What could you do with $600 Billion

West Virginia Senator, Robert Byrd, who has been in the Senate through Vietnam, Gulf War I, and this current debacle, was outraged, and rightly so, but seemingly to be the only one, at the cost, after this latest round of funding requests. He simply repeated the number $600 billion.

That is what the United States government has spent on the war in Iraq. And the question still remains, where are the tangible returns on investments? I have already outlined what the most recent requests are for, so I thought I would come at it a different way and try and illustrate what $600 billion dollars would get the United States.

First, to put this in perspective, $600 billion (600,000,000,000) if it were your country's Gross Domestic Product, would put you at number 17 in the world.

For $600 billion, you could fund the Department of Homeland (In)security for 12 years ($48 b/yr) or the Department of Defense for a year and a bit ($400 b/yr).

For $600 billion, you could fund every local jurisdictions request for an interoperable radio systems and actually make it work.

For $600 billion, you could rebuild a large number of schools that are beyond their useful life span and give the teachers a raise.

For $600 billion, you could put a dint in the issue of a new source of energy.

For $600 billion, you could make large strides to repairing and replacing infrastructure (such as bridges and roads and the electrical grid).

For $600 billion you could clean up polluted rivers, streams and lakes.

For $600 billion, you could actually come up with a national security plan that preserved the rights and liberties documented in the Constitution while actually affording the nation some real security.

The limit is only your imagination, yet the government, with no real outcry from the people, continues this fruitless and pointless war. The nation is beyond bankrupt. I just hope that her citizens wake up and realize this before it is too late.

On Net Neutrality - Verizon Steps In It.

Verizon reverses decision to block text messages BY Grant Gross September 27, 2007 (IDG News Service) -- Verizon Wireless Inc. has reversed a decision to block text messages on its network from abortion rights group Naral Pro-Choice America after an outcry from Net neutrality advocates and others. (ComputerWorld)

Now, I would think, by 2007, that the issue of net neutrality was pretty much a foregone conclusion. If you do not have neutrality, you cannot effectively have an Internet. It simply will not work otherwise. But clearly, the telcos, who cannot think from quarter to quarter, much less outside the box, still do not seem to get it and they are joined in their duplicity by the very federal agency that is supposed to be looking out for the citizen. Regrettably, it seems there is still a fight to be had.

Now, do not mistake me. I think that email and other services have been hijacked by spammers and all other unsavory characters to their own ends, making it harder and harder for legitimate users to really take advantage of the technology. What is especially bad about this whole case is that we are not talking about blanket SMS messages to just anyone, but targeted messages to people who have signed up for the service! That, to me, is not spam, regardless of how many people the message is going to. And in the case of SMS messages, unlike general email, Verizon would get their proverbial pound of flesh in the form of fees from receipt of message. So everyone wins. Of course, the suits at Verizon probably were facing a lawsuit over this and some sharp tech was talking to a marketing rep and said, why face a suit when we will make money and oh, by the way, here is another revenue stream (so look for this coming soon to a system near you).

The telcos can bitch all they want about freeloaders on their lines. The fact, as proven in other parts of the world, is that when you open the system, you get more opportunities and more opportunities means more money. You just have to spend a little more time thinking about how you are going to recognize the revenue, because the old rules do not apply any more.

How much did he say?

Gates Seeks $190 Billion for Wars September 26, 2007 - 1:39pm By ANNE FLAHERTY Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - Defense Secretary Robert Gates will ask Congress Wednesday to approve nearly $190 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2008, increasing initial projections by more than a third. (WTOP)

Would someone please tell me why this is not causing outrage and concern? This is not chump change we are talking about. Back in July it was reported that the war was costing an estimated $12 billion dollars a month. A quick calculation shows that it is now up to almost $16 billion. What are we getting for this? Well, I am glad you asked:

• $11 billion to field another 7,000 MRAP vehicles in addition to the 8,000 already planned;
• $9 billion to reconstitute equipment and technology;
• $6 billion for training and equipment of troops;
• $1 billion to improve U.S. facilities in the region and consolidate bases in Iraq; and
• $1 billion to train and equip Iraqi security forces.
  

Now, I don't want to sound bitter or anything, but why am I paying to train and equip the Iraqi security forces? I would think this cost would be borne by the Iraqi government, or what currently passes for it. Why am I paying to improve facilities in a country where we are only supposed to have a temporary presence (at least according to our leaders)?

I am beyond understanding why the United States is continuing to pour money down this sewer. What scares me even more is who is underwriting the paper that all this funding is based on, because it is not the American Taxpayer. I hope that the countries that hold these notes are not just waiting to foreclose. If you think things in Russia were bad after the fall of communism, you have not seen anything yet.

Talk Like a Pirate Day Mate!

The good captain must still be in his cups as to almost forget such a fine day as this. So hoist yer sails and turn yer back to the wind and don't forget m'harties to plunder first then burn! Arr. Hoist the Black Jack and lay in for Tortuga.

(Yes, it is Talk Like A Pirate Day again :-) Now wheres me wench and me rum?

SCO: Put a fork in it.

SCO says there is 'substantial doubt' it will survive: In SEC filing, company cites cash Chapter 11, legal setbacks By Robert McMillan September 18, 2007 (Computerworld) -- With its cash reserves running out and its legal case against IBM Corp. unraveling, The SCO Group Inc. says there is doubt that it will remain afloat. SCO made the statement in its most recent quarterly U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission statement, filed today. The company cited its recent motion for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection as well as a recent court setback relating to its intellectual-property claims as reasons for worry. (ComputerWorld)

Woohoo! Put the Champagne on ice and tell the fat lady to start warming up. One of the nastiest, most backward cases of FUD is about over and it could not happen to a nice bunch of morons. I do not know what is in the water in the SCO building, but clearly, they lost their way and a good company became the epitome of what bad corporations can do to the reputation, not only of themselves but almost an entire industry.

Almost single handedly, SCO has set back the ability of the consumer to choose and that is a pity. Fortunately, the European Union has slapped the mighty Microsoft's wrist and the International Standards Organization went thumbs down on a restrictive Microsoft "standard" too, so this is turning into a banner month. Since Apple has announced it does not want to go after the corporate desktop (which is probably a good decision) more work needs to be done in the Open Source community to show that there is an alternative to putting a file server under every user's desktop.

SCO files Chapter 11

Update: SCO files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection: Announcement comes just before next week's Novell trial Todd R. Weiss September 14, 2007 (Computerworld) -- The SCO Group Inc. today filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, just a month after losing several key court rulings in its legal fight against Novell Inc., IBM and others over what it asserts is the company's Unix intellectual property. (ComputerWorld)

SCO files for bankruptcy. Could this really be the beginning of the end of this long, over drawn nightmare?

The kilo is loosing weight!

Kilo prototype mysteriously loses weight By JAMEY KEATEN, Associated Press Writer Wed Sep 12, 1:00 PM ET PARIS - A kilogram just isn't what it used to be. The 118-year-old cylinder that is the international prototype for the metric mass, kept tightly under lock and key outside Paris, is mysteriously losing weight — if ever so slightly. Physicist Richard Davis of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in Sevres, southwest of Paris, says the reference kilo appears to have lost 50 micrograms compared with the average of dozens of copies. (Yahoo News)

Woohoo, so we are not really getting heavier! OK, put down that double fudge ripple sundae, you are not made of a platinum and iridium alloy!

September 11 - Are We More At Risk Today?

Today is September 11, 2007.

In 2001, I reported to work. It was not a normal day. I had my infant daughter in my arms and we were scheduled to perform a series of network tests. Otherwise, I would have been at home on my couch. When I arrived at the office, the first plane had hit the towers, but I was unaware of this because I had been listening to silly songs rather than the news. The IT team was glued to the web feed. The CIO was not amused about it and wanted us to get back to work. I was not sure what all the excitement was about either having just come in the door, but I was looking out the window from the sixth floor and could see what I later learned was the smoke from the Pentagon on the horizon. By lunch time, I was in my driveway with multiple radios. the county having lost phone service, my daughter playing in the grass under the tree. Four days later, I was down at the Pentagon, ready to lend my aid. Ironically, it was determined that my presence at a management seminar was a more important use of my time. This was not a determination I made, but was made for me by my employer. This was, perhaps, the first indication to me just how little the attacks truly meant to the county and explains why the nation as a whole, even today is not ready for another incident, but I will discuss that in a moment.

In August 2002, I went to Seattle, Washington to attend a friends wedding. While most of the East Coast was still talking about the events of the previous year, it was not even a topic of conversation in Seattle. What was ironic is most people associated Washington, DC with the Cherry Blossoms, not an airplane hitting the Pentagon. It was almost as if they did not even know that the Pentagon was near Washington, DC.

Today, six years later, the nation seems to have gone from a state of readiness to a state of laissez faire, more interested in what their government is prepared to do for them than the state of their own plans. And, sadly, the state of the government's plans is more interested in preventing things, in the name of security than they are about working towards effective preparation. It reminds me a lot of the sage wisdom in Frank Herbert's Dune. The United States has become very much like House Harkonnen while Al-Qaeda is following the path of House Atreides and their Fremen allies. When the Harkonnen go to ground, Paul Maud'Dib and Gurney Halleck are talking about the events.



Says Gurney "They say they've fortified the graben villages to the point where you [Paul] cannot harm them. They say they need only sit inside their defenses while you wear yourself out in futile attack."

"In a word," Paul said, "they're immobilized."

"While you can go where you will," Gurney said.

"It's a tactic I learned from you," Paul said. "They've lost the initiative, which means they've lost the war." (pg. 415)



While I am not saying that the United States has lost the war, it certainly has adopted a bunker mentality that seems to be more focused on preventing than it is on being prepared for it to happen again, which is most assuredly will.

In Sunday's Washington Post, in the Opinion section, Messrs. Keen and Hamilton, the Chairs of the 9/11 Commission Report asked the question "Are we safer today?" Their answer, which I happen to agree with, is no, but I think a better question is "Are we more at risk today?" This is less clear cut.

Clearly, many of the issues addressed in the 9/11 Commission report are still issues that need to be resolved. There are still a large core of young, predominantly male, Muslims that have no job, and no hope of betterment in the near future. This is further compounded by the power vacuum created by the United States invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq and a failure, as pointed out by Michael Scheuer, of the intelligence community to check the checkables. The United States has invested large amounts of money into questionable policies and procedures that, while on the surface look like positive steps, begin to show cracks and serious failings as you dig deeper.

As an example, let us take air travel. For obvious reasons, this was one of the first targets for "improvement" following the events of September 11. The problem, and a question that still to my mind has not been answered satisfactorily, is how did the hijackers get into the cockpits in the first place? Remember that following the CIA shootings in Washington in the early 1990's the FAA ordered all cockpit doors to be secured at all times. This, to me raises some very serious questions about how seriously the current regulations are being taken if previous directives were ignored. Further, while the traveling public is all but stripped searched (and with the new back scatter devices being installed in select airports, you might as well be naked) before being allowed on an airplane, the cargo being loaded into the belly of the very same plane is barely looked at, besides making sure it is actually getting on the right aircraft. For those of you who follow this stuff, I am sure you are jumping up and down to point out my error. Sorry, but I am one step ahead of you. In August, what was HR-1 became Public Law 110-53 and ordered the screening of all cargo. As of today, that is not happening and under current TSA guidelines, most of that "checking" will be done by the air cargo carriers with random "enforcement" checks by TSA rather than formal TSA procedures. If you think for one minute this is an improvement over the current set of procedures, I have a genuine piece of the Pentagon to sell you. And it will be years, if not decades before the United States is capable of examining every rail, road and ship borne cargo brought into the United States.

On the home front, the Department of Homeland (In)security started several programs to enhance safety. These include the Ready program, RealID, National Incident Management System (NIMS), and HSPD-12. With the exception of NIMS, these programs are close to being outright failures.

The Ready Program is a great idea. While I think it tends to focus too much on terrorism rather than being an all-hazards approach (after all, why should we worry about bird flu and bio-terrorism. Treat them as a hazard and mitigate the risks). The problem is that in the years since September 11, like my friends in Seattle, the memory has faded and most people are less prepared today than they were prior to September 11. Further, more are looking to the government to be prepared for them rather than taking the responsibility themselves. Yes, this is a problem because when the next incident occurs, whether it is domestic, foreign, weather or illness, the country will again be wringing its hands and asking what more could we have done when the answer has been spelled out clearly and repeatedly.

I have documented numerous times the problems with RealID. From the costs, to the inability for most citizens to qualify for the documentation, RealID is nothing less than a National ID card, and frankly, the United States already has too many forms of identification for too many purposes, some of which are crossed. Until there are real discussions about the privacy of this information and who is going to bear the costs of the program, RealID is dead on arrival.

Along the lines of RealID, is the HSPD-12 initiative. There are dozens of little things in HSPD-12, but the major focus is the attempted establishment of a single, federal ID card. Like all things in the United States, single is a word that is a difficult concept to grasp. The goal may be to archive a single ID card, but at the moment there are no less than three competing standards for what the card will encompass. To add insult to injury, the costs for moving to this single card systems are borne by each agency out of their operating budgets (as compared to separate and distinct appropriation) which must compete with a forced move to IPv6, data center relocations and other routine issues that every agency deals with. Without a single, enforced standard, the mandates of HSPD-12 are doomed to failure.

The National Incident Management System (NIMS) has a lot of good qualities. It attempts to establish a single model for incident response, a unified plan and a process for interagency cooperation. Many parts of the program are good and it is nice to see that many agencies are beginning to adopt the core concepts. That being said, there are large sections of NIMS that are "to be decided," or worse, can never be decided because of the sheer size of the implementation project. A single (there's that word again) data network for passing information just is not realistic (I would argue that several already exist, why re-engineer, but that is just me), especially when each jurisdiction has to buy its own gear and train its own people. Interoperations in communications have come a long way but there are still monumental hurdles to overcome, least of which is cooperation between the various first responder agencies and their local, state and federal counterparts. When it comes to human interaction, there is not much you can legislate, as much as you would like to.

The other piece of NIMS that has a long way to go is the National Response Plan (NRP). There seems to be a disconnect between the writers of the NRP and the writers of NIMS. A disconnect that I understand is being rectified, but will take some time. As we saw with the response to Katrina, the NRP is so new, that even the federal government did not follow it, which of course, begs the question, why should I follow it when the federal government does not? This will bear further examination as the next revision of the NRP is released.

I asked earlier if we were anymore at risk? Frankly, I do not believe the United States is any more at risk from a terrorist attack than it was prior to September 11. What I do believe is that the risk of damage from such an attack is significantly higher and that the ability to execute an attack is significantly higher. Man, as an animal, does not like restrictions generally. Ask any security expert who has thought about it and you will discover that the more stringing the security measures, the more man will try to work around them. While this is particularly true in computer security, we are beginning to see it as an issue in immigration, transportation and economics. This becomes even more critical when you consider the patchwork of enforcement or just following the policy. Again, as any air traveler will tell you, TSA enforcement is haphazard. In some airports you have remove your shoes and belt, take your electronics out and submit to a cavity search. In other airports, you can walk through with nary a glance at the magnetometer. It is this sort of enforcement that really makes most of us upset rather than the requirement for enforcement to begin with. As a result, in the words of Michael Scheuer:



"This dire lack of discernment - few senior bureaucrats will discount a threat if there is a one-in-a-billion chance it might occur and cost a promotion - results in a massive misapplication of manpower, computer time, and national-level intelligence collection systems against a mass of threats, most of which are palpably absurd. As a result, like a fire department plagued by false alarms, analysts, spies, equipment and police at all levels are worn out chasing nonextant threats. In doing so, moreover, an atmosphere is created where the constant crying of wolf dulls our analytic edge and increases the risk of the career-ruining oversight senior bureaucrats fear." (pg. 85).



Finally, there is the "sense of national grief" that seems to pervade the whole incident and has gotten progressively worse as time goes on. Yes, some people died. But the people that died on September 11 were a minority. To put it in perspective, if you assume 2000 people died, that would still be less than then number of people who died on the road in the United States in one month! So far, only one other person seems to get the irony, and that is OpEd cartoonist Jeff Stahler who's rather poignant piece appears today. So if we are going to grieve as a nation, perhaps we need to be looking a different statistic. Further, as pointed out in the 9/11 report, some 600 of those who died did not have to because they violated their own procedures and self-deployed without proper gear or following safety protocols.

Is the United States safer? No, absolutely not. Is the United States more at risk? From another attack? No I would argue that the United States is at no more risk than it was prior to September 11, 2001, but the United States is certainly at more risk for damage and death from an attack when it next occurs. Whether it is from Al-Qaeda, the Illinois Nazis, or Mother Nature. So go and get prepared. It is not up to the government. It is up to you.

DOJ and Net Neutrality. You were expcting something positive?

Net neutrality: "not normal" Grant Gross reports:

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should resist calls to impose net neutrality regulations on broadband providers because such rules could hurt the Internet, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said Thursday ... [it] said net neutrality rules could "inefficiently skew investment, delay innovation, and diminish consumer welfare." Rules that would prohibit broadband providers from giving priority to their own Internet traffic and prohibit them from blocking or slowing competitors' traffic could also prevent providers from charging fees for priority service ... [and] could, in turn, cause fees to increase to all broadband users ... [and] could also discourage broadband providers from investing in new, high-speed services and keep providers from managing their networks efficiently. (ComputerWorld)

At the risk of getting kicked off the net, this is bullshit. Pure and simple. The FCC has been in the hip pocket of the ISPs and telcos for the bulk of this administration and some of the previous one. How else can you explain some their decisions to support HDTV, Broadband over Powerline and other technologies that bring little or nothing (or are outright detrimental) to the end user but provide windfall profits for companies that do not have to upgrade systems or provide anything resembling services to their customer base, who is paying for the services.

Now, the Department of Justice says go ahead and write more rules that will inhibit technology growth and deployment (Google, Vonage, take note, the FCC and the DOJ are directing this right at your forehead) of slick solutions that would make doing things much easer. Instead, they are going to enable Verizon and Cox and Time-Warner to contiue to degrade service for third party applications, that probably work better then the crap they are trying to shovel, while continuing to jack up the price for their own applications (VoIP is the current one that jumps to mind) and pushing off technology upgrades as long as possible.

I read an article in just the last few days that looked at broadband speed and saturation levels in the world. Want to guess where the United States came in that study? Remember, the Internet was invented here. If you said anywhere but the bottom, go back up and read the DOJ's opinion again. Japan is leading the way with almost Gigabit to the desktop. Why? Several reasons. First, no surprise, they have an advantage because of density and a need to rebuild their phone network following World War II that the United States never had to face, but almost more importantly, the Japanese government forced, by law, the telcos to open their gateways to "upstarts." The end result is more competition, more bandwidth, cheaper prices and more services. Even Canada, which has vast wastelands of empty space has more bandwidth and more adoption than the United States (although not by much).

So, the next time you are wondering why that video on demand service so slow and there has to be a better way to do it, or you read about this really cool technology but it only works on "their" network, remember to thank the Department of Justice the FCC and your local telco and cable provider. They are there to help you...fail.

What's with the politicians?

Craig reconsidering decision to resign By JOHN MILLER, Associated Press Writer BOISE, Idaho - Sen. Larry Craig says he may still fight for his Senate seat, a spokesman says — if the lawmaker can clear his name with the Senate Ethics Committee and a Minnesota court where he pleaded guilty after his arrest in an airport men's room sex sting. (Yahoo News)

This guy is starting to become somewhat of a joke, even within his own twisted party. Most of us have watched enough police dramas in our life to know that if you do not understand something, you ask for an expert and when you do not understand what the police are telling you, you ask for a lawyer. When you are a member of Congress, you should be doing that right out of the gate.

I do not care if he is gay or not. Really, I do not. His sexual orientation is not the issue. What is at issue is his arrest and subsequent guilty plea. While it is too much to hope that a member of the Congress might actually stay on the right side of the law, this is not a parking ticket or DUI. Further, this is a member who claims to be an upstanding moral individual. If it was a case of disorderly conduct where, perhaps he was overly loud in a setting where he was disturbing people, that would be one thing, but it is not.

At this point, the smart thing for him to do is to resign, let the process run and then try and convince the voters that he should be reelected. And while he and the rest of the politicians out there are about it, perhaps a little less high and mighty and a little more humility and a desire to actually serve the people might stand them in better stead.

Juxtiposition - Hurricanes and Genetics

Felix could become Category 5 hurricane By ESTEBAN FELIX, Associated Press Writer Forecasters said Tuesday that Hurricane Felix could strengthen into a Category 5 monster just as it makes landfall near the Nicaragua-Honduras border, home to thousands of stranded Miskito Indians. Meanwhile, off Mexico's Pacific coast, Tropical Storm Henriette strengthened into a hurricane, the National Hurricane Center said, with winds of 75 mph. It is on a path that would take it near or over Mexico's southern Baja Peninsula by Tuesday afternoon. (Yahoo News)

Mom's Genes or Dad's? Map Can Tell. One Man's DNA Shows We're Less Alike Than We Thought By Rick Weiss Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, September 4, 2007; Page A01 Scientists have for the first time determined the order of virtually every letter of DNA code in an individual, offering an unprecedented readout of the separate genetic contributions made by that person's mother and father. (Washington Post)

On first glance, these two article have nothing to do with each other. In fact, they are probably more directly related than you might imagine, especially when you consider that I am reading Darwin's The Origin of Species (Literature.org) and Project Gutenberg). How? There is some body of evidence, greater even than that of climactic change and global temperature fluctuation that indicates that some 95% of all the species on earth are extinct. Wiped out. Destroyed. Those in the Intelligent Design camp would have us believe that some one up there is responsible for making us, us. Frankly, it is a long stretch of faith (and it would have to be based solely on faith) to put any sort of stock in that belief.

One of the more reoccurring reasons, simply, is nature herself. As we are about to witness, another, potentially dangerous Category 5 (as we currently measure them) storm is about to roll over an area of dense vegetation, poor (by our standards) living conditions and marginal soil base, which will result in devastation, loss of life and a long period of regrowth and renewal.

Now, before we boo-hoo the loss of life, which is expected to be substantial, I want you to think for a moment. Hurricanes, tornadoes, tsunamis, earthquakes, biological plagues and other assorted nastiness have bothered this planet for most of its existence. During that time, ecosystems have been altered or destroyed and the loss of life has been significant. With six billion people on the planet, loosing a couple thousand in a hurricane is bad day, but we will go on. When there were not that many people, loosing a couple of thousand could have had, and is estimated to have had a dramatic and significant impact on what comprises the human species today, especially given the current results that there is as much chance (mutation) as there is parental lineage to our genetic make up.

We, man, have currently expended large amounts of energy to prolong life and make a better place for ourselves on this planet. As a result, we have affected her climate and her ecosystems. This is not something we can change. Regrettably, we cannot wind back the clock. We do need to make some substantive changes though. We need to reduce the amount of energy we are using, not because of so called global warming (sorry, as a Geographer you will need a lot more evidence to convince me that a couple of hundred years of man-made effluence is even close to equal the output of a couple of very large volcanic eruptions, which we have strong evidence did more to alter the earth's climate) but because of the effects of the exploration and exploitation of the surrounding environment that is being explored and harvested. We need fewer malls, fewer things, just fewer. Obesity is just symptom of a much greater ill. I guess Mother Nature, in her twisted way, figures if she cannot kill us with pain, she will kill us with pleasure.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go an prepare for the next hurricane.