Thursday, April 28, 2005

Time to Level Playing Field for Gun Makers



Excel web sharing - spreadsheet collaboration over the Internet made easy with BadBlueThis is another classic, beautifully written article from John Lott:

Every product has illegitimate uses and undesirable consequences, but even lawsuits have had their limits. In 2002 in the U.S., car accidents killed 45,380 people and injured another 3 million, 838 children under the age of 15 drowned, 474 children died from residential fires, and 130 children died in bicycle accidents.

Fortunately, local governments haven’t started recouping medical costs or police salaries by suing auto or bicycle companies, pool builders or makers of home heaters.

All sorts of products, including cars and computers, are also used in the commission of crimes. But again, no one yet seriously proposes that these companies be sued for the losses from these crimes...

...Yet suing manufacturers for costs cities incur from gun injuries and deaths is exactly the theory behind government lawsuits by cities against gun makers. George Soros, via the Brady Campaign, has funded most of these suits...


John Lott: Time to Level Playing Field for Gun Makers
 

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Crazy Al is Slashing Metaphors!



Click here for AmazonInternet inventor Al Gore launched another entertaining diatribe yesterday. His missives were, of course, directed towards the Republican effort to get simple up-or-down votes on President Bush's judicial nominees. You know, the way the Congress has been operating for only, oh, the last couple of centuries.

Well, Mr. Gore says that the GOP has a "lust for one-party domination.' Dammit, someone revealed the secret! Who let it out that Rove and company have a lasvicious, carnal desire to crush the Democrats beneath a spiked boot heel? Isn't the point of elections to... win?

He also noted, in what was likely a nasally and monotonal whine, the GOP's "willingness to do serious damage to our American democracy." Yes, that's exactly what I'd call trying to get the Senate to... vote. After all, voting is tantamount to... yes... crushing... democracy... beneath a spiked boot heel!

Another Gore-gasm: "This family of 7 judicial fanatics is now being stopped at democracy's gates by 44 Democratic Senators." Yes, they're being stopped at democracy's gate... by a refusal to vote! Yes, dammit, I know it makes no sense, but this is Al Gore we're talking about!

"They seek nothing less than absolute power." Alright, someone really let the cat out of the bag! How in the heck can the Republicans expect to get away with this dastardly, insidious plot to get seven whole judges a vote? After all, these seven judges represent absolute power! What could the GOP be thinking? It's ridiculous! Outrageous! Preposterous! Thanks goodness the Inventor of the Internet has rescued our Democracy!

* * *

If given a choice between trusting my children with Al Gore or trusting my children with Dennis Rodman, I'm thinking I go with Rodman.

Guardian: Gore Blasts GOP
 

Was Integrating IE and Windows Explorer a Good Idea?



Excel-web sharing of spreadsheetsInteresting side-thread -- from, yes, the JOS forum -- related to security.

(Picture credit BC Designs)

Out of curiosity, is there anyone who still thinks integrating IE and Windows Explorer was a good idea?
      comp.lang.c refugee
      Tuesday, April 26, 2005

If mean integrating a HTML rendering library into the OS I'd most definately say yes. Wether that redering library had to share code with that of a full blown state-of-the-art Internet browser , or could be restricted to a simpeler subset, remains open for discussion.
      Just me (Sir to you)
      Wednesday, April 27, 2005

I'll have to respectfully disagree with Just Me.

The concept of embedding and intertwining all sorts of interesting technologies may have helped certain (ahem) business development practices at MSFT. But it had the unfortunate side-effect of making a fundamentally sound architecture -- from Office apps to Outlook to the browser -- almost impossible.

Clean layering would have allowed MSFT's architects and engineers to build these systems upon rock-solid foundations. Instead, security is a nightmare as is troubleshooting embedded objects gone wild... or diagnosing DLL hell... or any one of hundreds of other idiosyncratic Windows issues.

IMO, the tactical zeal to aggressively pursue markets like the browser hampered the strategic vision of delivering rock-solid solutions.

But that's just me. I'm old-fashioned like that.
      directorblue Send private email
      Wednesday, April 27, 2005


JOS Forum: Win2K Security Threat
 

How eBay Fraudsters Operate



Excel-web sharing of spreadsheetsDuff on the JOS forums had an interesting description of how eBay fraudsters operate. I can't vouch for its accuracy, but it certainly sounds plausible.
(Picture credit Filtered Life)

You're wasting your time. A buddy of mine was ripped off by a laptop scam, and a few of us started looking at the rampant fraud on eBay... we managed to identify about 60 accounts that were being setup to scam people and confirmed 7 of them via auction feedback.

Response from ebay? Nothing.

The scam works like this:

- Create several accounts, buy & sell information and low value crap like recipies, ebooks, etc between these accounts.

- Leave phoney feedback for your phony auctions. (A++ Super seller! Great Laptop! A++++)

- Build up a feedback rating of 20 or so.

- Wait 60-90 days for your bogus auctions to be unviewable by other users

- Start selling laptops that don't exist.

- Disappear.

Does ebay do anything about this?

Nyet.


Has eBay been successful catching phishers?
 

Life without the Associated Press



Click here for AmazonReading the paper this morning, I was struck with an unusual thought. What would we do without the Associated Press? Well, we'd have to go without gems like this from Hope Yen on a Supreme Court ruling:

...The ruling, divided mostly along ideological lines, created a bit of an anomalous result for the conservatives Scalia and Thomas... In their opinion, Scalia and Thomas stuck to their conservative philosophy of interpreting statutes according to their strict, dictionary meaning, rather than delving into a presumed intent of Congress...


Of course, no mention of liberal Justices and their habit of using subjective, relaxed, interpretative meanings based upon extra-sensory perception or other means of divining what they thought Congress had intended.

Just conservative Judges who use a cold, strict, dictionary meaning.

Going without an AP would also mean we'd miss stool samples such as this from Noor Khan:

Afghan farmers have begun harvesting this year's opium crop, exposing the limits of a U.S.-sponsored crackdown on the world's largest narcotics industry despite claims Tuesday by President Hamid Karzai that drug cultivation was down sharply...


Of course, recall the fact that Bashir Noorzai -- the Tony Montana of Afghan Opium production -- was arrested just a couple of days ago in New York. Wouldn't it make sense to report upon the impact that his arrest might make on funding the nascent, Afghan insurgency? How it might damage the distribution channels? Or how it might hamper a reconstituted Taliban? Nope. Not if you're the AP.

The AP has had enough arrows fired at them over the past year or so -- and deservedly so. You'd think they'd have gotten the picture by now... and at least have made a cursory effort to curtail their biased tripe. But they can't seem to help themselves.

You know, a more liberal reading of the pooper-scooper laws would keep droppings like these out of the newspaper.
 

Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Fisking Security Roulette



Click here for AmazonFor security executives, CSO Online offers articles and opinions on all things security. If a topic relates to physical security, privacy, or information security, CSO Online will probably cover it.

The April 1, 2005 publication offered an anonymous column by a "real CSO". In short, the author questions the Government's current approach to national security. Ostensibly apolitical, it provides subtle jibes at the administration's spending priorities.

After reading it, digesting it, and allowing it to percolate, I started having some doubts regarding the author's assertions. Let's fisk it, shall we?

On any given day, we CSOs come to work facing a multitude of security risks... To guard against these risks, we have a finite budget of resources in the way of time, personnel, money and equipment—poker chips, if you will.

If we're good gamblers, we put those chips where there is the highest probability of winning a high payout. In other words, we guard against risks that are most likely to occur and that, if they do occur, will cost the company the most money... So lately I've been wondering—as I watch spending on national security continue to skyrocket, with diminishing marginal returns—why we as a nation can't apply this same logic to national security spending. If we did this, the war on terrorism would look a lot different. In fact, it might even be over.


Diminishing marginal returns? How so? The country's borders are porous and a serious problem, I think most would agree. A nuclear device detonated in New York City would literally pulverize the economy and risk a global thermonuclear exchange. And a single EMP weapon detonated at altitude could literally turn the country's economy off, sending the US back into the nineteenth century.

So, I suppose we need to understand what "diminishing marginal returns" mean, when stopping a single device from entering the country could literally be the difference between, oh I don't know, the United States and, say, Haiti.

Let's assume, first of all, that the ultimate goal of security is to prevent the loss of lives. In this risk management approach, then, the first thing to look at is the leading causes of death in the United States. The total number of deaths from all attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, was approximately 2,988, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. The top 10 causes of other deaths in the United States in 2001 were the following.

1. Heart disease: 700,142
2. Cancer: 553,768
3. Stroke: 163,538
4. Chronic lower respiratory disease: 123,013
5. Accidents: 101,537
6. Diabetes: 71,372
7. Pneumonia/flu: 62,034
8. Alzheimer's disease: 53,852
9. Kidney disease: 39,480
10. Suicide: 30,622

The 9/11 deaths were classified within a category called assaults/homicides, which was the 13th leading cause of death at 20,308.


I'm guessing that you picked a convenient criterion out of your... err... hat... but it's the wrong one. The 9/11 attacks were not a major contributor to deaths in the U.S. in 2001. But the attacks were absolutely devastating to the national economy and, indirectly, to the entire global economy.

$16.9 billion in total lost output for the New York City economy alone. $83 billion in direct and indirect costs, according to the GAO.

This translates to a serious impact on the livelihoods of tens or hundreds of millions of people... all caused by an attack that killed several thousands of people, but was small potatos compared to the worst-case scenarios.

Thus, there's little question that the wrong criterion was used.

The next thing to look at is spending. As I write this article, the president has just released his proposed federal budget for fiscal year 2006. The projected budget for the Department of Defense is $419.3 billion, and the projected budget for the Department of Homeland Security is $34.2 billion. Since 2001, defense spending has risen by more than 40 percent, and the Department of Homeland Security budget has roughly tripled... CSOs know how to best allocate available resources to guard against the most likely threats. We should be vocal about the need to apply that same logic to our nation's security.


And if you had access to all of the actionable intelligence, much of which I am sure is classified, perhaps you could evaluate that logic. But I'm betting you don't have such access... and therefore you are flying blind. And that's no way to run a security operation.

...For example, eight of the top 10 causes of death are health-related. If one classifies suicide as a mental health problem, then nine of the top 10 causes of death are health-related. Could those billions of dollars have saved more lives if they had been spent on health research or on making health care available to a larger percentage of the population?


Wrong criterion. Wrong... wrong... and wrong.

Probably. But, you might ask, what about the costs of another successful terrorist attack? Another terrorist attack using say, a nuclear device, could result in hundreds of thousands or maybe even millions of deaths—not to mention having a catastrophic effect on the nation's economy and environment. That's true. But ask yourself this question: Have the billions of dollars spent on additional security since 9/11 made this kind of attack impossible?


Impossible? Since when does any defensive course of action render something impossible? Never. Nothing is impenetrable. But when the very existence of the United States is at risk, every possible and reasonable avenue must be explored.

We inspect less than 3 percent of the cargo containers coming into this country. It would be catastrophic if just one of the 97 percent that aren't checked made it through with a nuclear device. Or what about the possibility of a terrorist sailing a vessel with a nuclear device on board into the harbor of New York City, San Francisco or New Orleans, or any other port city? All the money in the U.S. Treasury might not be enough to prevent that from happening.


And yet, a modest amount of R&D funding might create a sophisticated scanning technology that would make protecting ports feasible. Again, without an understanding of the actionable intelligence and all ongoing programs/countermeasures, you are simply flying blind. And your statements are therefore little more than conjecture.

In economics, there is something called the law of diminishing marginal returns, which dictates that, at some point, spending additional dollars no longer gains you as much improvement. As a nation, we have certainly reached that point with spending on security.


And you've reached that conclusion... how? Not a shred of evidence has been presented to make that case.

...If you don't want to spend money on those problems, fine. Save it instead. The U.S. Federal budget deficit is at a historic high... The money we spend fighting terrorism could be used to reduce the budget deficit and prevent future economic problems instead...

...Former Vermont Sen. George Aiken reportedly gave some now-famous advise to Lyndon Johnson during the Vietnam War. He told him, "Just declare victory and go home." It's time we did the same on terrorism. The sooner we stop spending more and more on security and start applying to other, more serious threats, the better off this country will be.


Are the government's decisions perfect? Of course not. Are you -- a person almost certainly unfamiliar with the relevant, actionable intelligence -- capable of adjudicating the government's performance? Likewise: no. Not even close.

The byline shouldn't have read "anonymous". It should have read, "Naive, anonymous, and probably partisan to boot.".

CSO Online: Security Roulette
 

Kerry vs. Hillary, part 75



Click here for AmazonLet's get it on! The accompanying picture reminds me of the old saying, "Keep your friends close... and your enemies closer."

A fuming John Kerry had "daggers in his eyes" after a fellow Democrat promoted Hillary Rodham Clinton for president — suggesting the 2004 loser is green with envy at a potential rival.

The flap was touched off two weeks ago when Clinton spoke at a Minneapolis Democratic dinner and Sen. Mark Dayton (D-Minn.) told the cheering crowd that he was introducing "the next great president of the United States."

Two days later, Kerry came over to Dayton on the Senate floor "with daggers in his eyes and said, 'What are you doing endorsing my 2008 presidential opponent?' . . . He was very serious," Dayton told the Minneapolis Star Tribune...


NY Post: JEALOUS KERRY FUMES AS DEM BOOSTS HILL
 

Al Qaqaa: Proof of MSM/DNC Bias



Click here for AmazonI've been saving this story for a while, because it's so delicious. In March, Jonah Goldberg expertly recalled the shrill rantings of the MSM/DNC (a singular noun) regarding al Qaqaa. You'll recall that al Qaqaa was, for a week prior to the presidential election, the most important story on Earth .

Al Qaqaa was the monstrous weapons cache that wasn't properly secured after Saddam fell. Or so the stories went. And it was due, one would surmise from these stories, to the ineptitude of (a) President Bush; (b) Donald Rumsfeld; (c) the U.S. Military; or (d) all of the above. Problem was... the story didn't hold water. I haven't seen many references to al Qaqaa since the election. I'm not the only one.

The New York Times splashed the news on its front page and didn't stop splashing it for a week. In all, the Times ran 16 stories and columns about al-Qaqaa, plus seven anti-Bush letters to the editor on the subject over an eight-day period. Editorial boards across the country hammered the "outrage" for days. It led all the news broadcasts. It became the central talking point of the Kerry campaign, with John Kerry bellowing his indignation at the administration's incompetence at every stump stop. Maureen Dowd wrote a column about it, titled "White House of Horrors." ...

...So, anyway, I'd forgotten about all this. Bush won the election despite the al-Qaqaa drumbeat from Kerry and his surrogates in and out of the press.

But Byron York, my colleague at National Review, didn't forget. He wondered, whatever happened to The Biggest Story on Earth? The answer, it turns out, is nothing. The Times has not run a single story about the al-Qaqaa story since November 1...


Read the whole thing. And, please, sit down while you're reading it.

Jonah Goldberg: Remember al-Qaqaa?
 

Monday, April 25, 2005

Iran: Condition Uh Oh



Click here for AmazonThe "Voice of Bahrain" reports that Iranian cleric Rafsanjani intends to run for president of Iran.

Powerful Iranian cleric Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani declared yesterday he was set to stand again for president in the June 17 election and challenge a field of candidates so far dominated by hardliners.

"The issue of the presidency is my current preoccupation and although I would like somebody else to take this responsibility, I think I must take this bitter medicine," the charismatic cleric was quoted as saying by the official Irna news agency.

Rafsanjani has been seen as the leading contender in the race to replace incumbent reformist Mohammad Khatami, who is nearing the end of his second consecutive term in office, and a string of recent informal opinion polls have put him ahead of his potential rivals by a wide margin.


If this weren't so terrifying, it would almost be funny. Rafsanjani, of course, is the stable, seasoned Mullah who was reported to say (just after 9/11, no less) that Muslims should use nuclear weapons against Israel. And, not to worry, Rafsanjani is perfectly willing to sacrifice millions of Palestinian men, women and children, too... so long as the evil Jews are destroyed.

If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world...


So... Rafsanjani is going to run against a field of hard-liners. Wow. I think we need to raise the Mideast Instability Level to "Oh, Sh*t".

Gulf Daily News: Rafsanjani to run for president

Update: WND puts the story in context with its cheery reporting: Iran plans to knock out U.S. with 1 nuclear bomb (Tests missiles for electromagnetic pulse weapon that could destroy America's technical infrastructure) and Wargaming Scenario: NYC hit by terrorist nuke
 

Where, oh where, has my Editor gone?



Click here for AmazonThe Washington Post, to which we lovingly refer as WaPo, treats its readers to this enjoyable snippet in an article on Internet vigilantes.

...He said he has received thousands of dollars in donations, as well as some ominous death threats. One warning came in a handwritten letter mailed to Weisburd's house. Another letter on a Web site declared that he should be beheaded and it listed his address. For his protection, Weisburd keeps a loaded 38mm pistol in the house...


A 38mm  pistol? Good grief, that thing must be heavy.
 

The Feds visit Annie Jacobson



Click here for AmazonLGF points us to this startling read regarding Ms. Jacobson's reporting on the possible terrorist dry run on Flight 327:

So what do you say to four federal agents at your kitchen table on a bright Tuesday morning? The first thing I clarified for the agents was that, prior to my experience on flight 327, I had never heard of a “probe” or a “dry run.” For the record, I explained, I had never heard of the James Woods incident either. [In case you’re not aware, the actor James Woods flew on an American Airlines flight from Boston to Los Angeles one month prior to 9/11. Alarmed by the behavior of a group of four Middle Eastern men, Woods summoned the pilot and told him that he was “concerned the men were going to hijack the plane.” A report was filed with the FAA on Woods’ behalf but, tragically, no one followed up with Woods or the men. A few days after 9/11, several federal agents showed up in Woods’ kitchen. Woods can’t talk about what was said — he believes his testimony will be used in the trial of the supposed 20th hijacker, Zacarias Moussaoui— but, in an interview with Bill O’Reilly, Woods revealed that his flight “was a rehearsal [for 9/11] with four men.”]

Standing in my kitchen, one of the agents said, “What I can tell you is this: Mohammed Atta was one of the passengers on that flight with James Woods.” (Apparently, this information has never been made public.) With that, the agent pulled out his chair, opened his notebook and started in with his questions for me (at which point the other three agents opened up their notepads almost simultaneously).

During my meeting with the agents, what was not said was often as revealing as what was said. Naturally, the agents “were not at liberty” to tell me anything about the 13 Syrian men aboard flight 327, but they asked a lot of questions regarding my “intuition” about the situation: Intuition told me something was not right. Intuition is why I began noting the men’s actions from the get-go. And it was exactly these details in which the agents seemed most interested. One of the agents commented on the fact that I took a lot of hits in the press — that I was called a racist and a bigot simply for sticking with my gut instinct. To me, the agents’ story that Mohammed Atta had been on James Woods’ flight was a wink and a nod to the fact that it’s fine to trust your intuition. If you’re wrong, you can always stand corrected...


Annie Jacobson gets a visit from the Feds
 

Steyn on the Bolton Hearing



Click here for AmazonThe genius -- Mark Steyn -- nails the namby-pamby GOP turncoats to the wall in his latest offering, courtesy of the Chicago Sun-Times.

...who is Voinovich? What is he? Well, he's a fellow called George, and he's apparently a senator from Ohio who's on this Foreign Relations Committee. He was, alas, unable to interrupt his hectic schedule to attend either of the committee's hearings for John Bolton's U.N. nomination, but nevertheless decided last week he could not bring himself to support Bolton's nomination. ''My conscience got me,'' he said. Maybe one day his conscience will get him to attend the hearings he's paid to attend...

...As Sen. Biden put it, ''The USAID worker in Kyrgyzstan alleges that she was harassed -- not sexually harassed -- harassed by Mr. Bolton.'' This was a decade ago, in some hotel. John Bolton allegedly chased this woman down a corridor in a non-sexual manner. It's not clear from Biden whether he would have approved had she been chased down the corridor in a sexual manner, as the 42nd president was wont to do. But the non-sexual harassment was instead about policy matters relating to Kyrgyzstan...

...I'll bet Pope Benedict XVI is glad that his conclave doesn't include either Cardinal Biden or Cardinal Voinovich... Apparently, the New York Times was stunned that their short list of Cardinal Gloria Steinem, Cardinal Rupert Everett and Cardinal Rosie O'Donnell were defeated at the last moment by some guy who came out of left field and isn't even gay or female but instead belongs to the discredited ''Catholic'' faction of the Catholic Church.

...The rap against John Bolton is that he gets annoyed with do-nothing bureaucrats. If that's enough to disqualify you from government service, then 70 percent of citizens who've visited the DMV in John Kerry's Massachusetts are ineligible. Sinking Bolton means handing a huge psychological victory to a federal bureaucracy that so spectacularly failed America on 9/11 and to a U.N. bureaucracy eager for any distraction from its own mess...


The New York Times' impotent rage regarding the new Pope is best exemplified by Maureen Dowd. She of the unraveling skill-set is now almost unreadable. Bulldog at Ankle Biting Pundits, however, has mustered the energy and concentration to read her nonsense (hat tip: PoliPundit) and reports her latest brain-droppings:

Unlike Ronald Reagan and John Paul II, the vice president and the new pope do not have large-scale charisma or sunny faces to soften their harsh “my way or the highway” policies. Their gloomy world outlooks and bullying roles earned them the nicknames Dr. No and Cardinal No. One is called Washington’s Darth Vader, the other the Vatican’s Darth Vader.

W.’s Doberman and John Paul’s “God’s Rottweiler,” as the new pope was called, are both global enforcers with cult followings.


Steyn: Bolton hearing monkey biz
 

Sunday, April 24, 2005

Google Satellite Maps... and Other Sensitive Locations



Click here for AmazonHere's another high-res image of a reactor (hat tip: B) at an unspecified location. There's really no reason I can think of not to obscure the satellite images of these venues.

Photo
Refinery at an unspecified location
And here's another candidate for obfuscation: refineries.

Just a few weeks ago, the NRO's Frank Gaffney wrote about the national security concerns related to refineries:

"This nation is dangerously vulnerable to severe economic dislocation and possibly dire national-security threats as a result of its excessive reliance on imported oil and the infrastructure that transforms most of that oil into fuel for our transportation sector... the limited number of aging and, in some cases at least, increasingly dangerous refineries is but one aspect of this vulnerability..."

Once again, I'd recommend that you do as I did and contact Google to request that certain venues -- like reactors and refineries -- be rendered in extremely low-resolution.

Google Maps: Contact Google
 

Holy Shnikeys



Click here for AmazonFor the love of... I happened to revisit Tony's A.J. Quinnell page yesterday. And what I found there was truly a surprise - and a gift.

You may remember Quinnell, if only indirectly. He is the author of Man on Fire and eleven other works of "fiction". I quote the word fiction simply because so much of what Quinnell writes about is based upon historical fact.

Man on Fire, of course, was recently made into a Denzel Washington film. Washington starred as Creasy, the quiet, deadly ex-mercenary. Broken down and alcoholic, Creasy is offered a position as a bodyguard for a wealthy industrialist's adolescent daughter. When the daughter is kidnapped, all hell breaks loose in this novel of redemption and ultimate revenge.

There are no better books in the this genre. In fact, it is a travesty that any of Quinnell's books are out of print. All of them are five-star, without question.

Want a free sample? The surprise that I discovered is that Quinnell has released a Creasy short story entitled Gladiator. Read it and then buy the rest of his books.

A.J. Quinnell: Gladiator: a Creasy Short Story; Embassy of France in the US: The French Foreign Legion.
 

Saturday, April 23, 2005

Google Satellite Maps... and Nuclear Reactors



Click here for AmazonAfter noting the obfuscation of the U.S. Capitol Building in Google's satellite maps, I decided to see what else might be similarly obscured. Whether at the behest of DHS -- or simply because it makes sense -- I would expect Google to render certain areas of the country somewhat opaque.

Consider nuclear reactors, for instance. I can't think of any good reason to show high-resolution detail of a reactor and its surrounding environs. So, for the heck of it, I tracked down the reactor (and I won't mention the location) pictured above. At least, I'm pretty sure it's a reactor. Email me if you recognize it as something else ("Ross, that's an amusement park in Beaver Falls, Minnohsota, you maroon!").

In any case, I'd recommend that you do as I did and contact Google to request that certain venues -- like reactors -- be obfuscated. Let's not make a bad guy's job any easier.

Google Maps: Contact Google
 

Google Satellite Maps... and the Capitol



Click here for AmazonHere's some evidence that the folks at Google have brainstormed with the U.S. Government, or at least just DHS. And this is a good thing. The accompanying image is Google's satellite map image of the U.S. Capitol Building. Note the pixellated, lower-resolution of the Capitol building and its surrounding area. Hopefully this is indicative of serious air defenses and other countermeasures that can be used to fend off suicidal dirtbags like Atta -- who is certain to be roasting in hell at this very moment -- and company.

Google Satellite Maps: Capitol Building
 

Google Satellite Maps... and Area 51



Click here for AmazonHere's a blogger that (a) has entirely too much time on their hands; (b) an almost voyeuristic interest in Google's new satellite mapping capability; and (c) apparently thinks the movie Independence Day is a documentary.

So tonight I spied on Area 51
 

Letter to Senator Voinovich



Click here for AmazonHere's an open letter to Senator Voinovich, which has been copied to his office. I would encourage you to write similar letters (either email or hardcopy) and call his office to register your polite complaint regarding his mini-rebellion. His office phone number is 202-224-3353.

Senator Voinovich,

I would like to register my extreme disappointment with your handling of the Bolton nomination.

The U.N. has proven itself to be relentlessly corrupt, willing to prey on the innocent, and unable to marshal any meaningful support for millions of true victims throughout the world.

Into this mix is thrown John Bolton, a man who speaks his mind and will not back down to those at the UN who have such egregiously poor track records.

President Bush supports John Bolton. I expect any Republican Senator worth his salt to do the same. Here's hoping you get realigned with the President on this issue... and fast.

Many of my peers in Ohio are similarly outraged regarding your mini-rebellion. I can assure you that we will remember this incident during any campaign in which you choose to engage from this point forward. And we will work hard either for you or against you based upon these actions.

Sincerely,

Doug Ross


Contact Senator Voinovich
 

Friday, April 22, 2005

A Soundless Sound System



Click here for AmazonElwood "Woody" Norris pointed a metal frequency emitter at one of perhaps 30 people who had come to see his invention. The emitter -- an aluminum square -- was hooked up by a wire to a CD player. Norris switched on the CD player.

"There's no speaker, but when I point this pad at you, you will hear the waterfall," said the 63-year-old Californian.

And one by one, each person in the audience did, and smiled widely.

Norris' HyperSonic Sound system has won him an award coveted by inventors -- the $500,000 annual Lemelson-MIT Prize. It works by sending a focused beam of sound above the range of human hearing. When it lands on you, it seems like sound is coming from inside your head...


One use for this technology I haven't seen discussed is telephonic. In a car or on a plane, wouldn't it be nice to talk quietly into a directional microphone while listening to a caller? While handling absolutely no equipment?

Inventor creates Soundless Sound System
 

What really happened in Deadwood?



Click here for AmazonI'm a serious fan of the hit series Deadwood. And that's saying something, given that I watch about two hours of TV a week. The show is a multi-layered drama based upon real events that transpired in the late nineteenth century near Deadwood, South Dakota. The town erupted as gold fever infected the region, which signalled prospectors, charlatans, officials, hoods, and every combination thereof to attempt to take a piece of the action.

And if there's a better actor on the planet than Ian McShane, pictured above, I haven't seen him.

In any event, I just happened upon a site that distinguishes the historical from the fictional in this outstanding series:

What really happened in Deadwood?