Entries Tagged as ''

Boehner makes sense

House Minority Leader John Boehner (Republican) stated that he would support President Barack Obama’s proposal to renew the expiring Bush tax cuts only for those making less than $250,000 if it were his only option.

The Republicans in both the House and Senate were quick to add fuel to the fire and turn up the volume on the rhetoric about fiscal responsibility, watching out for the little guy, etc, etc, etc — and saying that they believe the tax cuts should be extended for all Americans.

Do people making over $250,000 really need a tax cut?

Seems to me that they’re doing OK; much better than the average American is fairing in this economic crisis (I won’t call it a recession because it certainly seems much more like a depression — so we’ll leave it a crisis).

The bottom line is we have to pay our bills — and as the Republicans are complaining about the government has been spending out of control… but what they don’t remind you is that George W Bush is responsible for the out of control spending; Barrack Obama and his administration haven’t spent anywhere near as much as George W Bush — and a large amount of what is being spent now is being spent on a war that George W Bush threw this country into (and lied to get the support for it).

I’m well aware that it’s a tenant of Socialism that we take more from those who can afford it, and give it to those who need it…

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need
· Karl Marx, 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program

But in point of fact the American income tax structure has always been based on a progressive tax (those who earn more, pay more); except what happens now is that those who earn enough can avoid taxes by taking advantage of the loop holes the complex laws afford them.

We really need to rework the tax system so that it’s more equitable across the board; and those who benefit greatly from society pay their fair share of the costs of supporting society… but until then, I think getting $700B from those who earn more than a quarter million dollars per year is a necessary step to putting this country back on the road to stability.

Originally posted 2010-09-15 02:00:52.

Illegal Immigrants

Illegal Immigrants
By Arend Van Dam, 13-May-2011

Originally posted 2011-05-15 02:00:11.

Marco Rubio

Politicians are slick, and it’s always difficult (if not impossible) to truly know what they mean when they say anything, not to mention how to know whether or not they mean anything they say.

Marco Rubio, junior senator from Florida (Republican) made an interesting statement recently on his views on big government verses small government.

The success sequence in America says you get an education, you get a good job, you get married, you have children. People who do those four things have an incredible level of economic stability.

Now the question that came to my mind after pondering this statement is:

  • Does Rubio support same gender marriage, or does he believe fundamentally those who would seek a same gender marriage should be denied access to the “success sequence” he’s put forth?

Well, it would seem he’s pandering to his political base, the conservative right, since shortly after he said:

Those who support same sex marriage have a right to lobby their state legislatures to change state laws, but Americans who support keeping the traditional definition of marriage also have a right to work to keep the traditional definition of marriage in our laws without seeing that overturned by a judge.

While he did indicate that American history was “marred by discrimination against gays and lesbians” it would appear that while he’s willing to let gays drink in a bar, or have a job, he’s unwilling to allow them access to what he considers “the success sequence in America”.

I honestly don’t know what Rubio is trying to say, and perhaps neither does he — he may be so lost in trying to drum up votes from every segment of American society that he has lost or muddied his values… but one thing that is nagging me in the back of my mind is if he would have been a staunch supporter of separate but equal

Originally posted 2014-07-25 17:00:08.

Amazon Merchants

Once again I’ve been disappointed with the “service” and “products” provided by an Amazon merchant.

I’ve ask Amazon how to inhibit the display of any and all items except those sold by them; I don’t care to deal with the questionable merchants that use Amazon’s sites.  And obviously Amazon doesn’t stand behind them either (look over their A-Z Guarantee, and notice that a person who buys an item every day has the same lifetime limits as one who rarely buys — sounds to me like Amazon is afraid to offer a real guarantee — why should I have more confidence).

Anyway, rather than play the game with Amazon I’ve just opened a charge dispute with my credit card company (which in this case happens to be an Amazon credit card).

If Amazon doesn’t have a way to block the display non-Amazon merchandise I’ll close my account (and credit card).

Originally posted 2009-04-08 12:00:24.

OBiTalk

For many POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) is a distant memory… and given the pricing I’d say the local TelCo providers have priced it out of existence.

In a society where almost everyone has a cell phone (and unlimited cell service is fairly reasonably priced), the likelihood that any “home” telephone service will make a comeback is fairly low.

That said, Google Voice (a totally free service from Google) is something I’ve used for years to provide me with an auxiliary communications channel.  Why would I want to give me cellular number to all the annoying people who get a phone number; I pay for my phone service, so I should be able to decide who can reach me when — and Google provides many of the features you simply must have for telecommunications in Google Voice.

You can easily access Google Voice directly from your Android handset, but sometimes you might want to be able to just pick a phone on the end table to answer or make a call; or you might have that occasional FAX you need to send (while I find it hard to believe that companies don’t allow you to upload scanned documents via a web page portal, or send them via email — many are still in the stone-age of technology and simply think FAX machines will be here until the end of time, or that some law makes a FAX somehow necessary, or that they’re more secure).

To that end, OBiTalk has a number of telecommunications devices (technically VoIP Telephone Adapters [TAs]) available for a fairly reasonably price, and they support Google Voice.

The OBi200, the lowest model currently sold, is a great and economical device to provide you with a “home” phone.  The OBi200, a Google Voice number, and a home cordless (multi-station) phone is everything you need to have a service that fulfills you needs for free (if you require E911 service, you would have to subscribe to that service separately, but perhaps your cell phone is a better E911 device).

The Obi200 supports a single handset, but will support up to four phone lines (and any combination of them can be Google Voice — or other VoIP services… but again, Google Voice is free).

I’ve been using one of these devices for quite sometime, and I recently just added a second one (you can do station to station dialing with it as well), so it’s fairly easy to see that I’m quite happy with the device.

One word of advice, if you’re interested in a OBiTalk device, watch sales at online (also remember some brick-and-mortar stores will match online prices at some sites).

Just remember, with Google Voice, you do need to use each line (I recommend using them monthly at a minimum), but you will get an email notification from Google if you’re at risk of losing your Google Voice number from inactivity.

 

OBiTalk OBi200

Google Voice

Originally posted 2017-05-30 08:00:23.

Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell

Repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is inevitable
By Christopher Wolf, CNN
22 September 2010

Senate Republicans successful in blocking the repeal Tuesday of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the military’s discriminatory policy on gays and lesbians in the military, obviously did not read or simply chose to ignore a California federal judge’s ruling several weeks ago that the policy violates fundamental constitutional rights.

Given the opportunity to undo the bigotry that was written into law 17 years ago, the senators chose not to follow the lead of the House of Representatives, which voted in May to repeal the law. Instead the Senate opted to pander to socially conservative voters. For now, at least, the law remains on the books.

But the march to repeal or invalidation must and will resume. The unfairness and wastefulness of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy has been demonstrated repeatedly.

Twelve years ago I handled a case that by itself showed the absurdity and mean-spirited nature of the law. In 1998, I represented a highly decorated 17-year veteran of the United States Navy who had served honorably and continuously since he was 19 years old.

Out of the blue, the Navy decided to kick him out of the service because he was gay, and not based on anything he did as a sailor. (I was called into the case the night before the discharge was to take effect.)

At the time of the Navy’s decision to discharge him, he was the senior-most enlisted man aboard the United States nuclear submarine USS Chicago, the sole source of income for his mother and nearing retirement eligibility.

The “offense” triggering the Navy’s witch hunt was an e-mail the sailor had sent from his AOL account seeking donations of toys for the children of his shipmates at Christmas. (His AOL username made the Navy officials suspect the sailor might be gay, but nothing in the contents of the e-mail or anything else in the sailor’s behavior in the service justified what the Navy did.)

The Navy decided to go on a “search and destroy” mission against the service member (those are the words of the judge hearing the case), when it asked AOL to get information about the sailor to confirm he was gay.

Then-Judge Stanley Sporkin–formerly general counsel of the SEC and CIA, so no bleeding heart liberal — found that the Navy had violated federal electronic privacy law by demanding information from AOL to make its case against the sailor, and that it had violated the strictures of the “don’t ask” part of the military policy on gay and lesbian service members. He stopped the Navy from throwing out a distinguished service member in light of its illegal activity.

The case made news at the time. The decision was a courageous one and against the conventional wisdom that Congress had accommodated gays and lesbians just fine with “don’t ask, don’t tell” and it was not up to civilians to tell the military how to operate.

Sporkin wrote in his opinion that “It is self-evident that a person’s sexual orientation does not affect that individual’s performance in the workplace. At this point in history, our society should not be deprived of the many accomplishments provided by the people who happen to be gay.”

He said the court “cannot understand why the Navy would seek to discharge an officer who has served his country in a distinguished manner just because he might be gay” and that the case “vividly underscores the folly of a policy that systematically excludes a whole class of persons who have served this country proudly and in the highest tradition of excellence.”

He acknowledged that the case specifically did not reach any of the constitutional issues underscoring the “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue” policy, but he felt compelled to note that “the defenses mounted against gays in the military have been tried before in our nation’s history — against blacks and women.” Sporkin concluded: “Surely, it is time to move beyond this vestige of discrimination and misconception of gay men and women.”

Twelve years later, a successor of Sporkin’s on the federal bench in California decided just that — that it is time to eliminate discrimination, as a matter of constitutional law. In the meantime, scores of qualified and committed service members have been ousted based solely on a policy whose foundation is unconstitutional bigotry.

They did not have a Sporkin to take up their cause of justice. They will never get their careers back, or purge the trauma of being labeled second-class citizens, and neither will our country be able to recover their valuable lost service.

Although the Senate stopped repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” in its tracks yesterday, the California ruling will work its way through the appellate process. In the end, this will turn around and the day will come when gay and lesbian service members and their allies can say we were right all along, and just as in the days of segregation, the country was wrong.

Repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is inevitable on CNN

Originally posted 2010-09-25 02:00:31.

Tablet Wars

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…

Not really — and it doesn’t have much impact without a score playing — but, that doesn’t take away from the fact that the Apple iPad appears to have sparked an all out battle for control of the tablet market.

A number of “new” tablets (and tablet prototypes) are being shown, some with a price tag as low as $199!!!

Maybe the competitors won’t be quite as “slick” as Apple’s iPad, but they’re all guaranteed to be more powerful, more affordable, and more open.

Freescale 7′ Tablet $199

ODROID Tablet

EAFT Magic Tile and Compal Tablets

ICD Tegra 2 Tablet

Originally posted 2010-05-06 02:00:15.

Windows Security

Sometimes I wonder if Microsoft employees actually run the products they work on.

Elevated security, something that debuted on Windows Vista — and apparently derived from OS-X is a good example.

It’s a great idea.

As a user I should get to decide whether or not a pieced of software is allowed to make changed to my computer.  But the failing of Microsoft is they didn’t really think the problem through before they blindly copied what OS-X did.

In Windows there’s at least two levels of changes that should be approved…

When a piece of software I want is approved for install it should be able to make changes to a set of locations that is owned by the software vendor once I approve it’s installation.  However, it should not be able to make changes to my system configuration unless I specifically approve that.

What Microsoft should have done is something more along the lines of this.

A piece of software is launched and requests the user permission to install itself.  Microsoft fetches the security certificate bound into the executable and presents the user with that information when the system asks for the approval (the dialog should also have an additional detail button).  The user approves it, and the task is run with a security token created on the fly that allows the installer access to the vendors specific structure.

Should the installer desire to change system components it should have to ask to an additional elevation; at which time the operating system should again ask for approval and clearly indicate what system level resources the installer has requested access to.

Installers, would, of course generally be designed not to request access to modify the system (meaning they couldn’t install auto-start, install services, install device drivers, etc without a user knowing these things were going to happen).

When you installed software that did not have a certificate the system would still be able to present two levels of authentication (provided the installer properly requested the different access levels properly).

This would make Windows a far more secure environment… and it would prevent software vendors from install unwanted features onto a system.

Why doesn’t Microsoft implement something like this?

Well, it’s any ones guess… I prefer to believe that the people who design Windows don’t actually use it — but there are lots of conspiracy theories that could be put forth as well.

Originally posted 2010-01-18 01:00:02.

4% of the Market; 50% of the Profit

Apple’s iPhone accounts for only 4% of the cellular handset market for “feature” phones, yet account for 50% of the profits…



asymco.com

Originally posted 2010-11-29 02:00:46.

Better late…

It’s been a quarter century after the automotive industry received a wake-up call and they seem to finally get it.

A few auto makers toyed with all electric vehicles in the early 90’s; but Honda introduced us to the hybrid vehicle, and Toyota catapulted it into a business success.

Both Honda and Toyota had hoped to introduce fuel cell technology vehicles, but with the world’s economy in shambles building out the infrastructure for that isn’t likely to happen any time soon.

Now we have virtually every auto maker introducing electric, hybrid, plug-in hybrid; many are also introducing high efficiency (bio) diesel vehicles.

Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai, Ford, GM, Volkswagen — just to name a few — have made a serious commitment to increasing the fuel efficiency of their fleet (and thus decreasing their carbon foot print).

GM announced a 100,000 mile, 8-year warranty on their new Volt — displaying to consumers that they have a great deal of confidence in their offering.  Other companies like Tesla have offered a pre-purchased battery replacement.

I haven’t done exhaustive research on all the offerings; the Prius is likely to continue to be a near term winner, it get’s a plug-in option next year; and the Insight get’s that the following year.  However the Volt goes the other route and is an electric car with a backup generator (giving it over 300 miles range, and a somewhat simpler design since it doesn’t require the complex drive system found in most hybrids).

I’m still driving my 1997 Toyota 4Runner, it’s got 350,000 miles on it and going strong.  I’d considered replacing it during the “cash-for-clunkers” program, but it just didn’t seem to make sense to me since I couldn’t find any suitable replacement vehicle that got better than 30 miles to the gallon — and the math just didn’t work out financially, nor did the impact on the environment for disposing of a perfectly functional vehicle seem right.

It might not be until 2014 or so that we really have a number of good options for vehicles that provide the features and economy we’re looking for… but finally we’re on a path that should reduce the environmental impact of the continuing car culture.

Originally posted 2010-07-27 02:00:24.