Politics and economics are the expressions of ideas.
If the ideas are good the results are good, if they are not, well you can see the results in your daily life.
To make a great country you need great men, to destroy it, is much easier.
Wednesday, March 09, 2011
Future ain´t what it was supposed to be...
Whoever controls the media controls the culture.
Whoever controls the culture controls the future.
Looking at what they broadcast on TV or Movies, there is no much hope left for the future.
You have better results if you brainwash the youngs, they haven´t had the time to build antibodies.
Whoever controls the culture controls the future.
Looking at what they broadcast on TV or Movies, there is no much hope left for the future.
You have better results if you brainwash the youngs, they haven´t had the time to build antibodies.
Sunday, March 06, 2011
Technology applied to war
The same technology advances that improves our computers and communication also constantly improves the killing power at all levels, whether the U.S. Air Force, insurgents or unconventionals.
Drones, warfare and videogames.
Talking to my friend, a military expert, I learned that fighters with real pilots will be rare in the future. That most air battles will be fought with drones.
So instead of “the best pilots”, in the future what the air force will need, is amazing video game players to guide drones.
Indeed use of drones is already common in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq.
Now what surprised me was to find out that drone operators are suffering from more war stress syndrome than real pilots, a lot of it is from the thought of killing innocent people.
As bad as it sounds I think this is good news.
It shows humanity in them. I think that pilots are stressed enough but when they kill they are also at risk, so maybe they have less remorse.
Pilots are like toreros, they have the upper hand, but they can also die.
Drone operators are like toreros outside the arena. They just zap the bull.
Personally I don’t share other people’s fascination with high tech war. I know there are bad people out there, Osama Bin Laden and others who want us dead and if they could they would nuke us. But I also know that in the last 10 years we have lost the moral high ground that we had after 9-11, we have committed a lot of atrocities, and if anything there are more terrorists now than there were 10 years ago.
And as excited as some people may be with drones I think they make us in USA and EU look like terrorists. Moreover we armed Osama with Sting missiles and we suffer for it.
These drones will sooner or later be used by Hamas, Hezbollah, and war will escalate much further.
I see war as inevitably more lethal. That will hold from Sudan to Xinjiang.
Being a technologist gives me no special wisdom on how to achieve that peace, but as a technologist I've learned that the tools - including those of war - will predictably become more effective.
Beyond drones and better rockets, I fear what can soon be produced even in a high school biology laboratory.
Dave Burstein
Drones, warfare and videogames.
Talking to my friend, a military expert, I learned that fighters with real pilots will be rare in the future. That most air battles will be fought with drones.
So instead of “the best pilots”, in the future what the air force will need, is amazing video game players to guide drones.
Indeed use of drones is already common in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq.
Now what surprised me was to find out that drone operators are suffering from more war stress syndrome than real pilots, a lot of it is from the thought of killing innocent people.
As bad as it sounds I think this is good news.
It shows humanity in them. I think that pilots are stressed enough but when they kill they are also at risk, so maybe they have less remorse.
Pilots are like toreros, they have the upper hand, but they can also die.
Drone operators are like toreros outside the arena. They just zap the bull.
Personally I don’t share other people’s fascination with high tech war. I know there are bad people out there, Osama Bin Laden and others who want us dead and if they could they would nuke us. But I also know that in the last 10 years we have lost the moral high ground that we had after 9-11, we have committed a lot of atrocities, and if anything there are more terrorists now than there were 10 years ago.
And as excited as some people may be with drones I think they make us in USA and EU look like terrorists. Moreover we armed Osama with Sting missiles and we suffer for it.
These drones will sooner or later be used by Hamas, Hezbollah, and war will escalate much further.
I see war as inevitably more lethal. That will hold from Sudan to Xinjiang.
Being a technologist gives me no special wisdom on how to achieve that peace, but as a technologist I've learned that the tools - including those of war - will predictably become more effective.
Beyond drones and better rockets, I fear what can soon be produced even in a high school biology laboratory.
Dave Burstein
Cloud computing and its consequences
"Cloud computing," is just a buzz phrase for remote storage.
Instead of having a local hard drive, a provider like Google or Amazon makes their space available to you.
All your files are on their servers; as long as your mobile device has an app for it, you can get to them. Tablet, netbook, cell phones - multiple devices all able to see the same stuff.
Sounds much more convenient than having it all on a PC and copying it everywhere right? And they'll take care of the backups, upgrades and other administrative chores too. What could be simpler?
Now let's say all your data is on the cloud.
It is very versatile and convenient, provided you remain on good terms with your provider.
You can walk away from a service that has only a handful of files hosted. What if you put all of your data there? All your photos, music and so on? How long would it take to download all that if you had to without much warning? Would doing so bust your usage cap?
Imagine another possible scenario:
Government goes to the companies (and you better fucking play ball, mister) and says it wants absolutely everything, no warrants required.
The companies hand it over.
That is what is beginning now. Companies are offering an attractive, convenient and high speed (albeit capped and throttled) experience.
Government sets rules privileging the handful of big providers, and an increasingly docile user base slowly funnels into one of those silos. Federal officials can then, if need be, work with these partners (Orwellian language intended) to get whatever it thinks it has to have - no legal hassles required. It is a very efficient way to manage an otherwise unwieldy population.
We are seeing the development of an increasingly bright line in how users access the Internet.
For most people, who don't know or can't be bothered, there will be an array of relatively cheap and fast wireless options that will allow them to stream media, store favorite music or picture files on remote drives, and generally live their digital lives happily in a gilded cage. (This all assumes no one takes an interest in the DRM status of their MP3 files or becomes concerned that their pictures might show things that touch on national security.)
For those who do not want to live there - permanently, anyway - there will be another one: Wired, slower, locally stored and self-administered - that will provide access to that portion of the network that has not yet been smothered out of existence.
Liberally taken from Building the shadow Internet.
Instead of having a local hard drive, a provider like Google or Amazon makes their space available to you.
All your files are on their servers; as long as your mobile device has an app for it, you can get to them. Tablet, netbook, cell phones - multiple devices all able to see the same stuff.
Sounds much more convenient than having it all on a PC and copying it everywhere right? And they'll take care of the backups, upgrades and other administrative chores too. What could be simpler?
Now let's say all your data is on the cloud.
It is very versatile and convenient, provided you remain on good terms with your provider.
You can walk away from a service that has only a handful of files hosted. What if you put all of your data there? All your photos, music and so on? How long would it take to download all that if you had to without much warning? Would doing so bust your usage cap?
Imagine another possible scenario:
Government goes to the companies (and you better fucking play ball, mister) and says it wants absolutely everything, no warrants required.
The companies hand it over.
That is what is beginning now. Companies are offering an attractive, convenient and high speed (albeit capped and throttled) experience.
Government sets rules privileging the handful of big providers, and an increasingly docile user base slowly funnels into one of those silos. Federal officials can then, if need be, work with these partners (Orwellian language intended) to get whatever it thinks it has to have - no legal hassles required. It is a very efficient way to manage an otherwise unwieldy population.
We are seeing the development of an increasingly bright line in how users access the Internet.
For most people, who don't know or can't be bothered, there will be an array of relatively cheap and fast wireless options that will allow them to stream media, store favorite music or picture files on remote drives, and generally live their digital lives happily in a gilded cage. (This all assumes no one takes an interest in the DRM status of their MP3 files or becomes concerned that their pictures might show things that touch on national security.)
For those who do not want to live there - permanently, anyway - there will be another one: Wired, slower, locally stored and self-administered - that will provide access to that portion of the network that has not yet been smothered out of existence.
Liberally taken from Building the shadow Internet.
Thursday, March 03, 2011
When "Humanitarism" has nothing to do with humanity
We are on the verge of a big war.
Big because when US are loosing with traditional weapons will try to win with Atomic weapons.
People of the world, especially you, American people, do not fall in the trap.
What US and Britain have in mind has nothing to do with humanitarism, it is but one of the déjàvu ways to arrive to the oil source.
Apart the moral aspect of a war, this won’t even be an economical gain for the US citizens.
As usual, they will have to pay for a new war which won’t bring any advantage to them.
A few corporations will get huge profits, but how many people will have to die for them?
Remember the pyramid has a few on the top and millions on the bottom.
The millions should decide what to do with their own life.
Big because when US are loosing with traditional weapons will try to win with Atomic weapons.
People of the world, especially you, American people, do not fall in the trap.
What US and Britain have in mind has nothing to do with humanitarism, it is but one of the déjàvu ways to arrive to the oil source.
Apart the moral aspect of a war, this won’t even be an economical gain for the US citizens.
As usual, they will have to pay for a new war which won’t bring any advantage to them.
A few corporations will get huge profits, but how many people will have to die for them?
Remember the pyramid has a few on the top and millions on the bottom.
The millions should decide what to do with their own life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Stumble It!