s employment: “I agree with Occupy Wall Street”. , for it is full of spies.One cannot even rant it on Facebook even jokingly, without being kicked out of ones job. Our nation has lost its way. Everything is controlled by the 1%.”
Now I’m sure some people will take issue with this, and do their best to weave it into whatever they want to weave it into.. That’s fine. That is what the 1% is paying them to do and I am relatively confident that those people will stick out like sore thumbs for being the toadies they are: supplicants to the teats of excessive wealth.
If America is destined to go the way of all other past nations, then let it only speak in one voice and become a mouthpiece for its landed gentry, I can do nothing to stop it. All I can do is point out, that today, the America we have at our disposal, is no different than that of ancient empires, than that of Roman control, than that of medieval warlords, then that of imperialistic Europe, then that of Hirohito, than that of Soviet Russia, or even that of our own Guilded Age whose excesses led to the creation of the New Deal….
In fact, I would go so far to stretch out on a limb that the current public perception of America’s Exceptionalism, was founded upon the structures first put in place by the New Deal… I know that opens a theory up to a whole battery of counter-arguments, and most of them I have used myself to test out this hypothesis. But after all the dust has settled, I have still to admit (and you probably will too), that with historical analysis outweighing whatever theoretical arguments get dashed against it, the New Deal worked for 70 years until we started taking it apart…
With it gone, we are not exceptional anymore. We are just the same as everyone else. A 1% ruling over the 99% peasant class beneath them…. The same as King George’s Great Britain. The same as Robespierre’s France. The same as Caesar. The same as Babylon’s king… The same as the ancient Pharaoh….
None whose empires are still around today. None today hold onto their power they once possessed. With our expansionist opportunities now dimming, with the advent of a disturbingly stupid but powerful upper class, with our allowing them to usurp our edifices of democracy and force them to rule in their favor, not ours, America is now at a crossroads. We can either choose to become comfortable slaves, grateful for the shelter, food, and Super-Bowls thrown for our benefit, … or we can choose to become the masters of our own destiny, and accept whatever that may befall. The latter option worked best in our past. The later option was the Golden time of American Exceptionalism from which we have now removed ourselves…..
Should we go back? Or accept the incremental slavery slowly wrapping its tentacles around us?
If my words ring hollow, then our time has already passed. If you feel the same, then time is short. It must change 2014, and in 2016 must make it even more clear… After all, 2012 was writing on the wall… America is only exceptional because its people are exceptional. Its everyday simple people who wake up every morning and go to bed every night. That theme rolls through all the definitions of Exceptionalism listed above at this article’s very beginning. But when those people no longer own their nation, our fate will be sealed… and it won’t be pleasant….
..
.
New York is exploding. Not only with the mayors race which is centering now on the Bloomsberg educational policies, but the debacle of test scores across the state, those same ones that failed 70% of all kids in New York State, have driven passions up to a feverish pitch.
If you thought Rodel has always been on the right track, you need to see what is happening in New York State.
For those who don’t still know, the idea behind school reform is that you implode the public educational system, destroying it so badly, that private schools or charters, can move into the vacuum and educate children for a profit…. That is the underlying premise behind educational reform. If a school is doing well, you say it isn’t, you force it to do test after test until it really isn’t doing well, and then you close it.
Philadelphia, Chicago, and DC all shut down tremendous numbers of public schools this year. They intend to give the empty buildings to their friends for free, and allow them to open schools on those premises. Their friends stand to make a lot of money.
Charter schools thrive on choice. Every parent wants to choose the best for their child, and charter schools sell that well. “Our student are good “they say, “for if they get low scores we kick them out. That is why our scores are so high…”
And it is true. If one looks at Delaware’s highest scoring school, it is a Charter. but it is a Charter with hardly any blacks, and hardly any children on free lunch… So duh… it’s scores are higher. The problem in such a comparison, is that public schools, with the same amounts of rich white kids sprinkled with a few Asians, do better than charter schools of the same mixture. Public schools have more resources; public schools teach better. Likewise upon looking at the low end, where almost all the students are on free lunch, public school low income students, score significantly higher than do their counterparts in Charter Schools. Again, more resources.
But charters still argue with choice. If your school is failing they say, why should your kid be forced to remain in a failing school? That argument is very deceptive and certainly rings true upon first hearing…. Why would we keep a genius in a bad school, when a great one opened up a block away?
The answer to that question is simply not every child is a genius. As there is a ying to a yang and a Laurel to a Hardy, their is a Sith Lord to the aura of choice… (Dark Side; get it?) 🙂
That is that 40% of kids in Charter Schools get kicked back to public because they are bringing down the test scores.
So… 40% is the same as 2 our of 5, or 4 out of 10…. Choice is ruining the lives of 2 out of every 5 kids, … They got pulled out, and pushed back; losing a whole year because their parents “choiced” them into a school that taught by test scores…
So offering choice, ruins the lives of 2 out of 5 students. That is two who are ruined to three who make it. Now if there is nothing wrong with the public school to begin with, we just created a negative situation out of one where none occurred.
2 people our of 5 would have learned had that Charter not opened. Actually all 5 would have learned. But now, 2 people out of five are remedial, simply because the Charter School wants to lie about their high test scores…
So when someone pulls a Diller and starts screaming that children need a choice…. let them explode and while their insides are dripping off the ceiling, … say “by your figures, two out of 5 students will be forced to transfer out to keep your schools test scores up. Where is their choice? Those people don’t have a choice. They can chose to go into a charter school, and you’ll get to keep the money, but they can’t choose whether or not they get to stay.
Better to have all students succeed in a good public school, than force 2 our of 5 to become the Lost Society…
Up until he had this one teacher, he was a good student. For 10 years in the public school system, he and been in the top 5% of his class.
Then, he was put in a tenth grade government with a Tea Party ideologue as the teacher. Being a good student, he challenged her assertions: that climate change was liberal propaganda; that SNAP was a communist program, that Medicare and Medicaid needed to be eliminated, that the markets were the sole determination of character, that we needed to get rid of every environmental law, that blacks were born dumb and no schooling would rectify that, that Mexicans needed to be gassed in concentration camps because it was too expensive to ship them back…
This was the first year of inBloom and every teacher was asked to fill out data on each of their students. There were 400 data fields that needed to be filled out, including grades, attendance records, academic subjects, course levels, disabilities. Administrators can also upload certain details that students or parents may be comfortable sharing with teachers, but not with unknown technology vendors. InBloom’s data elements, for instance, include family relationships (“foster parent” or “father’s significant other” or “mother’s fourth husband”) and reasons for enrollment changes (“withdrawn due to illness” or “leaving school as a victim of a serious violent incident”)
One privacy lawyer, said she was particularly troubled by the disciplinary details that could be uploaded to inBloom because its system included subjective designations like “perpetrator,” “victim” and “principal watch list.”
And that is what happened to our former good student. He is now in prison.
Did you know that solely because of Common Core, that parents no longer control their child’s data if it was gathered electronically? As in the case of this student, they don’t even know what is stored under his name in Amazon’s cloud, and from there, it can spread now far as the eye can see… Future colleges! Future employers! Future Advertisers! Remember all those privacy forms you have to sign? They are only valid for information on paper. When it comes to electronics, they simply “Do Not Apply!”
In Delaware, thank Dave Sokola.
Delaware Liberal has a silly controversy over John Kowalko’s performance. The reason it is silly is because they are arguing over John’s alleged ability without determining the position that he plays. For example, in football, a defensive player is rated differently than an offensive player. In basketball, a center is rated different than a point guard. A catcher is rated differently than pitcher in baseball. To the casual reader it is pretty obvious that the argument is over which standards ought to be used, and not over whether John is an outstanding person or not. (He is btw; I’ve even heard Rick Jensen say so.)
In the current legislature, there are many moving parts. The only true criteria one can hold legislators accountable towards…, is did they vote. Everything else is superfluous. The only part of their job outlined in legalese… is to vote. Everything else they choose to do is extra; its over and beyond the call…
But politics is a personal business. If challenges are made towards John’s effectiveness, even if baseless, they need a well honed defense. Simply because if not, future readers may see only one side and base their votes upon what they read, Therefore there is a lot of give and take, and bashing and smashing of egos, but it is all basically over whether John should play defensive, or go offensive.
We cannot have all of one and none of the other. A team with only an offensive line, does pretty badly when the other team has the ball. To the casual observer reading comments over there, it is obvious that we need both kinds of players. Both are necessary. and since one person can’t be opposite of himself, it is necessary to have another person take up that position …
John is John. Just like El Som is El Som. Just like Deldem is Deldem. Each has a unique set of genes, each has a unique set of life experiences. Obviously none of those match, and therefore, their viewpoints will differ. What happened is that it got personal, and the line; “others say it is so” got trundled out.
Of course others will say different things. They are different too. Instead of arguing over what this person said, and what that person didn’t say, we should be recognizing just how diversified our party is. Yay! We should accept that we have John in the offensive line. Yay! We should be grateful we have defensive players working behind the scenes. Yay! Commentator Geezer actually pointed all that out before I do here.
The point I’m making is we have a team of people. They are individuals. They are not all carbon copies of each other. Thank Goodness. Just like any corporate development team, just like any legal defense team, just like any sports team, just like any managerial project team, all have a goal; all should work towards that goal.
Calling people out in public does not help all reach that goal. It hinders it; is s-l-o-w-s the march toward that goal, considerably. Talking to those people directly, one on one, what we like to call having a “frank” conversation, IS conducive. It provides communication, and even if you disagree in the end, you trust the opponent’s judgment because you know exactly why he is adamant in his beliefs. You know why.
I think everyone here has a part to play. Just as in a car, if one part goes bad, the rest of the car doesn’t function at its full potential. Everyone here, (or over there commenting I mean) has an important role to play in how our state will be functioning one, four, eight, or ten years into the future….
We have a job to do. Work is not done. If we don’t finish it, others who oppose us will come behind us and tear it down. This is serious stuff. If we don’t work together as a team, we leave no lasting legacy. And what’s the whole point of even living, if your life here doesn’t make a difference?
So recognize our differences then use them. Those in planning can say, John we need some public outrage on this at this time. Let’s get it done. Vice versa, now coming from John, he can say “hey we in the public eye are getting pinged badly on this item; we need to develop a fix right now”. Those are just two examples how each can use the other to achieve aims, instead of create friction….
‘Nuff said.
Silicon Valley’s role in US government surveillance has triggered public anxiety about the internet, but it turns out there is at least one tech company you can trust with your data.
Xmission, Utah’s first independent and oldest internet service provider, has spent the past 15 years resolutely shielding customers’ privacy from government snoops in a way that larger rivals appear to have not.
The Electronic Freedom Foundation called it a model for the industry….
And speaking of the EFF, yesterday a Federal judge allows the case Jewel Vrs NSA to go forward into a real court. There is nothing secret about the Constitution the judge said. Either this practice is legal or it isn’t. A court will decided.
Evidence in the case includes undisputed documents provided by former AT&T telecommunications technician Mark Klein showing AT&T has routed copies of Internet traffic to a secret room in San Francisco controlled by the NSA. The case is supported by declarations from three NSA whistleblowers along with a mountain of other evidence. The recent blockbuster revelations about the extent of the NSA spying on telecommunications and Internet activities also bolster EFF’s case.
It appears Edward Snowden tipped the balance. This has been held up 5 years because it supposedly was too secret for trial.
It is clearer now that the biggest benefactors for the NSA spying were commercial enterprises. The Obama administration went along with the Bush plan and accelerated it, primarily to give American companies a heads up, and keep jobs here. It worked too.
One can’t argue with success. But one can find how American businesses were co-opted to assist the NSA. From the Guardian, the following, allegedly from Snowden himself.
• Microsoft helped the NSA to circumvent its encryption to address concerns that the agency would be unable to intercept web chats on the new Outlook.com portal;
• The agency already had pre-encryption stage access to email on Outlook.com, including Hotmail;
• The company worked with the FBI this year to allow the NSA easier access via Prism to its cloud storage service SkyDrive, which now has more than 250 million users worldwide;
• Microsoft also worked with the FBI’s Data Intercept Unit to “understand” potential issues with a feature in Outlook.com that allows users to create email aliases;
• In July last year, nine months after Microsoft bought Skype, the NSA boasted that a new capability had tripled the amount of Skype video calls being collected through Prism;
• Material collected through Prism is routinely shared with the FBI and CIA, with one NSA document describing the program as a “team sport”.
it is revealing that the beneficiaries of the Patriot Act and probably one of the reasons it has been intact long after terrorism faded offshore, are the exact same who are suing each other left and right, using the anti-piracy laws as their barrage. It appears that laws are not for people anymore; they are for corporations. It is corporations who want the US to fund listening posts for every American word and sentence.
The only way to fix that, is to divide the corporations Teddy-Roosevelt-style, thereby giving We, the People a little more clout. …
Courtesy of Top Hits of The Seventies
…. said Rick Jensen as Liz Allen finished and hung up the phone before Rick could answer….
I usually drive in silence but I laughed out loud when I heard that. Seriously glad I was not drinking coffee that very second…
To set the background, Rick was trying to pin the blame on unions like would a normal corporate shill and Liz called in and was objecting…
Basically her argument was that there were a lot of things wrong with this Kinder Morgan Deal. Most of you know, I’ve outlined many. Al Mascitti has outlined some. Nancy Willing outlined some. Norinda outlined some. Bobby Marshall has outlined some. John Kowalko has outlined some. The News Journal writers and editorialists have outlined some. Even Alan Levin truthfully outlined some…. And of course, Liz Allen was Delaware’s voice. She outlined many…. And don’t even mention that the entire House of the General Assembly, both Democrats and Republicans unanimously voted for General Assembly oversight on this strange thing happening, despite the Governor and Alan Lavin saying…”shouldn’t do that!!!”
THE ENTIRE HOUSE OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY VOTED FOR SENATE BILL 3 YET KINDER MORGAN IS SINGLING OUT A LABOR LEADER, JULIUS CEPHAS? ? ?
All of these people are more to blame for swaying public opinion than Julius Cephas. However, truth be told, without Julius, none of these people would be swaying public opinion…. He didn’t harangue, he didn’t bash, he’d didn’t twist arms…
All Julius did to persuade this wave against Kinder Morgan, was speak the “truth”. The letter paints Julius as a feisty uncooperative fiery personality… Anyone who’s sat on a panel with Julius finds that hard to believe. That is not how Julius handles adversity. He digs down and works.
Of course as we all age we come to realize that anything is possible. But if we are going to allow ourselves to consider even the most outrageous items, what I find far more possible, and far more probable, was that Kinder Morgan was seriously planning on cutting jobs. Furthermore, it probably had it’s eye on the DRBA portion of the state pension fund… Speaking strictly as a vulture capitalist here… who wouldn’t?
Apparently Julius Cephas was in the way… We all owe him a thank you.
I know Texas gas firms. This deal is not off. What we have here is a lighter being held up to Delaware’s foot. To scare us a little, try to get us to move things up, to get us to concede… They sharply deduced that to have a successful operation here, they need to do away with the union. Hence, instead of excoriating Bob Marshall’s leadership, which they would have done if they truly were to pick up and go, …knowing they might need him later instead they chose to focus on Julius Cephas…
Can they turn the state into an out-roar against Julius and the Longshoreman’s union, so much so that we offer them a counter-offer with “the union” completely eclipsed out of it?
In their minds they think they can. They’re Texans… Look at Governor Perry. (Hope you weren’t drinking hot coffee right there… )
What they don’t realize is that to convince Delaware to come aboard, they have to accomplish all these four things…
A. Convince us first on the concept of privatization; Trust us, our state is completely against it.
B. Give us $5 billion for 50 years.
C. Promise us the Longshoreman’s Union will be around forever .
D. Expand business so the outside businesses will grow…..
I think this is more money than they want to bear right now…. But if they are willing to agree to these propositions, send us an offer….
Us Delawareans are a little stronger negotiators, with a little more backbone, than is Alan Levin…. I’m sorry from a honesty point of view, if his actions sort of misled you.
There are two ways to do business. One is do what is best for the business by being selfish.. The second is to do what is best for the customer and community, which in our view, turns out to be what is best for the business.
Delawareans (minus Rich Heffron) subscribe to the latter…..
‘