Chaotek Thoughts

It has been reported in the last month that Macs have been attacked with a Trojan virus from pirated software. From what I understand is that the virus intends to create a Mac-based botnet for denial of service and other zombie style attacks. It’s notable that this isn’t the first Mac virus or botnet, just perhaps the first popularized one.

I don’t think it’s a good thing that a virus is getting out there. But I am pleased that the self-righteous Mac people might be taken down a few levels. It has been proven that Mac people are snobs. There is an unending arrogance that radiates from the Mac community that Macs are inherently more secure and generally better, or that Mac users are more sophisticated than other computer users.

At the end of the day, Macs are just as secure as PCs. It’s just that it’s not worth the time to write malicious code against these systems. If you’re going to do the work, I’d think you want the most bang for your buck and PCs dominate the market. Finally, the irony that the virus came from pirated software is so precious that I giggle at the thought of Mac snobs looking down their noses at the rest of us from behind their cloud of smug. It’s not that I don’t like Macs–I just don’t like Mac users.

The Supreme Court just banned the death penalty for child rape cases, on a 5 to 4 vote. I can’t disagree more with this decision. Perhaps the questionable circumstances of this case had some influence, as I admit that the victim’s testimony in this case is questionable as it took 20 months for the victim to identify the convict even though he was arrested within weeks of the event. However I don’t think that this should remove the possibility of the death penalty entirely. In fact, I would support expanding the death penalty to more non-homicide crimes.

For example, bank robbery has historically had a very steep penalty compared to similar robbery charges because in the past robbing a bank could destroy the lives of thousands. Since banks are insured by the Federal bank, this isn’t the case anymore, but the punishment is just as severe. I would go as far as to say that others who ruin many lives or destroy the life of someone without killing them should be eligible for execution. Consider cases in Africa where a man throws battery acid on the face of a woman, or in Europe where a person was held as a sex slave for years. These sound like cases where a person’s life is ruined even if they are still alive. Or consider a case where the attempted murder resulted in paralysis, blindness, or even severe emotional damage. In some ways, isn’t that a fate worse than death?

Considering the circumstances, I think I would not have supported the death penalty in this case, and perhaps even would have voted not-guilty if I was on the jury since the eye witness testimony allows for some doubt. I don’t like the death penalty in cases where the only evidence is eyewitness testimony, especially that of a child, given how unreliable it is. However that shouldn’t destroy the ability to sentence the death penalty in non-homicide cases.

I’m in San Francisco on business and I found out that at the base of the building I am at, was going the end point of the Torch Relay. Great, I thought–something cool to do at lunch. So we took a late lunch and the group headed down to the Embarcadero right in front of the Ferry Building. There were pro-Tibet protestors, pro-China supporters, anarchists, and general spectators like myself. It was actually pretty entertaining. The anarchists were funny, all dressed in black with bandanas covering their faces. Some were quite prepared, even wetting the bandanas in preparation for tear gas. They shouted a lot about the corrupt military industrial complex, evils of McDonalds, faked moon landings, and the war on terror/Iraq–all with little conviction or education The pro-Tibet protestors generally seemed to fall into two categories: peaceful demonstrators and complete idiots. The peaceful demonstrators, especially Team Tibet, were very organized and orderly. Idiot protestors were just chaos incarnate. My favorite was a sign stating that the US would have boycotted Nazi Olympics, so why would we cater to the Chinese? Uh, didn’t the US attend the 1936 Berlin Olympics?

Anyways, the relay was supposed to start at 1pm. At the beginning, the police were pretty strict about keeping people behind barricades. But as the minutes passed, the police force just seemed to evaporate. People started marching up and down the street. Before too long, it was pretty obvious that the relay wasn’t going to come this route–there was no order. On the news, the Mayor and police explained that they “spontaneously” decided to change the relay route because of the crowds. They said that there were too many protestors, and that the crowd was too large at the beginning of the route rather than spread evenly along the route. What a crock of shit! For one, they had previously decided that there would be no protest permits necessary, so the protesters could be anywhere they wanted. Also, the route had previously been cut repeatedly, and just that morning it was announced that the route would be cut in half again. Duh, the people are going to want to be near the beginning because it might get cut down even more. Before 1pm, for the most part the crowds were reasonable and kept behind the fences except when they were crossing the street in crosswalks. It wasn’t until the police had abandoned the task of controlling the crowd, because they knew that the relay wasn’t coming this route anyways, did the streets get taken over. By then, the decision had long since been made. And you can’t tell me that they didn’t have at least 5 alternate routes for the relay, despite the claim that the route and decision was spontaneous.

The final result: the torch relay was a regular Communist China exhibition, secretive and dodging free speech. The protesters felt somewhat victorious, they got a lot of publicity anyways. The Chinese got a mostly Tibet-less Torch Relay, as if the trick will make people forget their human rights record. Thousands of Olympic supporters, Chinese nationals, tourists and spectators got screwed out of a chance to see and photograph the Olympic torch. Oh, and free speech got a kick to the nuts–though the Patriot Act mostly killed the First Amendment anyways. And now the IOC is suggesting that the International Torch Relay may be cut for future Olympics…

The recent deaths of Robert Jordan, Gary Gygax and Sir Arthur C. Clarke have got me thinking about the difference between the fans of modern celebrity and the cultish following of these influential creators. Each has a legacy of the worlds that they created, weaving words into masterful tapestries. Sadly enough, I can’t really claim much experience with any of them directly, though this is something I would like to rectify as soon as possible. But their impact to me is still profound, as their talent allowed them to transcend their works and impact the future works that I am more familiar with.

Unlike modern celebrities who gain their fame from beauty and wild antics, these legends are famous for their intellect and creativity. And you can tell by differences between the fans. The untalented celebrities that we see everyday don’t have fans, they have voyeurs. These fans are just as satisfied by watching the celebrity fail just as much as they enjoy their work. With Clarke, Jordan, and Gygax there are legions of fans who truly love the creations of these men even if they wouldn’t know it if they passed by them on the street. There are many other talented people out there who will never have the fame or renown of a movie star, but who will impact the world in much larger ways.

Alexander Tytler once noted that democracy “can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury.” While Tytler was referring to the decline of the Athenian Republic, the comment certainly reflects current events. In an effort to appease voters in a troubled economy, the Democrats and Republicans have come together in a rare show of bi-partisanship to give the American public $600 each during an election year…

Not wanting to be the party that said no to giving the public “free” money, Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the White House are working to expediently get money to the taxpayers to help avert an economic recession. Why, because they want to keep their jobs and buying votes from the taxpayers is a good campaign sound-byte. The problem is, it’s the wrong solution.

The problem with the current economy is one of greed. The mortgage companies, eager to cash in on the real estate boom, didn’t properly approve loans. They knowingly gave loans to people who couldn’t afford them hoping, like the home buyer, for a quick turn around on the loan for fast profit. The home buyers, also greedy for money, were all too eager to sign horrific loan agreements. Everyone, home buyers and mortgage companies knew that house prices were rising too fast and that it wouldn’t last forever. The problem with gambling, is that there is risk. Now people are losing their homes and mortgage companies are collapsing before our eyes. It may be cruel to say, but maybe they had it coming.

You see, back in the 80s and 90s, there was something called the Savings and Loan Crisis. Over 1000 lenders failed because of poor management, corruption, and risky loans. The government stepped, bailing out the industry with taxpayer money. Sound familiar? It’s because it’s happening again. The loan industry is once again calling on the government to bail them out.

So today the government is once again stepping in, making deals with the big mortgage brokers to hold off escalating loan rates and allow many of these home buyers an opportunity to refinance. I think that this was a smart move. It seems like a win-win for everyone. Mortgage companies don’t get stuck with overvalued foreclosures and people get to keep their homes. And it didn’t cost me or my unborn children anything.

But is wasn’t enough. Now our elected officials want to give about $600 to each taxpayer, costing roughly $100 billion in money that the government doesn’t have. While $100 billion might seem like a lot, the United States has a gross domestic product of roughly $14 trillion. That makes the combined $600 checks less than a 1% of 1% blip in the economy. Even more interesting, the government doesn’t want you to spend that money on debt. Instead, they want you to buy something expensive and unnecessary.

Here’s some facts about American debt:

• American consumers owe about $2 trillion dollars in debt
• Over a third of which is credit card debt ($700 billion)
• That’s roughly $20,000 per household (not including mortgage debt)
• Non-mortgage debt has increased more than 41% in the last 8 years
• 43% of American families spend more than they make each year
• Personal bankruptcies have doubled in the last decade

Perhaps the solution to the economy, is to deal with the credit/debt of Americans. Instead of increasing the national deficit with a check that will likely amount to little impact on the economy, maybe our elected officials can help the average American in a significant way. The deals made to limit interest rate explosion in the mortgage industry was a good start. Maybe start into the credit card companies next. The problem is too much credit is being given out, with the companies seemingly eager to cash in by skyrocketing interest rates when the consumer spends too much and can’t afford the payment. Maybe reduce the amount of credit people can have, as well as find a way to control interest rates. You still want to reward those with good payment history versus those with bad, but we don’t need to continue in the direction that we are going. I’m not an economist, so I don’t have the perfect solution. But I think that reducing personal debt and keeping the credit lending institutions from abusing consumers is a great way to get the economy back on track. Not only on-track, but much healthier. A $600 check might seem nice, but it is only a band-aid on a broken system.

For the second time in less than a decade, the elected officials in Washington are going to write Americans a check. Once we figure out that we can get a check anytime we want, the end of our way of life is in sight…

As the New England Patriots are enjoying a perfect normal season, there has been some talk of adding an asterisk to the record books, noting that controversy around the Spygate scandal which resulted from the September 9, 2007 game against the Jets in which the Patriots were caught cheating. Should the perfect season record be marked as questionable? In my opinion, that’s ridiculous. Either give them the validation of their accomplishment, or punish them with a forfeit of the entire season…

The concept of an asterisk next to a record seems to go back to Roger Maris, who beat Babe Ruth’s homerun record in 1961. As Maris was an unpopular player, who came out ahead of the fan favorite, yet injured, Mickey Mantle. Since 2 teams had been added to the league that year, 8 games were added to the schedule. The commissioner, Ford Frick, ruled that in order to beat Babe Ruth’s record, the homeruns should be accomplished in the same number of games. Otherwise there would be two separate records, one for 154 games, and one for 162 games. The concept of adding an asterisk to Maris’ record is an urban myth, but the idea has been popularized since then–including the 2001 movie 61*.

In October 2007, track and field athlete Marion Jones admitted to lying to investigators about steroid use. By December 2007, Marion Jones was forced to return all medals earned back to September 2000, including 5 Olympic medals. Considering that she never failed a doping test during those competitions, it seems questionable to me why she had to lose all of her past wins.

Seven consecutive time winner of the Tour de France bicyclist Lance Armstrong has been plagued with accusations of steroid use. Though never proven, there have been many calls for an asterisk to be added in the record books next to Armstrong’s wins, noting that the results are questionable. There have even been VERY questionable retests of urine samples from past races to try to disqualify the champion. If ever found guilty of cheating in a single case, Lance would likely be required to return all medals and would be removed from the record books.

At the 2000 Olympics in Sydney, Andreea Rãducan tested positive for the banned stimulant pseudoephedrine. During the IOC’s evaluation of the case, it was determined that the gymnast had used a common over-the-counter cold medicine which provided “no competitive advantage at the competition” and was given to the teen by her team physician. Though the Olympic Committee, Court of Arbitration of Sport, and International Gymnastics Federation all ruled that she was “an athlete who was innocent in this situation” Andreea was forced to give up her gold medal in the all-around gymnastics. Innocent, yet she lost her valid win.

Then we come back to the Patriots. Caught videotaping the Jet’s hand signals, the Patriots were faced with a massive scandal. While the taping could not have affected the outcome of the game, it does have potential impact on future games. It also raises the question of how long this practice has been going on? Could signal taping have been used to achieve other victories, including recent Super Bowl and playoff wins? If held up to the same standard as Olympic athletes, the Patriots could have been stripped of all recent titles and been banned for the rest of the season. Even worse, the coaching staff could have been banned from the NFL for years or life if held to the same standards as Olympians…

Instead the coach was fined $500,000, the team was fined $250,000, and they lost their first round draft pick. All and all, it’s a pretty light punishment in my view, as the financial benefits from a successful, even ill-gotten, season far outweigh the fines levied as punishment. While a first round draft pick may be strong, the Patriots were weighed as being the favorite for the Super Bowl well before the season started, due to some incredible pre-season trades. They should be sitting pretty good for many years, and one round of the draft in one year will hardly be noticed in the long run.

I don’t think that adding an asterisk is appropriate. It is the coward’s way out of a controversial situation. Either give it to them, or don’t. Consider the perfect season to be valid, or disqualify the season in its entirety. To add an asterisk to the record books invalidates the records.