Someone in Missouri is doing a web poll on the most famous Missourian. This morning, some MD who invented "osteopathy" was on top. This afternoon Robert A. Heinlein has pulled ahead, partly from a mention on Instapundit. Anyhow, now is the time for all you Heinlein fans to go to the Missouri website and vote for the Grand Master.
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Hacking your electric company
National Geographic will air a TV docudrama where in enemy hackers cause electric power failures nationwide. With the juice out, water systems stop delivering water, cell phones stop celling, gasoline pumps won't pump, freezers thaw out, the Internet goes off the air, along with TV and radio. Wired phones may last longer, but don't count on it. In short, Western Civilization crumbles.
One simple rule would prevent this. No control signals of any kind may be transmitted over the public internet or the plain old telephone system (POTS). Companies must be required to string private wires, preferably optical fibers for all remote control and monitoring.
Reason. Connect anything to the public internet, and every hacker on the planet has access to it. All the hacker needs is to learn the control codes and he can order the remote controled machinery to do anything he likes, go off line, shut down, blow up, you name it. Whereas with a private line, the hacker has to get a ladder and climb a pole to tap into it. Fiber optic is even better, you cannot tap fiber optics, you would have to cut the fiber, insert a splitter, and then rejoin the cut fiber. Few hackers will climb a pole, let alone splice optical fiber. And you have to be there, you cannot climb an American pole from your basement in Lower Slobbovia.
Companies won't like this, it's expensive. Using the public internet or POTS is free, where as a private line costs you, for installation and maintenance. The power companies won't comply unless the public utility commissions demand it.
If they don't, better check out your backup generator.
One simple rule would prevent this. No control signals of any kind may be transmitted over the public internet or the plain old telephone system (POTS). Companies must be required to string private wires, preferably optical fibers for all remote control and monitoring.
Reason. Connect anything to the public internet, and every hacker on the planet has access to it. All the hacker needs is to learn the control codes and he can order the remote controled machinery to do anything he likes, go off line, shut down, blow up, you name it. Whereas with a private line, the hacker has to get a ladder and climb a pole to tap into it. Fiber optic is even better, you cannot tap fiber optics, you would have to cut the fiber, insert a splitter, and then rejoin the cut fiber. Few hackers will climb a pole, let alone splice optical fiber. And you have to be there, you cannot climb an American pole from your basement in Lower Slobbovia.
Companies won't like this, it's expensive. Using the public internet or POTS is free, where as a private line costs you, for installation and maintenance. The power companies won't comply unless the public utility commissions demand it.
If they don't, better check out your backup generator.
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Regulation of Diet Supplements
Must be a slow news Saturday. Fox News ran a long piece on this. Not a product that I ever buy. But the Fox news chick felt they were terribly important. She dumped out two shopping bags of empty bottles, making a pile two feet high, and then said this was her monthly usage, and she paid $1400 a month for it. Wow. I don't spend that much on groceries. Must be powerful stuff.
Anyhow the FDA wants to regulate them like prescription drugs, require doctor's prescriptions and all that. The diet supplement people said regulation would skyrocket the cost and kill the industry.
Since they have been selling this stuff for a long time, and it doesn't seem to hurt anyone, I don't see a need to give the FDA another field to grow fat bureaucrats in.
Anyhow the FDA wants to regulate them like prescription drugs, require doctor's prescriptions and all that. The diet supplement people said regulation would skyrocket the cost and kill the industry.
Since they have been selling this stuff for a long time, and it doesn't seem to hurt anyone, I don't see a need to give the FDA another field to grow fat bureaucrats in.
Friday, October 25, 2013
So what's so wrong with the Gerrymander?
We hear pundits of both the left and the right claiming that Washington's dysfunction is all because of gerrymandered election districts. They wax eloquent about the evils of districts controled by the other side. Districts controlled by their side are clean and virtuous, districts controlled by the other side are dark and evil.
The gerrymander was invented by Elbridge Gerry, a governor of Massachusetts back in the Federal period. Gerry was a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a signer of the Articles of Confederation, and was present at the constitutional convention in Philadelphia. He refused to sign the original Constitution because it lacked the Bill of Rights. This resume makes Gerry as American as apple pie. Maybe not quite in George Washington's class, but plenty respectable enough.
While Gerry was governor of Massachuetts after the Revolution, the commonwealth redistricted. (Massachusetts is not a state, it's a commonwealth, ask any native) One of the new districts came out looking like a salamander, kinda long and thin, and curvy. Gerry's political opponents called it a gerrymander and the name has stuck to this day.
When redistricting, which happens every ten years, sometime after the federal census, the party in power gets to draw the new district lines. Principles are simple. For "my" districts, include only enough of "my" voters to win the district. For "their" districts, pack in as many of "their" voters as possible. There is only one seat to be won in each district . A district of 90% "their" voters only wins one seat. The same district redrawn to move a lot of "their" voters into "my" districts might win lots more seats. Anyhow, an experienced politician can come up with new district lines that give his party an edge. The edge is probably in the order of 10%, which is enough to win a lotta elections.
The real objection to gerrymandered districts is loss of control of elected representatives. A compact district, where the voters know each other from face-to-face contact, can rally behind some issue and tell their rep which way to vote. If the district is all stretched out and fifty miles long, it's harder for the voters to get together on issues. I mean, how many people do you know who live fifty miles away, as opposed to next door neighbors. The rep from a real gerrymander district has a much freer hand than the rep from a compact district.
If we the voters, really wanted to end gerrymanders, we could with one simple law. Require a 2:1 aspect ratio, or less for all districts. By this we mean the longest distance across the district shall not exceed twice the shortest distance across the district. Of course, the politicians don't want this, and we the voters don't really care that much, so it hasn't happened yet.
My own district in the back woods, used to be just two neighboring towns. Then my good friend Paul Mirsky, in charge of the 2011 redistrictings, gerrymandered it. My district now is five towns, running from here to the Vermont border, some 30 miles away. Paul thought that the new district would return a Republican rep. Did not happen, we are currently represented by Rebecca Brown, a Democrat. Door to door campaigning is easier to do on your home turf than in a rural town 30 miles away.
The gerrymander was invented by Elbridge Gerry, a governor of Massachusetts back in the Federal period. Gerry was a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a signer of the Articles of Confederation, and was present at the constitutional convention in Philadelphia. He refused to sign the original Constitution because it lacked the Bill of Rights. This resume makes Gerry as American as apple pie. Maybe not quite in George Washington's class, but plenty respectable enough.
While Gerry was governor of Massachuetts after the Revolution, the commonwealth redistricted. (Massachusetts is not a state, it's a commonwealth, ask any native) One of the new districts came out looking like a salamander, kinda long and thin, and curvy. Gerry's political opponents called it a gerrymander and the name has stuck to this day.
When redistricting, which happens every ten years, sometime after the federal census, the party in power gets to draw the new district lines. Principles are simple. For "my" districts, include only enough of "my" voters to win the district. For "their" districts, pack in as many of "their" voters as possible. There is only one seat to be won in each district . A district of 90% "their" voters only wins one seat. The same district redrawn to move a lot of "their" voters into "my" districts might win lots more seats. Anyhow, an experienced politician can come up with new district lines that give his party an edge. The edge is probably in the order of 10%, which is enough to win a lotta elections.
The real objection to gerrymandered districts is loss of control of elected representatives. A compact district, where the voters know each other from face-to-face contact, can rally behind some issue and tell their rep which way to vote. If the district is all stretched out and fifty miles long, it's harder for the voters to get together on issues. I mean, how many people do you know who live fifty miles away, as opposed to next door neighbors. The rep from a real gerrymander district has a much freer hand than the rep from a compact district.
If we the voters, really wanted to end gerrymanders, we could with one simple law. Require a 2:1 aspect ratio, or less for all districts. By this we mean the longest distance across the district shall not exceed twice the shortest distance across the district. Of course, the politicians don't want this, and we the voters don't really care that much, so it hasn't happened yet.
My own district in the back woods, used to be just two neighboring towns. Then my good friend Paul Mirsky, in charge of the 2011 redistrictings, gerrymandered it. My district now is five towns, running from here to the Vermont border, some 30 miles away. Paul thought that the new district would return a Republican rep. Did not happen, we are currently represented by Rebecca Brown, a Democrat. Door to door campaigning is easier to do on your home turf than in a rural town 30 miles away.
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Questions they ought to ask, but didn't
Washington is grilling the Obamacare software contractors today. Medium rare at least. Someone should have asked about the specifications for the job.
When was the final signed off specification released to the programmers? Was the website user load specified? Who signed off for the government? How many change orders were issued AFTER the specification was released to the programmers? Who signed off on the change orders? How long was the specification? Fifty pages is about right. By the time you get to a hundred pages nobody understands it. Who wrote the spec, government or the contractors? What kind of contract was it, firm fixed fee, cost plus incentive fee, or plain old cost plus? How many programmers did your company have on the job? When did they start? How much has your company been paid? What milestones were set for payment? What testing was required? Did the program pass those tests before Oct 1? How many lines of code were delivered? Does the program run on Windows?
When was the final signed off specification released to the programmers? Was the website user load specified? Who signed off for the government? How many change orders were issued AFTER the specification was released to the programmers? Who signed off on the change orders? How long was the specification? Fifty pages is about right. By the time you get to a hundred pages nobody understands it. Who wrote the spec, government or the contractors? What kind of contract was it, firm fixed fee, cost plus incentive fee, or plain old cost plus? How many programmers did your company have on the job? When did they start? How much has your company been paid? What milestones were set for payment? What testing was required? Did the program pass those tests before Oct 1? How many lines of code were delivered? Does the program run on Windows?
Red Dawn Remake
The original Red Dawn, starring Patrick Swayze, came out in 1984. Ill omened year that. It was gripping, and carried a strong message of patriotism and American exceptionalism. In fact so strong that my lefty Protestant minister preached a sermon against the movie one Sunday in 1984. I'm assuming everybody saw it back in the '80s, or later on TV. The actors, unknowns except for Patrick Swaze, did good, camera work and sound was good.
So, 20 years later, Hollywood does a remake. Remakes are easy. It's easy to get funding, and easy to do the screenplay and do the plot. And so, just to check up on 'em, I netflixed it last night.
Big mistake. It was a terrible remake. Camerawork sucked. Interior shots were so dark you couldn't recognize the characters. Few of the grand panorama shots of western mountain scenery. John Ford made his rep with movies set in super scenic Monument Valley. None of that kind of camerawork in remade Red Dawn.
Actors mumbled their lines. At least the sound man didn't let the score override the dialog. The dialog omitted character names, every one wore pretty much the same costumes (urban grunge mixed with combat fatigues) making it hard to tell one character from the other. The relationship between brothers Jed and Matt was confused. In the original, Jed and Matt were quite close, in the last scene we see Jed carrying a wounded Matt in his arms off an urban battlefield, thru a heavy snowstorm, back into the hills. In the remake, Matt is not much of a team player and Jed does a lot of snarling at Matt about it. In the original the characters make it clear that this guerrilla warfare thing is scary, as well as cold, lonely and hungry. Very little of that in the remake.
Props were disappointing. The enemy shows up driving Humvees, whereas we expect the enemy to drive enemy manufactured vehicles. No horses, everyone gets round in cars and pickup trucks. No sign of the big ivory handled six gun that Jed used to shoot down the nasty enemy colonel in the original. The Wolverines fight with popgun assault rifles, no 12 gauge pump shotguns, no Model 70 scoped rifles, just full automatic popguns. No scary enemy helicopters either.
Era is sort of blurry. We see Obama and Hillary Clinton on TV in some of the opening atmospheric shots, that makes it after 2008. Then we see the Wolverines escaping an enemy ambush in a Detroit station wagon. I haven't seen a station wagon on the road for 15-20 years. Every drives SUV's now.
The cast all seemed too old to be in high school. In the original, everyone looked like real high schoolers, in the remake. everyone looked old enough to have graduated college.
Anyhow, Hollywood has lost it's touch. They can't even do a decent remake.
So, 20 years later, Hollywood does a remake. Remakes are easy. It's easy to get funding, and easy to do the screenplay and do the plot. And so, just to check up on 'em, I netflixed it last night.
Big mistake. It was a terrible remake. Camerawork sucked. Interior shots were so dark you couldn't recognize the characters. Few of the grand panorama shots of western mountain scenery. John Ford made his rep with movies set in super scenic Monument Valley. None of that kind of camerawork in remade Red Dawn.
Actors mumbled their lines. At least the sound man didn't let the score override the dialog. The dialog omitted character names, every one wore pretty much the same costumes (urban grunge mixed with combat fatigues) making it hard to tell one character from the other. The relationship between brothers Jed and Matt was confused. In the original, Jed and Matt were quite close, in the last scene we see Jed carrying a wounded Matt in his arms off an urban battlefield, thru a heavy snowstorm, back into the hills. In the remake, Matt is not much of a team player and Jed does a lot of snarling at Matt about it. In the original the characters make it clear that this guerrilla warfare thing is scary, as well as cold, lonely and hungry. Very little of that in the remake.
Props were disappointing. The enemy shows up driving Humvees, whereas we expect the enemy to drive enemy manufactured vehicles. No horses, everyone gets round in cars and pickup trucks. No sign of the big ivory handled six gun that Jed used to shoot down the nasty enemy colonel in the original. The Wolverines fight with popgun assault rifles, no 12 gauge pump shotguns, no Model 70 scoped rifles, just full automatic popguns. No scary enemy helicopters either.
Era is sort of blurry. We see Obama and Hillary Clinton on TV in some of the opening atmospheric shots, that makes it after 2008. Then we see the Wolverines escaping an enemy ambush in a Detroit station wagon. I haven't seen a station wagon on the road for 15-20 years. Every drives SUV's now.
The cast all seemed too old to be in high school. In the original, everyone looked like real high schoolers, in the remake. everyone looked old enough to have graduated college.
Anyhow, Hollywood has lost it's touch. They can't even do a decent remake.
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
Would you buy a used jet fighter from this nation?
The Israelis are offering used, but refurbished, Kfir fighters. $20 million apiece. Mach 2+, Datalink compatible with NATO standards. Phased array radar, missiles. Guaranteed for 8000 more flying hours. Air to air refueling. " The Kfir was designed to be a tough fighter jet. well-built and 'young in spirit'. The Kfirs we are selecting for refurbishment logged only a few hundred flight hours , their structure is intact, without cracks or fatigue," says Yosef Melamed, general manager of Israeli Aircraft Industry's Lahav division. The aircraft were retired by the Israeli Air Force in the late 90's and stored in the Negev Desert, where it's dry and doesn't rain often. The Israelis claim the refurbished Kfirs are as good as any other 4th generation fighter.
Compared to used F16's at $51 million, or used Tornados for even more, the price is right.
Owned by a little old lady and driven only on Sundays.
Such a deal.
Compared to used F16's at $51 million, or used Tornados for even more, the price is right.
Owned by a little old lady and driven only on Sundays.
Such a deal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)