Guard Dog

If anyone is looking for a true story about a seriously interesting dude you should check this one out. I finished it in two days: http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/mercenary-david-gaughran/1119692086?ean=9781500620080

No. I've moved on from Ye Olde Political forum on the BIS boards. I wouldn't be surprised if Obsidian didn't want to go back to that again. Folks here are super nice compared to those days. Which is ironic since some of the same people are here now. Growing up is helluva drug. Yep. Ain't it a shame? I used to think who occupied political offices was one of the most important things in the world. It's not. Don't get me wrong, it is consequential, but it's not worth the passion it often engenders. .

No. I've moved on from Ye Olde Political forum on the BIS boards. I wouldn't be surprised if Obsidian didn't want to go back to that again. Folks here are super nice compared to those days. Which is ironic since some of the same people are here now.

Much like you Gromnir I started from small beginnings. My parents were lower middle class and were not in a position to help me with school. I was an unathletic C student in high school so scholarships and financial aid was not really an option. So I joined the military. In exchange for four years of service I got a career and a college education mostly paid for by Uncle Sam. There are numerous opportunities like that open to everyone and all that is required is to show up and do the work. Like you said no one is owed success. But everyone is owed an opportunity and for the largest part, has one. I really don't know how a failure of individuals to take what is offered CAN be fixed. There is an old story I love because it's so true. There was a man trapped on the roof of his house by rising flood waters. He was praying for God to save him. Another man came by in a boat and offered to take him. The man on the roof refused and said "God will save me". A short time later another boat happened by and the man on the roof answered the same. Finally a helicopter passed over and the man on the roof again refused to get up from his prayers saying again "God will same me". The waters rose and the man drowned. When he met God in heaven the man fell to his knees and said "God, why didn't you save me?" God replied "I sent you two boats and a helicopter. What more do you want"?

I really don't understand Barack Obama. The Chinese Navy commits an overt act of war, seizing an unmanned US vessel in international waters in full view of it's mother ship and not only refuses to return it but threatens military action against any attempt to retrieve it and the President is as meek as a kitten about it. The Russians might have hacked into the DNC and released some embarrassing information about things they actually WERE doing and he's moving troops to the Russian border. It makes no sense to me.

Thats a good question In the case of SA currently no they wouldn't be justified as the private sector is suppose to be separate .....but personally I would prefer SA would be more concerned with this type of cyber attack but we are still dealing with certain disruptive social, economic and political realities that are due to Apartheid and bad government decisions, so SA is probably a bad example The DNC is also a private enterprise and separate from the operation of the US Government. So maybe the President's actions here were inappropriate?

OK, let me ask you a question then. If Sasol was hacked by Russian hackers would the South African Government be justified in expelling Russian diplomatic staff from the county?

Wow, even PBS is spreading disinformation. The very first sentence: The Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee are joining with Democrats in calling for an examination of reports that Russia interfered in the presidential election. They DID NOT interfere with the election. They interfered with the DNC. I'm sure Lindsey Graham isn't happy about it. I'm not happy about it either. The takeaway is for the DNC to take batter care of it's business. Everyone seems to be missing that point. None of this would have happened without some bad acts and mistakes by the DNC. Bruce what do think the remedy for this is? We have all typed thousands of words of text complain or discussing it. What do you suggest should be DONE about it though? Should the bombers be manned and on-station? Should the keys be in the missile silos? Should the DNC sue the Russian Government? What do you suggest is the remedy?

Bruce, no one is arguing Russia is not a bad actor on the world stage. The thing about the DNC hack is it does not rise to level of State espionage that so many people, particularly on the left want to make it. Once again taking at face value that a hack is what it was and not an "inside job". And I hate to say this but the DNC brought this on themselves. Not only for poor server security but had their people conducted themselves with even a modicum of professionalism and the common e-mail etiquette that most corporations insist upon this would have been a non-story from the get go. Yes they were exposed for trying to "rig" their primary elections. Nothing illegal about that, it's their Primary. They don't even have to have one. If it offends voter's sense of fair play, well that was a thing to consider before the act. And the fact they were doing it was exposed. But it's not like it wasn't happening Hillary Clinton was cheating in the debates. It was exposed. Not like it wasn't happening. Their e-mail correspondence demonstrated they were... and I'll be kind... not very nice people. It was hardly headline news. But anyone who has spent 10 minutes in the 21st Century should know not to put anything in an e-mail that might embarrass you if someone else read it. Because once you hit "send" you have 0 control over it after. But all of this aside. The DNC, the RNC, the Clinton Campaign, the Trump Campaign, these are not the United States. If this had been a hack of the Department of Defense, Department of Treasury, the Secret Service, etc then we'll call it state espionage.

Te DNC has nothing what so ever to do with the conduct of the election. It has nothing to do with polling, vote tally, any of it. They are a private institution that coordinates fundraising and other campaign activities of democrat candidates. So no, the release of that info did not make the election less free or fair.

Happy Birthday KP. I hate to tell you this but starting right about 25 and getting worse as you grow older, hangovers go from being an inconvenience to a seriously debilitating condition that lays you up for 24 hours or more.

You are correct of course. Too many people lamenting the lack of opportunity all while ignoring the wealth of opportunities available. It's like a starving man refusing a free sandwich because he'd rather have lobster.

Bruce, assume for the moment the hacking of the DNC is what everyone takes at face value: a deliberate attack by the Russian government. Although it is certainly a criminal act, it is NOT an attack on the United States any more than if the target had been Bank of America, AT&T, Ford Motor, etc. The DNC is not a a part of the US Government in any way. It is a private institution responsible for it's own conduct and cyber security. The term "hacking the election" is being thrown around here in the US but that is not what happened. At worst a state actor perpetrated a criminal act against a private institution. The remedy is to buy better server security and engage in better business practices.

You know I really figured that the reverse would be true. The desire to better yourself is usually rooted in some dissatisfaction with where you are in life. The drive to increase your knowledge and skill levels (beyond doing that for it's own sake) usually leads to better jobs, higher pay and all that good stuff. You'd think someone of lower social class would be more motivated to make use of the educational opportunities the internet provides. The problem is that scraping together enough money to handle the necessities of basic survival is generally a full-time occupation for those of lower social class, leaving little time and energy for self-education. But that is the beauty of the internet. It's all right there at your fingertips and mostly free. It does not demand hours of time. It rewards any time spent. Even 20-30 minutes a day over months adds up. In the US 99% of the population has easy access to public libraries and high speed internet. Absolutely everything you need to learn nearly anything you want to learn is right there and asks for nothing but the desire to do it.

You know I really figured that the reverse would be true. The desire to better yourself is usually rooted in some dissatisfaction with where you are in life. The drive to increase your knowledge and skill levels (beyond doing that for it's own sake) usually leads to better jobs, higher pay and all that good stuff. You'd think someone of lower social class would be more motivated to make use of the educational opportunities the internet provides. You know your second point is spot on though. In my undergrad work I took two classes called Strength of Materials I & II. We have a project at work we are trying to get funded this year that I'm helping with. The project involves a new concrete construction in the discharge flow for the power plant at Sequoyah. Water re-condensed from steam has a higher volume of dissolved solids and is much more alkaline. Hard water over time weakens the molecular bonds of Tricalcium Silicate, a component of concrete. To compensate the forms used will need to be more than 17% tetracalcium alumino ferrite means higher cost per kilogram, etc. None of this was covered in any class I've ever taken. I learned quite a bit about it reading from two sources. One was a study published for Our World in Concrete and Structures by a team of engineers from JNT University in India in 2004. The second was a book I found on http://www.academia.edu . But those two classes I mentioned did cover the chemical composition of concrete in some detail. So while it was by no means an expert on concrete I did know enough about it to be able to learn more.

The only professional organization i've ever been active in is AT&T Labs. Which I'm still a member even though I'm no longer with the company. Of course I'm familiar with IEEE and they are a great source for continuing education. Nothing you cannot get by without but it's also a decent vehicle for networking with your peers. Community Colleges are a tremendous resource. I attended Miami Dade Community College for four years (part time at night) and completed half of my undergrad work there. At a fraction of the cost and hassle. The availability of night classes are essential for working professionals. It was a much harder road when I started at FAU with no night classes. I remember commenting about that to one of the academic advisors and he replied with a wave of his hand "college isn't for everybody". Of all human frailties I believe I hate condescending arrogance the most. It's sad to see but many community colleges are becoming real 4-year Universities. And losing the very things that made them so valuable. I suppose that was inevitable. I'm curious Hurlshot. Do you think there is value in the notion of a "well rounded education" that Universities insist on? Of the 128 credit hours I earned about 40 or so were things like humanities, psychology (I picked this one), American Literature, and endless array of history classes to choose from, etc. All of these were three credit hour classes that I had to pay for, buy books for, and spend the time working through. And off of which are required to graduate but are a distraction from my chosen field of study. It would have saved thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours of ultimately useless work if those forty or so credits could have been skipped. I think Universities should behave more like Trade Schools and focus the academic programs around particular fields of study and not require students to waste time and money on superfluous classes. That would be a step to reducing the costs of a degree. Learning about the Id, the Ego, and the Superego did not help me learn to design a wireless network.

I have a BS in Electronics Engineering. My current job is a cross between Civil Engineer, Environmentalist, and Biologist. Needless to say I had a lot of catching up to do to my peers. For close to two years now I've been diligently doing just that without setting foot on a campus. That has me wondering if perhaps the most indispensable part of professional advancement isn't so indispensable. But I am doing it backwards. I got the job first (somehow) and pursued the knowledge after. There are some fields of study you just can't learn on your own. Electronics Engineering is one of those I think. There are a lot of hands on labs that give students the opportunity to put theory into practice. I don't expect medical doctors, veterinarians, etc. to be "self educated" either. At least I wouldn't use their services. But in fields like this you can't just read a few books and open an office either. There are boards, license requirements, internships. However, I don't think a law degree is a requirement to be admitted to the state bar. Not sure about that. The driving factor here that would make self education (in lieu of college) attractive is cost. I'm curious. Does anyone have any ideas how the costs of higher education can be reduced?

Aha, found it. The New York Times ran a piece a few years ago on MOOC (Massive Open Online Courses). Basically free online higher education that you don't get credit (other than the knowledge gained). http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html Of course four years later this has not has the explosion in growth I thought i might.

Yeah Gromnir brought that point up too. I suspect anyone sharp enough to educate themselves would probably show very well in an interview. The trick is getting over the first hurdle: getting your resume past the HR director that does not see what they are looking for under you education qualifications. I still believe this idea has merit in the future because as Orogun pointed out the cost of a degree is only escalating. But that will not be fixed. Period. Like healthcare (as discussed in the politics thread) there is no interest in fixing the cost, only subsidizing the ability of students to pay. And that is a dead end street. Eventually you cannot keep up. In the parlance, eventually you run out of other people's money.

To quote Matt Damon from the movie Good Will Hunting "See, the sad thing about a guy like you is, in 50 years you're gonna start doin' some thinkin' on your own and you're going to come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life: one, don't do that, and two, you dropped 150 grand on a f----n' education you could have got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the public library!" What do Abraham Lincoln, James Watt, Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, Oliver Heaviside, and Steve Irwin (yes the Crocodile guy) all have in common? They never attended college. They were all self educated. Another self educated man you may not have heard of is James Marcus Bach. He wrote the code for the Apple II OS and was one of the designers of the Commodore 64. With the free proliferation of knowledge on the internet and the nearly unlimited access to books and libraries around the world, do we need a college or a University to provide us with an education anymore? Is the value of a college degree worth what it costs? Most of us on this board are college educated or are in the process of becoming so. Was the degree you obtained at great personal cost and sacrifice of time and money worth what you paid for it? I mentioned before I'm now in a career field that is very different from my education. Necessity has compelled me to "catch up" so to speak with the knowledge and skill needed to excel on my own time. I considered going back to school but in terms of time and money it's out of my reach for practical purposes. And I'm finding more and more I don't need to. Everything I wish to learn is available to me to learn with a minimal investment of time money and effort. The big advantage of a formal higher education is that you will get a more rounded education. That is why technical schools like DeVry and CIT are not granted accreditation. But that also means spending thousands of dollars and man hours studying subjects that will not advance your understanding of your chosen field of study. And is that "well rounded" experience really an advantage? Does it have value commensurate with the cost and effort? I used to think yes but beyond the satisfaction of knowing the answers while watching Jeopardy... now I'm not so sure. Self education is not for everyone I'll grant. It requires a real commitment and a disciplined mind. And employers may not be receptive to self educated job candidates. But perhaps that will and should change as the costs of a formal education climb higher out of reach. What do you all think? Hurlshot I'd be especially interested in your opinion as a professional educator.

I just rewatched 13 Days with Kevin Costner about the Cuban Missile Crisis. I'd forgotten how good it was. I wonder how our current President and President Elect would have handled that? On second thought... no I probably don't want to know.

Hmmm... did a green dragon just fly over?

It isn't meaningless though, is it? Otherwise we wouldn't have several degrees of murder and manslaughter that all have one thing in common: Someone ended up dead, but the punishment is based upon intention/motive and culpability. No, degrees of murder are not differentiated by motive but by aggravating factors and the details of the crime. My wife dies under suspicious circumstances. I collect a $1M insurance payout. That is a potential motive IF there is evidence I committed the crime. If I have an alibi and no evidence links me to the crime it is STILL a motive but it can't be used against me alone. If it's proven I hired a hitman to take her out that is 1st degree murder. Not because I had a motive but because i had malice aforethought and planed the crime in advance. Once it's established I DID do it the deed motive is irrelevant. It's still 1st deg murder. If I shoved her down the stairs at home that is second degree murder. I didn't plan it ahead of time (or at least it couldn't be proven). Again, if there is proof I did the deed, motive is irrelevant. If I shove her and she trips over the table and cracks her head on the floor then it's manslaughter. You can't prove intent if I had a reasonable expectation my action would not lead to her death (lack of intent). Now take any of those examples and remove conclusive proof I did the deed. There is circumstantial evidence or incomplete evidence NOW my motive fo committing a crime becomes an issue. If I had a reason to do it coupled with some evidence I might have done it then it meets the standard for a criminal charge.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The problem with hate crimes is it punishes motive over the deed. You cannot know what is in someone's head. Sometimes it's obvious like that little monster in South Carolina. But even then if he shot up a church full of innocent people it does not matter WHY he did it. You can only execute him once. These animals in Chicago kidnapped and tortured a guy. It does not matter why they did it. Motive is relevant in proving they did it or creating doubt that they didn't. It's meaningless when it comes to punishment. If I punch a guy in a bar it's assault and battery. Why it happened does not matter. The act is what it is.