Tuesday, 2/9/10, Public Square

Advertisements

8 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

8 responses to “Tuesday, 2/9/10, Public Square

  1. fnord

    The sun is shining!

    I missed the sun! A lot!

  2. tosmarttobegop

    On top of hating winter I am also effected by the gloom and sun-less days.
    It is cold today! the only source of heat for the room the computer is in.
    Is a free standing space heater, it is reading 53 degrees and based on the observations of other family members.

    I may being having arthritis in my back and may have for years.
    Every winter it feels like there is a rock just beside and a little under my left shoulder blade.

    I went to the Doctor about it a couple of Decembers ago and he as much kind of blew it off.
    He felt and had me move my shoulder and said “nope don’t find anything…. Bye!

  3. fnord

    Poll: Tea Party candidates come in last

    Could the Tea Party movement be losing ground?

    Days after Sarah Palin headlined the nation’s first Tea Party convention, a Rasmussen Reports poll released today shows that a generic “Tea Party candidate” would come in third in a theoretical three-way congressional contest.

    The poll found that 36% of voters would support a Democratic candidate on a generic ballot, 25% would back the Republican and 17% would go for the Tea Party pick. Twenty-three percent of respondents are undecided.

    In early December, the same poll showed the Tea Party in second place and the GOP in third. Unchanged between the polls, according to Rasmussen, is that 41% of voters have a favorable view of the conservative movement.

    The poll of 1,000 likely voters was taken Feb. 7-8, just after the national Tea Party convention in Nashville. The survey has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2010/02/poll-tea-party-candidates-come-in-last/1

    • Or, is the result the necessary conclusion of those considering the perceived (current) futility of organizing a viable third-party movement in time for the 2010 elections?

  4. Zippy

    Letter to Google CEO Eric Schmidt, via the American Civil Liberties Union:

    Mr. Schmidt,

    I realize the US government already has the virtually unchecked ability to spy on random TCP/IP traffic (courtesy of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008), but, if what the Washington Post is true–regarding revealing your search data to the National Security Agency–that would be obviously indefensible, and beyond creepy. And also very good for Bing.

    As someone who works in information technology, you should know well the abuses that can and would occur if “No Such Agency” was given access to a such a large amount of customer data. Furthermore, it would seem to be in direct contradiction of your own Privacy Policy.

    As the CEO of the world’s premiere search engine, you of all people should be aware of the randomizing effect that overcollection of data has on the quality of intelligence information. The signal gets lost in the noise.

    Morever, (ab)using Google’s database for intelligence purposes–even if your employees edit and optimize the data–would not ensure anything approaching qualify intelligence information since, as you well know, even the most sophisticated search and retrieval algorithms are famously inept at teasing out meaning from correlated data. The only alternative to that would be full time support of spying of Google’s customers, with Google’s employees in effect becoming a mass surveillance force.

    Finally, security professionals have noted that the Domestic Spying Program enacted by the Bush administration actually endangers security by creating new conduits for espionage. The same would also be indisputably true of any alleged deal with the NSA.

    I do sincerely hope you’ve talked to Larry, Sergei and Vint about this, and that the Washington Post report is wrong.

    If it turns out otherwise, you can expect organizad opposition from the Libertarian and civil libertarian tech community (gee, not many of them, huh?), including boycotts of advertisers.