NSA: Please Turn off the Lights When You Leave. Nothing to See Here.

Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz shows how the general public can take action to truly protect their privacy using GnuPG with Evolution email. Read the details.

Mailvelope for Chrome: PGP Encrypted Email Made Easy

Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz officially endorses what he deems is a truly secure, easy to use PGP email encryption program. Read the details.

Step off Microsoft's License Treadmill to FOSS Linux

Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz reminds CIOs that XP Desktops destined for MS end of life support can be reprovisioned with FOSS Linux to run like brand new. Read how.

Bitcoin is NOT Money -- it's a Commodity

Linux Advocate shares news that the U.S. Treasury will treat Bitcoin as a Commodity 'Investment'. Read the details.

Google Drive Gets a Failing Grade on Privacy Protection

Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz puts out a public service privacy warning. Google Drive gets a failing grade on protecting your privacy.

Email: A Fundamentally Broken System

Email needs an overhaul. Privacy must be integrated.

Opinion

Cookie Cutter Distros Don't Cut It

Opinion

The 'Linux Inside' Stigma - It's real and it's a problem.

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Turn a Deaf Ear

Linux Advocate Dietrich Schmitz reminds readers of a long ago failed petition by Mathematician Prof. Donald Knuth for stopping issuance of Software Patents.

Showing posts with label New York Times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New York Times. Show all posts

Saturday, October 5, 2013

U.S. Economic Collapse is Unavoidable

by Dietrich Schmitz


I feel so strongly about what is happening in the U.S. that it is my moral obligation to amplify a message that needs to reach the general public concerning the grave condition of our economy.  Thus I am reprinting a story written by Paul Craig Roberts.

The fact is, that if nothing can be done to avoid the unavoidable, you should at least be 'awoken' and become informed of what is around the corner headed our way.

Would you believe a Man with impeccable credentials if he told you the U.S. economy is heading to a complete collapse?  Then you owe it to yourself to read his story.  Here it is:

The Real Crisis Is Not The Government Shutdown

by Paul Craig Roberts 
October 2, 2013
The inability of the media and politicians to focus on the real issues never ceases to amaze.
The real crisis is not the “debt ceiling crisis.” The government shutdown is merely a result of the Republicans using the debt limit ceiling to attempt to block the implementation of Obamacare. If the shutdown persists and becomes a problem, Obama has enough power under the various “war on terror” rulings to declare a national emergency and raise the debt ceiling by executive order. An executive branch that has the power to inter citizens indefinitely and to murder them without due process of law, can certainly set aside a ceiling on debt that jeopardizes the government.
The real crisis is that jobs offshoring by US corporations has permanently lowered US tax revenues by shifting what would have been consumer income, US GDP, and tax base to China, India, and other countries where wages and the cost of living are relatively low. On the spending side, twelve years of wars have inflated annual expenditures. The consequence is a wide deficit gap between revenues and expenditures.
Under the present circumstances, the deficit is too large to be closed. The Federal Reserve covers the deficit by printing $1,000 billion annually with which to purchase Treasury debt and mortgage-backed financial instruments. The use of the printing press on such a large scale undermines the US dollar’s role as reserve currency, the basis for US power. Raising the debt limit simply allows the real crisis to continue. More money will be printed with which to purchase more new debt issues needed to close the gap between revenues and expenditures.
The supply of dollars or dollar denominated assets in foreign hands is vast. (The Social Security system’s large surplus accumulated over a quarter century was borrowed by the Treasury and spent. In its place are non-marketable Treasury IOUs. Consequently, Social Security is one of the largest creditors to the US government.)
If foreigners lose confidence in the dollar, the drop in the dollar’s exchange value would mean high inflation and the Federal Reserve’s loss of control over interest rates. It is possible that a drop in the dollar’s exchange value could initiate hyperinflation in the US.
The real crisis is the absence of intelligence among economists and policymakers who told us for 20 years not to worry about the offshoring of US jobs, because we were going to have a “New Economy” with better jobs.
As I report each month, not a single one of these “New Economy” jobs has appeared in the payroll jobs statistics or in the Labor Department’s projections of future jobs. Economists and policymakers simply gave away a good chunk of the US economy in order to enhance corporate profits. One result has been to create in the US the worst distribution of income of all developed countries and of many undeveloped ones.
In the scheme of things, the enhanced profits are a short-run thing, because by halting the growth in consumer income, jobs offshoring has destroyed the US consumer market. As I noted in a recent column, on September 19 the New York Times reported what I have reported for years: that US median family income has not increased for a quarter of a century. The lack of consumer income growth is why 5 years of massive monetary and fiscal stimulus have not brought economic recovery.
The real crisis cannot be addressed unless the jobs are brought back home and the wars are stopped. As powerful organized interests oppose any such measures, Congress will pass a new debt ceiling and the real crisis will continue.
Do you hear any mention of the real crisis in the media? Today I was on an international TV program for 25 minutes with the chief financial editor of one of England’s major newspapers. Little doubt but that he was a good-hearted and intelligent fellow, but he had no capability of thinking outside the box. He was unable to comprehend my explanations, and resorted to regurgitations of the media’s ignorance or subservience to Washington’s propaganda.
Among his regurgitations was the “solution” of cutting Social Security. The chief financial editor of a major UK newspaper did not know that for the past quarter of a century Social Security revenues exceeded Social Security payments, and that the Treasury spent the surplus to fund the annual operating expenses of the government, issuing non-marketable IOUs to the Social Security Trust Funds.
The chief financial editor also did not comprehend that cutting Social Security payments also cuts consumer spending or aggregate demand, and sends the economy down further, thus magnifying the deficit/debt problem.
Because of the serious decline in the US economy caused by jobs offshoring and financial deregulation, Social Security no longer adds to its surplus. Social Security payments need the supplement to the annual payroll revenues of repayments by the Treasury of the borrowed funds.
The only reasons that Social Security is in trouble is that jobs offshoring and wars have constrained the US Treasury’s ability to make good on its debts except by having the Federal Reserve print money. Every job that is sent abroad does not contribute payroll taxes to Social Security and Medicare.
Insouciant American economists say that manufacturing is an outmoded source of employment, but Chinese manufacturing employment is almost equal to the total US labor force in all occupations, including waitresses and bartenders and hospital orderlies. China’s economy is growing at a rate of 7.5% in real terms, while Western economies cannot move forward and some are regressing.
In order to appease Wall Street, the most corrupt institution in human history, and to prevent Wall Street-financed takeovers of their corporations, executives destroyed the American consumer market by offshoring American incomes in order to enhance profits by substituting cheap foreign labor for US labor.
In my opinion, the US economy is not salvageable in its present form. The economy is running out of water resources. The supply that remains is being decimated by fracking. The soil is depleted by glysophate, a requirement of GMO agriculture. The external costs of production are rising (the costs that the corporations impose on the environment and third parties) and possibly exceed the value of the increase in corporate output. Economists are incapable of independent thought, and elected representatives are dependent on the private interests that finance their campaigns.
It is difficult to imagine a more discouraging situation.
At this time, collapse seems the most likely forecast.
Perhaps out of the ruins, a new, intelligent beginning might occur.
If there are any leaders.
END

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, September 15, 2013

Is NIST History?

by Dietrich Schmitz


In my last story, Is OpenSSL's Cryptography Broken?, I reported the ongoing developments surrounding a suspect security problem with the implementation of openssl.

The story, unfortunately, continues to unfold with suspicion now turning to confirmation in a NY Times report that the NSA inserted altered random number generator code into the Dual Eliptic Curve Deterministic Random Bit Generator so as to predict private key encoding and provide a 'backdoor' entry point mechanism.  (Image credit: fearlessmen.com)

Despite strong denials coming from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) who oversaw the development of the Eliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) standard, many now are left having a strong distrust of the agency.  From a The Register story NIST publicly responded:
The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has vehemently denied accusations that it deliberately weakened encryption standards to help the NSA's monitoring activities.
"We want to assure the IT cybersecurity community that the transparent, public process used to rigorously vet our standards is still in place," said NIST in a statement.
"NIST would not deliberately weaken a cryptographic standard. We will continue in our mission to work with the cryptographic community to create the strongest possible encryption standards for the U.S. government and industry at large."
The statement from NIST said that working with the NSA was 'standard operating procedure' and required by law.  In an attempt to throw a 'wet blanket' on the bonfire, NIST has reopened the standard for public comment.

Regardless, one outspoken Developer, Bruce Schnierer, said in a podcast:
NIST took a big credibility hit unfortunately. There are good people there doing good work but we don't know which of their standards are tainted, we don't know how much collaboration there is with the NSA. 
And unfortunately because trust is lost when they get up and say the NSA doesn't affect our standards we don't believe them. We need a way to get back trust.
In other news the IETF offered up a 'fool-proof' plan to PRISM-proof the Internet.

What is the take-away?


Cryptography standards have all now been put into question in addition to the public relations disaster that confronts NIST.

Whether or not NIST will recover remains to be seen as it is quite likely that all cryptography standards will require rigorous audits.

In the meantime, the prevailing perception is that many cryptographic standards have been compromised and privacy is not assured by virtue of their use on the Internet.  As such, it will take a significant amount of time to pragmatically review each standard and thoroughly vet code before a level of confidence in these needed privacy measures will be restored.

And, the question of whether or not trust should be placed in agencies such as NIST is now the main focus and primary concern.  Is NIST history?  Only time will tell.

-- Dietrich


Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, April 11, 2013

Microsoft Proxy Fight Against Android Alleging 'Antitrust' Offenses

by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

A rather laughable story is developing in Europe. Microsoft claims to be the victim of antitrust violations. The alleged offender in this case is claimed to be Free/open source software. For a Free/open source system to be 'too' dominant when everyone -- even the partly Microsoft-owned Facebook -- can fork it is just ludicrous. Make no mistake. Timothy B. Lee says that "[a]ntitrust complaint against Android is an attack on open source" and it opens the door to future attacks as such.

The New York Times says "European antitrust regulators have received a formal complaint about Google’s Android operating system for mobile devices, even as they move to the final stages of their inquiry into the company’s search practices."

Here it is from other, corporate-centric/biased press, CNN and USA Today, which says:
A group of companies led by Microsoft have called on European authorities to launch an antitrust investigation into Google and its hold over mobile internet usage on smartphones.

The "FairSearch" initiative of 17 companies - which includes Microsoft, Nokia, and Oracle -claims Google is acting unfairly by giving away its Android operating system to mobile device companies on the condition that the U.S. online giant's own software applications like YouTube and Google Maps are installed and prominently displayed.

"Google is using its Android mobile operating system as a Trojan horse to deceive partners, monopolize the mobile marketplace, and control consumer data," said Thomas Vinje, the group's Brussels-based lawyer.
As put by this report, it is simple to see that Microsoft is using proxies:

Microsoft not fooling anyone by using FairSearch front in antitrust complaint against Google



Microsoft isn't fooling anyone by hiding behind a trade group to complain to European antitrust regulators about Google and its Android mobile operating system, a legal expert said today.

"FairSearch.org is seen by many observers here as a Microsoft Trojan Horse," said Nicolas Petit, a professor of competition law at the University of Liege in Belgium. "Everyone understands here in Brussels that it's Microsoft versus Google."
Here is a somewhat sarcastic take on it:
Microsoft was accused by its competitors of using its dominance on the desktop to monopolise the burgeoning online marketplace by requiring partners to offer Internet Explorer, rather than the rival Netscape Navigator, and to grant it "default placement " on the desktop. Microsoft's bundling of Internet Explorer with every copy of Windows was regarded as giving it an unfair advantage over other browsers; its rivals claimed there was a danger that Microsoft might repeat its "desktop abuses of dominance" as consumers increasingly turned to an Internet platform dominated by Microsoft's Internet Explorer.

The closeness of the parallels might lead you to believe that the FairSearch group are trying to build on the earlier, successful anti-trust action to bolster their case. But what's interesting is that among the FairSearch group is Microsoft itself. So I thought it might be interesting to see what the company said when it faced exactly the same accusations that it is now levelling against Google.
Just think what a nerve it takes for Microsoft to file antitrust complaints like it's the victim. It takes great insensitivity, doesn't it? Microsoft is also pretending to be European via Nokia, which former Microsoft executive Stephen Elop abducted against employees' will. AOL cites the much-maligned "Scoogled" campaign as part of it:
Microsoft is skewering Google again with ads and regulatory bashing that say as much about the dramatic shift in the technology industry's competitive landscape as they do about the animosity between the two rivals.

The ads that began Tuesday mark the third phase in a 5-month-old marketing campaign that Microsoft Corp. derisively calls "Scroogled." The ads, which have appeared online, on television and in print, depict Google as a duplicitous company more interested in increasing profits and power than protecting people's privacy and providing unbiased search results.
Microsoft's attempt to distract from its own offences and refusal to comply with punishment are so recent that it is just crazy to pull off this stunt at this time. It was only weeks ago that Microsoft was fined almost billions of dollars for antitrust violations and failure to comply with suggested remedies. Microsoft's behaviour is very notable, outrageously so. "Since Google went public in August 2004, Microsoft's online division has accumulated more than $17.5 billion in operating losses," says one report. Here is another take:
INTERNET GIANT Google is at the centre of another European antitrust complaint orchestrated by Microsoft, this time relating to its Android software. The antitrust complaint has been filed by Fairsearch Europe, whose members include the likes of Microsoft, Nokia and Oracle. The group, which describes itself as an "organization united to promote economic growth, innovation and choice across the internet" is going after Google for its allegedly anticompetitve practices deployed with Android. It's a pretty ironic moment, after Microsoft recently was slapped with a mammoth fine for monopolistic behaviour relating to browser choice on Windows devices.
Tux Radar intends to dedicate an imminent show segment to this issue as it polls listeners/readers and Pamela Jones calls this "[a]nother Cynical "Antitrust" Complaint From Microsoft and Its Buddies Against Google" (this is not the first).
Evidently, Microsoft and its proprietary friends didn't get the result they hoped for from their first antitrust complaint against Google to the EU Commission. The latest news is that the first one is being amicably resolved, according to the New York Times. Instead of saying to themselves, I guess we were wrong, instead Fairsearch, the Microsoft-led group that seems to have no other reason for being but to attack Google, files another antitrust complaint.
Meanwhile, reveals this update from Thomas Claburn, Editor-at-Large at a large news site, the antitrust complaints against Microsoft are being kept away from the public. "In June 2007," he writes, "I filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to learn more about the basis for Google's complaint that Microsoft's implementation of desktop search in Windows Vista violated the terms of its 2002 antitrust consent agreement."

Then he says: "After six years, the truth can finally be told. What follows is an excerpt from an email sent by Kulpreet Rana, Google's director of intellectual property, to Justice Department attorney Aaron Hoag, dated Oct. 4, 2006."

Microsoft is trying to use antitrust law as an insurance policy as its business is collapsing. Law enforcers are not helping free competition and they oughtn't intervene with Free software going mainstream.

-- Dr. Roy Schestowitz


Enhanced by Zemanta