Showing posts with label Boots. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Boots. Show all posts

Saturday, October 19, 2013

Has Big Tech got too big for its boots? | Dan Gillmor

Has Big Tech got too big for its boots? | Dan Gillmor
http://isbigbrotherwatchingyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/16dde__43352?ns=guardian&pageName=Article3Abig-tech-silicon-valley-hubris3A1983574&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Technology2CApple+28Technology292CFacebook2CSan+Francisco+28News292CCalifornia+28News292CTechnology+sector+28business+sector292CUS+news2CEquality+28Society292CSociety2CUS+economy+28Business292CWorld+news2CGoogle+28Technology29&c5=Society+Weekly2CUnclassified2CDigital+Media2CBusiness+Markets2CNot+commercially+useful2CTechnology+Gadgets2CCommunities+Society2CCorporate+IT2CUS+Economy&c6=Dan+Gillmor&c7=20132F102F19+023A00&c8=1983574&c9=Blog&c10=Comment&c13=Dan+Gillmor3A+On+digital+being&c19=GUK&c25=Comment+is+free&c47=UK&c64=US&c65=Has+Big+Tech+got+too+big+for+its+boots3F&c66=Comment+is+free&c67=nextgen-compatible&c72=&c73=&c74=&c75=&h2=GU2FComment+is+free2FComment+is+free2FApple


Silicon Valley is an economic powerhouse – we all benefit from its innovation. But its dark side is an ugly hubris it may regret


In the middle of the government shutdown crisis, Chamath Palihapitiya, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, dismissed the impact:


If the government shuts down, nothing happens and we all move on, because it just doesn’t matter.



The falsehood in that much-replayed podcast was obvious: all kinds of bad things – including what NPR called a “squeeze on science and health” – were happening. The economic toll of the 16-day shutdown was estimated at $ 24bn, meanwhile; and had Congress not lifted the debt ceiling, a genuine economic meltdown might well have occurred.


Palihapitiya’s silly assertion did have a useful impact. It confirmed to many outsiders a fundamental disconnect the technology industry has with the rest of the world. Silicon Valley, enjoying its latest boom, is beset with hubris. And that is leading to public disdain, which won’t be as easy to solve as putting more transistors in a microprocessor or finding clever new ways to share photos.


I’m a huge fan of what Silicon Valley does right. The qualities that have made it so vital and prosperous include a risk-taking culture overloaded with capital and smart, single-minded people, where so many try that even the relatively rare successes have outsized impact, creating outsized wealth and growth. I admire what they do in so many ways, and their innovation has created enormous value – not just financial – for our world.


But the the darker side to those qualities is more real than they like to admit. And it’s clearest in a visible disrespect, from some of the tech people, for those who aren’t part of the scene – and what looks like indifference to others’ lives from the majority.


Never have the wealth and income gaps been greater, but never have the problems of the people at the bottom been less visible in my two decades here. This is partly due to the shriveling of the local media organizations that once might have put the problems more loudly on the public agenda. Whatever the cause, the gaps are growing and the tech industry, for one, hasn’t demonstrated much concern.


The Bay Area’s latest economic boom is amazing to see. It’s especially notable in San Francisco, where many companies are locating or establishing major beachheads. Fleets of sleek private buses roam the streets to pick up workers whose jobs are still down the peninsula in the “old” Silicon Valley, and the city’s soaring rent prices are causing all kinds of problems for longtime residents, many of whom are leaving.


This is unsustainable, just as the 1990s boom was bound to bust. We’re hearing the standard refrain of “this time it’s different” from folks who either ignore the lessons of history or never studied it in the first place. But that’s a longstanding characteristic of a place that lives in a perpetual boom-bust cycle.


Some of the worst elements of tech hubris have emerged in the attitudes of the industry powerhouses. Companies like Google and Facebook have built giant businesses based on the concept that users of the products are, in fact, the products. What users do on their services, and all the data they generate, much of it highly personal, is owned by the companies and will be put up for rent or sale to others.


Facebook, never content to push the boundaries, just gave teenagers a way to post publicly, not just within constrained groups of their choosing. The company’s public justification: teens deserve public platforms, too. Yeah, right. The move had nothing to do with Facebook’s overriding motives these days: to get its users to create more data, then to monetize all that information.


Collecting all that information – much of which, we have to acknowledge, we give them willingly – has made the tech powers, at best, cooperators in the most invasive surveillance system ever devised as they hand over our data to government snoops. Some, like Microsoft, seem to be active collaborators. And the telecom companies – increasingly, core players in the tech-communications sphere – are outright partners with governmental abusers of our privacy and security.


Dave Eggers’ new novel, The Circle, is getting a lot of attention in this context, because he’s describing a dystopian world where the companies (and governments) take increasing control over the lives of their workers and society as a whole. I don’t share his ultimate worry, because I believe the public is waking up to what corporations and governments are taking away from us. But he’s onto something important, and the tech crowd’s tone-deafness to its own hubris fuels ever more skepticism and outright rebuke.


Hubris takes many forms, including physical. Apple just won permission from the city of Cupertino, California, to build its massive new corporate headquarters – a structure that some have likened to a giant spaceship but which bears a startling resemblance to the UK’s electronic surveillance mother ship, the GCHQ. Cupertino’s assent to the mega-project was a foregone conclusion, despite the serious local disruption the project is likely to cause.


More than most places, Silicon Valley subscribes to Henry Ford’s famous belief that “history is more or less bunk”. Nevertheless, here’s some recent history. In the 1990s, several prominent tech companies built palatial new headquarters. That was, it turned out, the high point of their corporate lives, and they’ve pretty much disappeared.


The self-satisfied tech industry – like so many high-flying industries of the past – is practically begging for a comeuppance these days. Markets, fueled in part by public attitudes, do tend to solve the hubris problem. It’s too bad that self-reflection isn’t more prominent in the industry’s ethos.





theguardian.com © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds









Comment is free | theguardian.com


Read more about Has Big Tech got too big for its boots? | Dan Gillmor and other interesting subjects concerning Internet Spying and Secrecy at TheDailyNewsReport.com

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

"Special Report" Panel: Boots On The Ground Instead Of Drone Strikes?


“Special Report” Panel: Boots On The Ground Instead Of Drone Strikes?





The “Special Report” panel discusses the two recent military raids in Somalia and Libya.




RealClearPolitics Video Log



"Special Report" Panel: Boots On The Ground Instead Of Drone Strikes?

Friday, September 6, 2013

McCain: "There Would Be An Impeachment" If Obama Put Boots On Ground


“The fact is [Syrian President] Bashar Assad has massacred 100,000 people. The conflict is spreading … The Russians are all in, the Iranians are all in, and it’s an unfair fight,” McCain told KFYI-AM’s Mike Broomhead. “And no one wants American boots on the ground. Nor will there be American boots on the ground because there would be an impeachment of the president if they did that.”




RealClearPolitics Video Log



McCain: "There Would Be An Impeachment" If Obama Put Boots On Ground

Tuesday, September 3, 2013

Obama’s Syria Attack Resolution Authorizes Boots on the Ground


Plan for military intervention greases skids for war throughout the region, says Harvard professor


Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
September 3, 2013


The Obama administration’s draft resolution for military intervention which Congress is set to vote on next week is so broad that it would authorize boots on the ground as well as regime change and open ended war throughout the entire region, according to Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith.


Obamas Syria Attack Resolution Authorizes Boots on the Ground 030913boots

Image: Wikimedia Commons



Goldsmith served as Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel from 2003–2004, and Special Counsel to the Department of Defense from 2002–2003.


In an article for the Lawfare Blog, Goldsmith reveals how the White House’s proposed Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) would give Obama the power to deploy ground troops in Syria, despite the administration’s claims that it is only seeking to carry out “limited” strikes that have no connection to regime change.


“The phrase “The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate” would include authorization for ground troops, should the President decide they were “necessary and appropriate,” writes Goldsmith.


Goldsmith points out that although the resolution authorizes the President to use the US military to “protect the United States and its allies and partners against the threat posed by (chemical weapons),” it does not limit the countries or groups against which this mandate applies.


“The proposed AUMF focuses on Syrian WMD but is otherwise very broad. It authorizes the President to use any element of the U.S. Armed Forces and any method of force. It does not contain specific limits on targets – either in terms of the identity of the targets (e.g. the Syrian government, Syrian rebels, Hezbollah, Iran) or the geography of the targets,” writes Goldsmith, emphasizing that the language does not limit military force to the territory of Syria, merely that it must be connected to WMD use in the Syrian conflict.


The AUMF also contains no time limit for when this mandate expires without further congressional approval, meaning it creates the pretext for an open ended war that would “permit the President to use military force against any target anywhere in the world (including Iran or Lebanon) as long as the President, in his discretion, determines that the the target has a connection to WMD in the Syrian civil war.”


In response to complaints that the authorization is far too broad and would possibly be rejected by Congress on this basis, the Washington Post reports the the administration may be preparing to, “rewrite the proposed resolution to clarify that any operation would be limited in scope and duration and would not include the use of ground troops.”


Former vice chief of staff of the US Army General Jack Keane told BBC Radio 4 today that Obama’s claim that the planned missile strike on Syria will merely be an act of punishment for the use of chemical weapons and not intended to sway the course of the conflict or damage Assad’s military capacity is not the case.


“What he has told the two senators is that he also intends to assist the opposition forces, so he is going to degrade Assad’s military capacity and he is going to assist and upgrade the opposition forces with training assistance,” said Keane, adding that the attack plan has “much more substance than we were led to believe”.


Secretary of State John Kerry and another unnamed senior State Department official have both made it clear that the Obama administration will proceed with an attack on Syria whether Congress gives the green light or not.


Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet


*********************


Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.


This article was posted: Tuesday, September 3, 2013 at 6:00 am









Prison Planet.com



Obama’s Syria Attack Resolution Authorizes Boots on the Ground

Monday, April 29, 2013

Polishing Your Military Boots Properly

The typical individual is totally unaware of the most effective way to polish military boots. On the other hand, people who are already serving in the armed forces have learned to shine their boots perfectly. Polishing military boots is not only about cleaning them up, but additionally making them shine. With a lot of civilians using these kinds of boots for outdoor and various other activities, it makes a lot of sense to be familiar with the right way to take care of them.


Before you go about shining your military boots, it is essential that the boot is properly cleaned of all dust and grime. A big stiff brush will definitely be handy for this process. After the dirt is cleared, this same stiff brush may be used to apply some black polish over your boots. This polish has to be used liberally and it needs to cover up all areas of your boots.


When the basic polishing is finished, a softer brush may be employed to add soft touches to the boot. Your brush motions should be gentle and soft; there\’s no need to be rough. The lid of your polish container will need to be filled up with water. An old cloth, perhaps an old t-shirt that has not been used often, can be employed for this process. A smaller part of it should be dipped into the polish and then the water. The dipped portion of the cloth must be rubbed on the boot with a circular motion. The circular movements need to be small and they will need to begin with the toe. The movements should not be haphazard and will need to concentrate on one particular area of the boot at a time.


The cloth will need to be dipped once more into the polish and then the procedure must be repeated one more time. You will see that after repeated applications the boot will get more shiny. The process should be completed only once all parts of your boot are double-coated.


After the polishing is completed, a cleaner portion of the t-shirt will need to be pulled across the toe to get a buffed look. The fabric needs to be pulled with both hands taking hold of both sides of the fabric. Your fingers or hands must not come in contact with the boot at this time. The shine of the boot is directly correlated with the buffing process. This means that with each buff, the boot is going to become more shiny. The buffing process is not only for the toe of your boot; it could in addition be carried out for the heel and also other parts which will need that additional shine.


Precisely the same technique must be repeated for the other boot. This process may take some time and can additionally take a lot of elbow grease; nonetheless, the persistence and effort spent is going to assure boots which are polished to a beautiful shine.


Are you looking for army boots at the best prices? Be sure to visit Military Boots Direct for a complete selection of Belleville boots!



Polishing Your Military Boots Properly