Stupid of the Day

Feds To Shut Down Google Apps? -- InformationWeek.

The Federal Trade Commission is looking into the risks of cloud computing. 

The FTC held a two-day meeting this week to discuss data security in the global economy. Regulators are trying to determine whether they should intervene with cloud computing to address security and privacy (PDF) concerns.

Critics, including the Electronic Privacy Information Center, argue that consumers are at greater risk of privacy breaches with cloud computing because data management practices are inconsistent. 

EPIC asked the FTC for a legal injunction to stop cloud computing until the government approves it. In the unlikely event that the request is fulfilled, millions of individual and business users could be prevented from accessing data stored in the cloud.

Yes, Google and other holders of data have leaks.  So EPIC wants the government to protect us by only allowing us to keep our data on our own computers, which are all so much more secure.  Evidently, they want the efficacy and safety of internet products proven with the same rigor the FDA applies to pharma products while people die for their lack.  

One question: once it's approved for use, who exactly do I go to for my Gmail prescription?

Posted by Doug Murray at 09:35 PM Apr 16, 2009 Permalink | Comments (0)

None of the Government's beeswax, unless...

...it provides universal healthcare.


Universal healthcare and the waistline police | csmonitor.com.


Imagine a country where the government regularly checks the waistlines of citizens over age 40. Anyone deemed too fat would be required to undergo diet counseling. Those who fail to lose sufficient weight could face further "reeducation" and their communities subject to stiff fines.

Is this some nightmarish dystopia?

No, this is contemporary Japan.

The Japanese government argues that it must regulate citizens' lifestyles because it is paying their health costs. This highlights one of the greatly underappreciated dangers of "universal healthcare." Any government that attempts to guarantee healthcare must also control its costs. The inevitable next step will be to seek to control citizens' health and their behavior. Hence, Americans should beware that if we adopt universal healthcare, we also risk creating a "nanny state on steroids" antithetical to core American principles.

Also, Britain has banned some ads for eggs and New Zealand has turned away immigrants for being fat.

And, of course, the argument heard most often in support of mandatory motorcycle helmets is the medical cost to society caused by not wearing them.  Funny, they always add up the medical costs of no hats and too many cheeseburgers but neglect to subtract the pension savings to Social Security.

HT Mark Perry

Posted by Doug Murray at 09:41 PM Jan 10, 2009 Permalink | Comments (0)

Sowell Nails It...

...as usual:

 Amid all the political and media hysteria, national output has declined by less than one-half of one percent. In fact, it may not have declined even that much-- or at all-- when the statistics are revised later, as they very often are.

We are not talking about the Great Depression, when output dropped by one-third and unemployment soared to 25 percent.

What we are talking about is a golden political opportunity for politicians to use the current financial crisis to fundamentally change an economy that has been successful for more than two centuries, so that politicians can henceforth micro-manage all sorts of businesses and play Robin Hood, taking from those who are not likely to vote for them and transferring part of their earnings to those who will vote for them.

For that, the politicians need lots of hype, and that is being generously supplied by the media.

Whatever the merits of trying to shore up some financial institutions, in order to prevent a major disruption of the credit flows that keep the whole economy going, what has in fact been done has been to create a huge pot of money-- hundreds of billions of dollars-- that politicians can use to give out goodies hither and yon, to whomever they please for whatever reason they please.

Four groups benefit from defining everything possible as disasters.

Consultants tried to convince you that this little Y2K bug meant the end of the world unless you hired them to add two more digits to date fields in your database.  Now Al Gore pulls leaflets from his left pocket telling you the end is near unless you buy carbon credits, which he conveniently sells from his right pocket (HT W. C. Fields).

Troubled times mean lawsuits, so lawyers benefit from defining all times as troubled and making sure you know they are there to help (warning: link contains disgusting URL).

Media circulation/viewership increases with bad news. As housing prices once again become affordable, it's a crisis.

Politicians get elected by promising to solve problems, so the more problems you have the more they can promise.  The sad part is that so many, from unemployed workers to automotive executives, expect politicos to fix the economy.  But politicians don't actually make economic decisions, merely political decisions that have economic consequences.

Posted by Doug Murray at 02:45 PM Nov 30, 2008 Permalink | Comments (0)

Journalist Math

The Orlando Sentinel complains that Florida pays half of its university presidents more than the national median -

In all, six Florida presidents, including the University of Central Florida's John Hitt, were paid more than the national median.

We have eleven state universities, so I guess they're right:  we should only pay 5.5 of their chief's above the median.

Posted by Doug Murray at 01:02 PM Nov 25, 2008 Permalink | Comments (0)

Electing the Electors

Don Boudreaux questions those who question the democraticness of the Electoral College over the possibility that the winner may not be the candidate who gets the most votes.

There's much talk of how the Electoral College is undemocratic and, by implication, an obnoxious burden on 'the People's' right to choose their U.S. President.

Lots of sound counterarguments in defense of the Electoral College are possible. Here I offer just one - namely: if we don't think it undemocratic to elect representatives to Congress to carry out our political desires on tax policy, environmental regulation, national defense, why is it undemocratic to do largely the same when it comes to choosing a President?

In effect, a vote for presidential-candidate X is a vote for someone to meet in an assembly called the Electoral College -- someone whose platform is that he or she supports candidate X for President. The members of that assembly then vote on who will become the next President of the United States.

Two points are usually overlooked by those on both sides of these arguments, one historical and one current.

Historically, it was a huge step for the Founders to take the power to choose the chief executive out of the legislature's hands and give to a specially chosen group of electors (that can't even include members of Congress).  Definitely a democratic step at the time.

But the least "democratic" thing about the system is not the EC but fact that most states have chosen to direct all their electors to vote for a single candidate.  By not allocating them through some proportional method they make the undemocratic outcome much more likely.

Personally, I could support a direct election, providing that the winner must have an actual majority of the votes.

Posted by Doug Murray at 01:15 PM Nov 5, 2008 Permalink | Comments (0)

Got me an iPhone...

...last week and look what it did

iPhone grabs top smart phone spot.

Posted by Doug Murray at 08:06 AM Oct 7, 2008 Permalink | Comments (0)

NY Times Gets it Right

Alan Sullivan points out an article from the Times that raised the possibility of the current financial unpleasantness nine years ago.

Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates — anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

---------------

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980’s.

Posted by Doug Murray at 09:01 AM Sep 20, 2008 Permalink | Comments (0)

Just who are these damned speculators?

Phil Miller tells us (with a little Redneck inspiration):

  • If you have a retirement account, you might be a speculator.

  • If you've ever bought stock, you might be a speculator.

  • If you ever bought baseball cards or Beanie Babies as an investment, you might be a speculator.

  • If you buy airline tickets early because you expect the price to rise as the time of the flight gets closer, you might be a speculator.

  • If you wait to buy scalped tickets, knowing that the price falls as game time nears, you might be a speculator.

  • If you buy gas upon hearing that oil prices have jumped again, you might be a speculator.

  • If you wait to buy gas upon hearing that oil prices have fallen, you might be a speculator.

  • If you went to college and chose a major because of the future it was expected to give you, you might be a speculator.

Not me, though.  I had all the oil holdings in my IRA swapped for something more profitable - bottled water.

Posted by Doug Murray at 01:14 PM Jul 15, 2008 Permalink | Comments (0)

Energy Development - Response to Tom Feeney

Dear Congressman Feeney,

I found your January 26 newsletter mostly encouraging.  You outlined a 10 Step Energy Plan that is pretty much on target. 

However, for #5 I would like to know exactly how you intend to "encourage the greater use of coal" and I don't like #9 at all. A more honest wording would have been, "further complicate the tax code with energy conservation tax incentives."  This is the sort of good intention that makes tax law the monstrosity it has become.

The operative verbs for each of the other steps were: abolish, open, allow, (un)cripple, allow, streamline, allow, reduce.  These 8 steps remove obstacles that government has put in the way of energy development and are a good way to go.

Doug Murray
Altamonte Springs, FL

(See Feeney's plan in the continuation)

Click here to continue reading "Energy Development - Response to Tom Feeney"

Posted by Doug Murray at 12:57 PM Jun 29, 2008 Permalink | Comments (0)

Just Got Smart

The local reviewer said to skip Get Smart so we made a point to go.  Good move.  I haven't laughed that much in a long time.

I think the critic wanted something that ridiculed the TV show, which he didn't think much of either.  Those who didn't like the series won't like the movie, since it's more a tribute than a spoof.  Even when it does make fun of the original, it's in the Mel Brooks/Buck Henry spirit ( who both got credits in the film.)

On the big screen we get more James Bondish chases, explosions and high body counts, although some folks seem to think that's a fault, not true to the original.  But the old show was, after all, a send-up of the Bond of movies and was incomplete without the high-budget mayhem.

Of course, if you're new to Smart, you'll miss some of the references.  The Sentinel critic wondered why Bill Murray had a cameo as Agent 13.  (Well, Mr. Moore, Agent 13 and was a running gag throughout the old show and somebody had to do it.) And I loved it when Anne Hathaway's 99 used a Barbara Feldon hairdo as a disguise.

I will admit that the film loses a little steam around the ninety minute mark,  but that doesn't last long once the final chase starts.

I have just one word for Get Smart - It's Terrific! 

Posted by Doug Murray at 04:29 PM Jun 21, 2008 Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)