« November 2005 | Main | January 2006 »
"The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged..." [via; see also]
"...As part of the program approved by President Bush for domestic surveillance without warrants, the N.S.A. has gained the cooperation of American telecommunications companies to obtain backdoor access to streams of domestic and international communications, the officials said. The government's collection and analysis of phone and Internet traffic have raised questions among some law enforcement and judicial officials familiar with the program. One issue of concern to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has reviewed some separate warrant applications growing out of the N.S.A.'s surveillance program, is whether the court has legal authority over calls outside the United States that happen to pass through American-based telephonic "switches," according to officials familiar with the matter..."
Why won't the Bush administration obey the law?
"...Does the Bush administration refuse to honor its legislative and constitutional bargains with Congress, the courts, and the American people because it believes we are all just getting in its way? Or does it sidestep us because it believes that all these trappings of a democracy—the courts and the laws and public accountability are broken and unfixable? The first possibility is grandiose and depressing. The latter is absolutely breathtaking."
"...The result is that the president's wartime powers, with its armies, battles, victories, and congressional declarations, now extend to the rhetorical 'War on Terror': a war with no fronts, no boundaries, no opposing army, and -- most ominously -- no knowable 'victory.' Investigations, arrests and trials are not tools of war. But according to the Yoo memo, the president can define war however he chooses, and remain 'at war' for as long as he chooses. This is indefinite dictatorial power. And I don't use that term lightly; the very definition of a dictatorship is a system that puts a ruler above the law. In the weeks after 9/11, while America and the world were grieving, Bush built a legal rationale for a dictatorship. Then he immediately started using it to avoid the law..." (emphasis mine)
"In his 139-page ruling on the Dover, Pa., 'intelligent design' case, federal district Judge John E. Jones sets out to kill ID's scientific pretensions once and for all. 'After a six-week trial that spanned twenty-one days and included countless hours of detailed expert witness presentations, the Court is confident that no other tribunal in the United States is in a better position than are we to traipse into this controversial area,' he writes. Jones proceeds to tear ID limb from limb 'in the hope that it may prevent the obvious waste of judicial and other resources which would be occasioned by a subsequent trial' on the same question. Scientifically, Jones settles the issue. Culturally, he fails. And until we learn the difference, the fight over creationism in schools and courts will go on..."
All I have to say about this is: HELL YES! [via]
"...Their biggest obstacle was being taken seriously, Groening says. 'We had this show that looked goofy, with robots and aliens, but was actually very sophisticated. Having people overcome the hurdle of taking us seriously was something we didn't anticipate. Interestingly, it was my original worry on The Simpsons, where I felt for sure kids would watch, but I didn't know if adults would give it a chance. What I love about the reaction to Futurama these days is that people who did give it a chance and fell in love with it are still ardent fans.'"
Kids aren't escapists, they're little scientists.
"...The link between the scientific and the fantastic also explains why children's fantasy demands the strictest logic, consistency, and attention to detail. A fantasy without that logic is just a mess. The effectiveness of the great children's books comes from the combination of wildly imaginative premises and strictly consistent and logical conclusions from those premises. It is no wonder that the greatest children's fantasists—Carroll, Lewis, Tolkien—had day jobs in the driest reaches of logic and philology..."
Why People Who Live Close to Restaurants Are More Likely To Have an Accident and Pay More for Auto Insurance [via]
"If you live within a mile of a church, you’re far less likely to have a car accident than drivers who live more than a mile from a church. But if you live within one mile of a restaurant, you face a significantly greater risk of an accident than most other drivers. Those are among the key findings of a study released today by a leading predictive analytics company—Quality Planning Corporation—a firm that helps insurance companies price insurance more accurately and fairly. Quality Planning Corporation (QPC) examined the relationship between where a vehicle owner lives and the likelihood that he will be involved in an auto accident, and concluded that the riskiest place to live is within one mile of a restaurant. In fact, if the owner of an automobile lives with one mile of an eating establishment, he is 30 percent more likely to crash his car than if he lived more than one mile from the restaurant..."
"Was the program legal? Was it constitutional? Did it violate federal statutory law? It turns out these are hard questions..." [see also]
"..but I wanted to try my best to answer them. My answer is pretty tentative, but here it goes: Although it hinges somewhat on technical details we don't know, it seems that the program was probably constitutional but probably violated the federal law known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. My answer is extra-cautious for two reasons. First, there is some wiggle room in FISA, depending on technical details we don't know of how the surveillance was done. Second, there is at least a colorable argument — if, I think in the end, an unpersuasive one — that the surveillance was authorized by the Authorization to Use Miltary Force as construed in the Hamdi opinion. This is a really long post, so let me tell you where I'm going. I'm going to start with the Fourth Amendment; then turn to FISA; next look to the Authorization to Use Military Force; and conclude by looking at claim that the surveillance was justified by the inherent authority of Article II. And before I start, let me be clear that nothing in this post is intended to express or reflect a normative take of whether the surveillance program is a good idea or a bad idea. In other words, I'm just trying to answer what the law is, not say what the law should be. If you think my analysis is wrong, please let me know in the comment section; I'd be delighted to post a correction..."
When will we be secure? Nobody knows for sure (pdf) [via]
"...but it cannot happen before commercial security products and services possess not only enough functionality to satisfy customers’ stated needs, but also sufficient assurance of quality, reliability, safety, and appropriateness for use. Such assurances are lacking in most of today’s commercial security products and services. I discuss paths to better assurance in Operating Systems, Applications, and Hardware through better development environments, requirements definition, systems engineering, quality certification, and legal/regulatory constraints."
"Vivendi Universal Games...granted a fan license to Phoenix Online Studios to continue work on the KQIX project...As a result, 'King's Quest IX: Every Cloak Has A Silver Lining' will now adopt a new name: 'The Silver Lining'. We chose such a name because in many ways it represents the spirit that has always represented our project." [via]
Or, how spooks are like (and unlike) reporters.
"...For instance, had President George W. Bush read the Knight Ridder Washington bureau's reporting on Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction rather than listened to Director of Central Intelligence George 'Slam Dunk' Tenet's briefings on the subject, the United States might have been spared a war. To be sure, Knight Ridder relied extensively on confidential sources with access to classified information. But as the New York Review of Books' Michael Massing writes, the KR guys were able to piece together a more accurate picture of Iraq's capabilities based on public information and interviews with midlevel and career sources than all the president's men, who drew on testimonials from administration stars, political appointees, and the intelligence establishment."
Ready to have a baby? You'll earn 10 percent more if you wait a year.
"...So, if you have your first child at 24 instead of 25, you're giving up 10 percent of your lifetime earnings. The wage hit comes in two pieces. There's an immediate drop, followed by a slower rate of growth—right up to the day you retire. So, a 34-year-old woman with a 10-year-old child will (again on average) get smaller percentage raises on a smaller base salary than an otherwise identical woman with a 9-year-old."
Editor wants Salon to be "a mass-reader site, not a cult" [via]
"I'm not sure the world needs another Nation," says Salon editor-in-chief Joan Walsh. "I'm not going to hire Bill Kristol -- but we will write about a much broader range of topics than were looking at during the end of the Kerry-Bush race."
In his video-taped Nobel acceptance speech, Harold Pinter excoriated a 'brutal, scornful and ruthless' United States. This is the full text of his address [via]
"...It never happened. Nothing ever happened. Even while it was happening it wasn't happening. It didn't matter. It was of no interest. The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis."
"STEWART: You shorten it to 'Happy Holidays.' [laughter] Not everybody who says that is anti-Christian, but for those of you who don't feel like you want to be idiots walking around starting on November 27 saying 'Merry Christmas' to people, knock yourself out. You know what, it's OK. If Bill O'Reilly needs to have an enemy, needs to feel persecuted, you know what? Here's my Kwanzaa gift to him. Are you ready? All right. I'm your enemy. Make me your enemy. I, Jon Stewart, hate Christmas, Christians, Jews, morality, and I will not rest until every year families gather to spend December 25th together at Osama's homo-abortion-pot-and-commie-jizzporium."
A Cockney gangster film becomes a DVD phenomenon.
"But no recent film has so outperformed its theatrical box office as Layer Cake. No other film has even come close. The $20 million in American DVD rentals that the film earned is about nine times its theatrical box office in this country. What happened?"
"I tell them 'If you learn one thing in this class, learn that zero pollution is not an option.'"
"...And finally, here's an answer that received full credit: 'From an economic persepctive the socially optimal level of pollution occurs when the marginal benefit of the last unit of pollution exactly equals the marginal cost of pollution. At this level the net benefits to society are maximized. If all of the externalities of pollution are accounted for, the resulting level of pollution will be optimal.'"
The propaganda presidency of George W. Bush.
"...George W. Bush arrived in Washington [and] promised he would never parse, shade, or play nice with the truth the way that Clinton had. But if Bush has shunned spinning, it has been in favor of something far more insidious. If the Clintonites were inveterate spinners, the Bushies have proved themselves to be thoroughgoing propagandists."
Read the report (PDF): Prevalence of False Contact Information for Registered Domain Names [via]
Remembering Bush's worst public moment.
"...Here is what Carlson wrote (as quoted in National Review, another source hardly known to be hostile toward Republicans): In the week before [Karla Faye Tucker's] execution, Bush says, Bianca Jagger and a number of other protesters came to Austin to demand clemency for Tucker. 'Did you meet with any of them?' I ask. Bush whips around and stares at me. 'No, I didn't meet with any of them,' he snaps, as though I've just asked the dumbest, most offensive question ever posed. 'I didn't meet with Larry King either when he came down for it. I watched his interview with [Tucker], though. He asked her real difficult questions, like 'What would you say to Governor Bush?'' 'What was her answer?' I wonder. 'Please,' Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, 'don't kill me.'"
How my shoulder sent me to China.
"...Last year, the medical-tourism business grossed around $40 billion, and the numbers are getting bigger every day. A recent McKinsey study predicts that medical tourism in India, worth $333 million last year, will bring in $2.3 billion by 2012. Compare price tags and you'll understand why. A bone-marrow transplant costs $2.5 million in the United States. Doctors in India can do it for $26,000."
"...intelligent design as a field of inquiry is failing to gain the traction its supporters had hoped for." [via]
"...On college campuses, the movement's theorists are academic pariahs, publicly denounced by their own colleagues. Design proponents have published few papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals. The Templeton Foundation, a major supporter of projects seeking to reconcile science and religion, says that after providing a few grants for conferences and courses to debate intelligent design, they asked proponents to submit proposals for actual research. 'They never came in,' said Charles L. Harper Jr., senior vice president at the Templeton Foundation, who said that while he was skeptical from the beginning, other foundation officials were initially intrigued and later grew disillusioned. 'From the point of view of rigor and intellectual seriousness, the intelligent design people don't come out very well in our world of scientific review,' he said."
VirtualWiFi, Treemapper, paper on document similarity, and Outlook Mobile Manager.
"...The program has been a complete failure, resulting in exactly zero terrorists caught. And even worse, thousands (or more) have been denied the ability to fly, even though they've done nothing wrong." [via; see also]
"...I know quite a lot about this. I was a member of the government's Secure Flight Working Group on Privacy and Security. We looked at the TSA's program for matching airplane passengers with the terrorist watch list, and found a complete mess: poorly defined goals, incoherent design criteria, no clear system architecture, inadequate testing. (Our report was on the TSA website, but has recently been removed -- "refreshed" is the word the organization used -- and replaced with an "executive summary" (.doc) that contains none of the report's findings. The TSA did retain two (.doc) rebuttals (.doc), which read like products of the same outline and dismiss our findings by saying that we didn't have access to the requisite information.) Our conclusions match those in two (.pdf) reports (.pdf) by the Government Accountability Office and one (.pdf) by the DHS inspector general."
As oil prices have fallen is the 'Oil Drum' really less interesting than it used to be? The market seems to be saying 'yes'.