IMSI Cell Phone Sniffing Aircraft

I made a blog entry about the subject in Nov. 2014 at this link.

Today a report at this link presents more information and flight patterns.  This link is given for supporting info.

"The United States Department of Justice appears to be operating a fleet of at least 62 [EDIT: Now it appears that number is actually 100] small aircraft and helicopters over cities nationwide. The aircraft have been registered to corporations that do not exist, and the purpose of the aerial operations is not known at this time. The flight patterns of the aircraft indicate they are most likely conducting surveillance, much like the controversial aircraft caught flying circles over the city of Baltimore which has seen many protests recently. See examples from this investigation of similar flight patterns over New York City, Dallas, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Chicago, Seattle, and again, Baltimore."

This link from 2006 reports the same flight patterns and says:

"In this case, the more likely explanation is that the FBI is using the Delaware identity for its new generation of spy planes, equipped with sophisticated optics to watch people on the ground. In 2003, the Bureau admitted to flying a tricked-out 182 over several communities near Indianapolis to keep tabs on customers of internet cafes and copy shops."

The capability to do this cell phone IMSI catching is not new.  If the same aircraft is now equipped with Argus then the product of the flight is a two-fer-one deal. 

Of course the government is doing it to collect surveillance information!  It is so obvious and the capability exists, relatively cheap for the info collected.  One of the most important aspects of the surveillance info collected is its half life.  Especially when cell phone IMSI location is collected at night when cell phones are stationary.  People own cell phones for an average amount of time.  Maybe a year?  Some more than a year some less.

This link reports a small aircraft circling from 10:30 pm to 3:00 am.

Once a cell phone IMSI location is collected at night and the same location verified by a later flight, one week or a month later, the probability that it will also be in the same location in the future for a probable amount of time is simple.  The location is at least a good place to start if someone is to be tracked.  If they are not found there then it becomes the start of a trail and also has relationship to a person's prior association.

I would call it cell phone location data mining.  It tells where a person sleeps and who they are sleeping with.  More accurately if recorded after midnight.  It would be interesting to look at when the flights took place.

During the day recording IMSI location probably tells where a person works if they are at the same place day after day.

There is a great wealth of information produced by flights over cities to collect IMSI cell phone location data.

I am certain that it is being done.

Circumstantial evidence is overwhelming.

Will Computers Redefine the Roots of Math?

The subject line is the title of an absolutely fascinating  analysis at this link.

It connects to my frequent thoughts on this blog about object orientation, presence/absence and trinity and the impossibility in the physical world of a thing relating only to itself and nothing else.

Wow, this is great stuff that will take some time to digest.

Red Light Camera Detection and License Plate Reader

My small  town (80,000) has relatively few road/street entries to it.  A river runs through it so do  major east/west and north/south highways.  To the immediate west is a mountain range with passes 60 to 100 miles apart.  A railroad line parallels the north/south highway with underpasses at two high traffic points carrying traffic entering the city.

If my city was a fortress it would be extremely well protected with a relatively few guards at entry points.  Like an old walled city in Europe.  It is not a fortress, entry is free, so is exit.  However, it can be very well protected by the placement of a few surveillance cameras at key vehicle entry points.  It can be and obviously it is.

There are 4 way surveillance cameras place at red light intersections at city entry/exit points.  Cameras look all ways, coming and going.

What do they see?  Record? and for what purpose?

Red light violations might be the most obvious.  But there is much more to see and record.  For example this is a city solicitation is for traffic surveillance for a turnkey red light and License Plate Reading system.

What kind of equipment is my city using, what vendor provided it?  How is it being used?  Who paid for it?  How much?  What are the ongoing operational cost?  What does it do?  What governmental agencies are related to these cameras?

Interesting questions?

Interesting challenge to find the answers.

While the Google hit blurb lists bend as a city using red light cameras, the printable list of Oregon cities using them does not include Bend. 

The city of Bend has TripCheck cameras on highway 97.  One is at the ramp of Wall and Revere looking east.

I could not find anything about traffic cameras at street intersections in Bend but a broader search of webcams in Bend produced this link to produced this link to EyeOnBend.  Info here about EyeOnBend and Michael Kellog, owner MK Consulting.

Trafficland is a major aggregator provider of traffic monitoring equipment and services.  Trafficland is a service provider to ODOT highway camera system.

Axis is associated with Trafficland.  Axis provides LPR cameras with this LPR ability at 900 feet.

Tripcheck provides revealing information about the Tripcheck/Trafficland system at this link.

Of particular interest is streaming traffic video currently available only in Portland.  The link states:

"ODOT does not save camera images. After an image is shown for its set duration it is then written over by the next camera image. Images are not archived due to the amount of resources it would take to save the thousands of images accumulated daily and to respect privacy concerns."

But the same link also states;

"The Oregon Department of Transportation allows businesses, private citizens and organizations to use data and images found on TripCheck. To begin collecting real time data users can sign up for a  TripCheck Travel Information Portal (TTIP) account. This information is formatted in Extensible Markup Language (XML) and it's suggested that users know XML as a pre-resiquite before signing up for a TTIP account. Go to this URL to sign up: http://www.tripcheck.com/TTIPv2"

"To get the address of any camera right click on the camera image. A menu will appear, scroll down and click on "Properties". The address or URL can be found and copied under "Properties". ODOT should be credited for use of the camera. Language such as "Camera courtesy of ODOT" is acceptable."

TPP----Show Us The Deal!

The subject line of this blog entry is at this link.

Subject line simply says it all and oh so elegantly!

Short and sweet.  A demand to see what is secret.

Perhaps the old rule of secrecy is being applied?  What is that?

A need to know.  That that have no need to know are not allowed to know secrets.

Their truth?  The American public has no need to know.  Trust us.

Show Us The Deal! 

Note Well:  The link is from Russian Television!

Here is an addition to this blog entry that is related to what I am doing:  Commenting on reports and opinions that I find on the internet that I feel are worth expressing myself about.  Not an expression entered in the reader comment section of whatever I am commenting on (if the site provides for that) but an expression on my own web blog which nobody reads.  Just crying out my thoughts in the wilderness where the falling tree is never heard.

Why say anything?  Why not say it in the comment section related to the link (if provided).

Good question.

Maybe because it would do as little good there as being expressed here.  Everything entered in the World Wide Web is indexed and searchable.  Maybe if everyone exercised their right to free speech in the manner that I do then technology might someday apply artificial intelligence algorithms to analyze and aggregated public opinion and present some bottom line consensus position "vote".

Its the old media news model is asking the person in the street and then reporting on what is found. 

Just apply an old model to a new news media.

How many millions of us would say on our own freedom of speech website:

Show Us The Deal.

We do not assemble on the streets anymore to express our solidarity of  public opinion.  We assemble on the World Wide Web.  Each of us is a URL.

Show US the Deal!

Why not?

The Whitehouse says:

“There’s a very good reason we won’t do that: We’re trying to drive a hard bargain so the American people get the best deal possible,” wrote Greg Nelson in a White House blog post. “We can’t do that if we show the other players our cards, so to speak.” 

He might as well ad:  You have no need to know, trust us.  We are looking out for your own best interest.

The U.S. is at last facing the neocon captivity

The subject line of this blog entry is the same as this link written by Philip Weiss.  I believe that what he presents is the is and accurate and truth based analysis.  The unpleasant truth about the neocon agenda carried out by Jewish interests.  The only thing that he does not cover is the Christian Fundamentalist support of the same Jewish interest.  What he says is the raw truth and absolutely needs to be said, analyzed by all and conclusions drawn about what really is the truth about the self serving special interests of our country with allegiance to the agenda of Israel that has gotten the USA into what I will just call a Middle East Mess that is a tragic mistake that puts Israel first.  That of course is the Israel agenda.

The truth is so obvious.  Written on the wall.  So are the names of Americans that have died for the self serving agenda of others who are Americans, Foreign Nationals and Americans with primary dedication to the agenda of a foreign country.

Israel and neocon capture of the U.S. has driven U.S. policy and actions that make is a vassal state of a rogue nation that deserves pariah status.  Israel is the root cause of the "Middle East" problem.

The solution is not found in restructuring of Arab states to serve the interest of Israel.   U.S. policy has been captured by the interests of Israel (and American Fundamentalist that support it).  Solving the problem starts with a change in U.S. policy.  What policy changes are necessary depends on first recognizing the truth of the situation and the best interests of the U.S.

Then.......let the chips of truth fall where they may and act accordingly.

What is this war all about?

Like so many others this is a war between truth that is premised on some degree of real world fact and faith that is premised on some other than real world based fact but on any conceptual belie  structure of choice.

Here are my two cents. We invaded Iraq because a powerful group of pro-Israel ideologues — the neoconservatives — who had mustered forces in Washington over the previous two decades and at last had come into the White House were able to sell a vision of transforming the Middle East that was pure wishful hokum but that they believed: that if Arab countries were converted by force into democracies, the people would embrace the change and would also accept Israel as a great neighbor. It’s a variation on a neocolonialist theory that pro-Israel ideologues have believed going back to the 1940s: that Palestinians would accept a Jewish state if you got rid of their corrupt leadership and allowed the people to share in Israel’s modern economic miracle. - See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/05/facing-neocon-captivity#sthash.tm2i1cRr.dpuf

Here are my two cents. We invaded Iraq because a powerful group of pro-Israel ideologues — the neoconservatives — who had mustered forces in Washington over the previous two decades and at last had come into the White House were able to sell a vision of transforming the Middle East that was pure wishful hokum but that they believed: that if Arab countries were converted by force into democracies, the people would embrace the change and would also accept Israel as a great neighbor. It’s a variation on a neocolonialist theory that pro-Israel ideologues have believed going back to the 1940s: that Palestinians would accept a Jewish state if you got rid of their corrupt leadership and allowed the people to share in Israel’s modern economic miracle. - See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/05/facing-neocon-captivity#sthash.tm2i1cRr.dpuf

The best thing about this political moment in the U.S. (if not for the good people of Iraq) is that the rise of ISIS and the Republican candidates’ embrace of the Iraq war is posing that deep and permanent question to the American public, Why did we invade Iraq? - See more at: http://mondoweiss.net/2015/05/facing-neocon-captivity#sthash.tm2i1cRr.dpuf

Stop The Conflation of Internet With World Wide Web (WWW)

Explanation of the word Conflation at this link.

This is important:  Stop conflating the Internet with the World Wide Web.  The Internet is one thing.  The World Wide Web is another.  They are related at the most fundamental level but are two different things and must be understood as two independent related things in order to understand their relationship.  Failure to do that causes ambiguity.  At the root of all computing and use of computers is the reduction of ambiguity of form and function.  Stop the ambiguity so we all have a better understanding of the technology that is so important to our lives!

Conflation is a noun.   Its definition:  The process or result of fusing items into one entity; fusion; amalgamation.  The nature of Internet and the World Wide Web should be taught in every first grade classroom like the ABC's.  Any adult that cannot distinguish between the two or use the two words interchangeably failing to be accurate in which one they are really talking about should go back to first grade and learn the difference before they are allowed to use a device connected to the internet to access the World Wide Web.

I have commented on this in prior blog entries.  

Sir Tim Berners Lee created the World Wide Web. 

The origins of the Internet date back to research commissioned by the United States government in the 1960s.

Wikipedia explanation link follows: 
"The World Wide Web enabled the spread of information over the Internet through an easy-to-use and flexible format. It thus played an important role in popularizing use of the Internet.^[25] Although the two terms are sometimes conflated in popular use, World Wide Web is not synonymous with Internet.^[26] The Web is an information space containing hyperlinked documents and other resources, identified by their(URL) URIs.^[27] It is implemented as both client and server software using Internet protocols such as TCP/IP and HTTP. "

For computer illiterate; A hyperlink, commonly called a "link" is a thing to click on to go to a related website.  Every website in the world has a unique descriptive name as well as a unique associated number (URL) that is used by the internet of computer devices to know where to go in the World Wide Web.  Collectively, all websites in the world are the World Wide Web.

Thank you, Sir Tim Berners-Lee.

Timothy Karr wrote this about Facebook and Internet.org.

This is a description of what Internet.org is.

Wikipedia describes Internet.org:

"A partnership between social networking services company Facebook and seven mobile phone companies (Samsung, Ericsson, MediaTek, Microsoft, Opera Software, Reliance and Qualcomm) that plans to bring affordable access to selected Internet services to less developed countries by increasing efficiency, and facilitating the development of new business models around the provision of Internet access.<sup>[1][2]"

"Internet.org"  Is a WWW website name.  It applies to the association between an entity that does WWW business (Facebook) and a group of entities that all do Internet communication business.  

Timothy Karr makes the distinction between the Internet and how a WWW business wants to use it to fence off its own WWW related (paying to play) associate entities to be the only entities on the WWW to be accessed by those that are given free access to the Internet communication system aka: The Internet of connected computers that enable communication with the entire WWW.

It is about Net Neutrality.  A concept that should be taught in second grade. 

The situation is like "Close Encounters of the Third Kind".  However in this case we are having and encounter with something that we (the brilliant among us) have created but is not understood by the rest of us that have to figuratively go back to first grade in order to understand it.  Like the movie we, the general unaware population are compellingly drawn to it, are in awe of it, but do not understand it.  It therefore will dominate us like an alien landing on our planet to take control of us.

The beauty of the movie was that an alien entity landed on our planet to educate us all starting with first grade to learn and control a technology to enhance our lives, not control or restrict the lives of any segment of our entire population.

However, the sequel to the movie, if there was one, might have taken a darker turn if the alien intent was to teach us just enough to be hooked by the technology user interface (analogous to the WWW) without understanding the nature of its underlying communication structure (analogous to the Internet) and that we ultimately became controlled by management of where we could go in using the technology through the system that provides access.

Think about it.

Does this sound like being expelled from the Garden of Eden by means of denying access to a forbidden fruit.

 Truly biblical in proportion leading to all kinds of interesting implications of the role that human beings with great power over such matters intend to play.  They however are not god unless we allow them to play god.

We allow them to play god when we do not understand what they are doing and ambiguity is their tool to disguise it.

Something of third kind in a world where there are fundamentally two conceptual elements of human consciousness: 

Thing Object with two natures

and

Action

Where those two elements relate or are brought together in a trinity relationship among a thing with two natures (Subject/Object) and and action that joins them to create abstract Subject/Action/Object meaning.

Introduction of a "Third Kind" elevates the nature of it all to a whole new level, whatever that may be but we are all in the first grade to find out what it is.  We will never progress in our learning until we grasp the relationship nature of physical object entities to conceptual object entities and the actions that connect them.  Taking the great leap forward into a new world that this presents to us will fall short if we do not understand the fundamentals that will get us there.

Our reach will exceed our grasp.

Stated as the epitaph of the human race it might be:

"Their reach exceeded their grasp".

Robert Browning used the phrase in his poem.  The use however was contextual and the meaning derived from the context of reaching for dreams.  In another context however the meaning may be that when the things we reach for and grasp in the physical sense of using them are not grasped in their under laying conceptual nature of understanding the thing what we are using our reaching action has exceeded our grasp of the thing we reach for.

When the action of reaching becomes the dominant element in the trinity of a Thing with the dual nature elements of Subject/Object connected by the action element then we have lost sight of what we are reaching for.  The meaning of the action is in understanding the truth of the object.  When our reach action exceeds knowledge grasp of the nature of the subject truth thing joined to the nature of the object truth thing we are reaching for then our reach has exceeded our grasp and conceptually we have failed.  

It is like Wile E. Coyote attempting to jump a canyon and failing to make the distance.  His reach for the other side exceeded his grasp of the truth of Mass, Speed and Gravity.  The name Wile E. Coyote is a play on words.  Wily Coyote was "Wily" meaning crafty in the use of actions to catch Road Runner.  

Wile E. Coyote was action oriented without adequate grasp of the objects used in his actions to catch Road Runner.

Road Runner was object oriented and understood that knowledge of object relationship in his environment could always be used to defeat the actions of Wile E. Coyote that did not understand the knowledge of objects in his environment but only the action of catching and eating to satisfy want.

How did I get to a cartoon when I started out with the Internet and the World Wide Web?

Beats me.

Am I Wile E. Coyote or Road Runner.

Which one do I reach to be and what does it have to do with grasp?</sup>
 
 

Solidarity Economics and Corporate Capitalism

My recent tangent on local economics and allegiances just seems to extend itself as I do my browsing of the general internet on my favorite site:  NakedCapitalism.com

This link appearing in CounterPunch.org extends the thinking:

Toward a Solidarity Economy; Other Economies Are Possible by Ethan Miller

Solidarity Economy is a generic term I have not seen before but as a social entity it has some substance in ideology as well as budding practice.  It is the "other approach" of solving the problem from the bottom up with different objectives than the prevalent approach of the top down capitalism method.

"Consider this: thousands of diverse, locally-rooted, grassroots economic projects are in the process of creating the basis for a viable democratic alternative to capitalism. It might seem unlikely that a motley array of initiatives such as worker, consumer, and housing cooperatives, community currencies, urban gardens, fair trade organizations, intentional communities, and neighborhood self-help associations could hold a candle to the pervasive and seemingly all-powerful capitalist economy."

 

Great stuff!

 

Read the link!

 

One disadvantage of bottom up assembly is that growth can be nipped in the bud or simply starved of sunlight at the bottom overshadowed by growth above it.  A tree is harder to fell but grows no more at its maturity, eventually to die and be replaced by new growth.  

 

The local bottom up approach scalable quickly for application at other local levels always lurked in the shadows of my thoughts about the grand top down silver bullet to address the problem.  That local scalable approach is emerging.  Maybe I will call it the Facebook model.  It incorporates allegiance analysis and associated priorities.

 

In a different way of looking at it:  Solidarity Economics takes on the identification of a non-profit enterprise.  Basically a business with a business model that is not classic "profit" but non-profit to the extent that anything produced in classic profit terms goes back into general the general social welfare of everyone even if it might be a targeted group like bike helmets for children ditributed at safety classes by firemen or bike clubs.  Alternatively invested as a business growth expense in a public serving enterprise.

 

 

Secret Corporate Takeover and Relative Bargaining Power

After reading my last blog entry and thinking more about it this link tells about what is the conceptual imperative that drives everything:

Investor Protection!  In an indirect way I covered that by saying it was all about reducing economic risk.  Investor Protection by another point of view in my opinion if not in fact.

That is what TPP is all about.  That is what prohibiting local level laws regarding plastic bags is all about as well.  In a roundabout way I said that in the prior blog entry.  In the context of the prior blog entry point of view everything in this link can be interpreted to apply all the way down to the local level as far as Economic Investor Protection is concerned.

"The Secret Corporate Takeover"

The link concludes:

Rules and regulations determine the kind of economy and society in which people live. They affect relative bargaining power, with important implications for inequality, a growing problem around the world. The question is whether we should allow rich corporations to use provisions hidden in so-called trade agreements to dictate how we will live in the twenty-first century. I hope citizens in the US, Europe, and the Pacific answer with a resounding no.
Read more at http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/us-secret-corporate-takeover-by-joseph-e--stiglitz-2015-05#w1i2WEppMzvgefT4.99

The bottom line:  Rules and regs determine the economy and society.  They are a function of realtive bargaining power.  The balance of relative power is no longer Corporate and Union.  Unions have no power.  It is Corporate and "The Public"  The public not being a customer but a resource to exploit at the expense of its own interest which is economic but far beyond that its best interests are social and the general welfare which are non-economic and trump economics of Investor Interests.

All economics is local.  Our form of government is based on a bottom up foundation of individual rights which are not to be abridged or infringed upon.

It looks to me like the the Corporate Model is that business is based on the foundation of individual investor protection rights that are not to be abridged or infringed upon by governmental laws that advance non-economic interests of the common good beyond investor protection rights.  If they do then investors must be made whole (paid off) by the public (our appropriate level of governmental law, national, state or local) for loss of actual or future (mark to mark believe) profits.

Therefore:

All economics is local because any and all settlement payments under the rights of Investor Protection under the laws enabling it at the national, state or local level fall upon the citizen.

Fundamentally it is the consumer at the foundational base of our economic systems that produces profit or, if they impinge on the making of profit by any law or regulation under Investor Protection rules must pay the penalty in accordance with the law.

We Pledge Allegiance To The Corporation And The Investors For Which They Stand.

Not me, not my town, not my state, not my country.

No TPP at any level.

After thought:

On of the bug/features of TPP is settlement of disputes through mediation.  A non-judicial system method of resolution.  A form much in favor by corporate interests and the method specified in the small print of consumer contracts as the default agreed upon method of settlement of dispute.  Much in favor by corporate interests because it stacks the deck (good old risk reduction, reward maximization business plan) in favor of the corporation.

They who write the rules.....rule!  (By circumventing governmental judicial system with their own system or owning the government legislative system that writes the rules, the executive branch that applies and enforces the rules and the judicial branch that interprets the rules.)  I did listen in high school civics but that did not tell me how the system really works.

The other day I read an excellent link describing who were the writers of TPP.  Corporate types and those that went through the swinging door either way from business to government, public to related private interests.  That might be another interesting Allegiance relationship to examine but the conclusion is too obvious to waste the time to support it.

Why?

Its all about the money.

Duh!

It is often surprising to discover that some things are not the same as always fundamentally believed to be.....

Shadows on the wall..........and

Truth

One thing I continue to believe is that if we get firm foundation in the concept of what money is (digital discretely identified units of value each with a value of one dollar operating in a block chain transaction system of exchange among discretely identified entity owner accounts)  then we can manage for the common good what money does (economics) by simply following the metrics of money to learn what it does on the macro and micro level.

 

Local Level Allegiance, Economic and Law and Corporate National and International Profits

An interesting thing today that relates to my penultimate blog entry looking at where are allegiances are and observing that perhaps an economic model where are closest to home, geographically or ideologically are the strongest and most important.  In that case it would be city over state, state over national government.  Localized economic allegiance intended to serve state and federal government is the same manner that military allegiance to ones own brothers in arms in warfare (we fight for one another) serves our national welfare (or not when it serves national special interest?)

This is the report that caught my interest:

States saying 'no' to cities seeking to regulate businesses 

It is about the fundamental rights of levels of government.  

Governance is a matter determined by we the people.   Local allegiance to local interests would restructure governance and its associated governmental powers structure.  

Would local allegiance with less higher level restriction power result in segmentation and associated conflict among city to city, city to state, state to nation?  Or, is it the basis for a model that would lead to benefits of local citizenship vs higher level economic control of affairs?

 "We need to give companies and businesses some predictability and some consistency in their operations so that they can grow," said Shaul, a freshman Republican representative from the St. Louis suburb of Imperial, whose anti-bag ban measure is pending before Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon."

Is this TPP corporate profit policy and treaty law at the natioanl/international level in microcosm?  If a city passes law that would make it liable for loss of profits to an external corporate entity could the city be sued for loss of current or future profits?  Of course that situation would never exist if higher level governmental law of the land prohibited or restricted legal power of a city to pass laws that would have that result in the first place.

Looking closer at level of government control of economics casts some interesting light on ALEC.  On the one hand it seeks to limit national economic control that would adversely affect business profit.  Recent report on the aims of ALEC reveal that it applies the same approach to state and local government.  The conclusion is that special economic interests related to profit making and taking aggregate to representational entities Like ALEC that seek to control anything and everything at any level of governmental or external agency level that is adverse to pure profit.

 If that is ALEC ideology then it is the same that is driving TPP that makes profit the supreme parent law of the world as well as its all of its lower level governmental segmentation's inheriting the attributes of the parent law of global corporate dominance that extends that dominance down to the local level.

ALEC Exposed 

Plastic bags would seem to be inconsequential at the local level.  In the bigger picture if local law on plastic bags and its relationship to economic profit making interests beyond the local level sets the precedent then where does local level power to legislate these types economic/profit matters stop?

 To answer my own question:  Local level interest to regulate local rules is not dominated by external economic profit interests when the local rules are aimed at objectives that exceed the general welfare domain beyond the profit interest level.  

Social welfare, environmental welfare at the local level trumps the power domain interests of corporate profit at any level?

 Maybe a good model!

That is why if legislation fails to hamstring local government law and rules plan B would be to establish law that would allow corporations to sue cities (states too) for actual or future loss of profits.  Plan A for corporation is not to have to go to plan B by simply establishing law at the state  making it illegal for cities to pass any law at the local level adverse to actual current or future corporate profits.  It is simple risk reduction action on the part of corporate welfare.

Hey, its just business not personal.

This is the concluding paragraph from the link:

 "City councils and mayors "don't have some kind of organic legal authority to do whatever they want," said Missouri state Sen. Kurt Schaefer, a Republican attorney general candidate from Columbia. "It would be absolute bedlam what some of these communities would do to their citizens if they had that ability."

Yeahbut! Take a different point of view: Look at what communities would do for their citizens if they had that ability!  

Who is your daddy?  Somebody looking out for you and your majority general interest at the local level that as a citizen has a greater degree of influence on or somebody at the state and national level that has a special interest economic profit making/taking client? 

 

 

 

 

Self Driving Cars for the Ignorant

This news item is the reason for this blog entry:
  
Nissan Will Have Self-Driving Cars By 2020, CEO Says

 I had to edit the subject line a couple of times.  It started out with harsh adjectives describing the drivers that that would be moved to the passenger seat replaced at the wheel by a robot chauffeur.  The subject line I used is the 4th iteration of toning it down and actually is a good segue to what follows.

The lead from the link:

"YOKOHAMA, Japan (AP) — Nissan Motor Co. will have vehicles packed with autonomous driving technology by 2020 but whether people will be able to drive them on roads is up to government regulators, Chief Executive Carlos Ghosn said Monday.
Many of the world's automakers, and companies outside the auto industry such as Google, are working on technologies that allow cars to navigate without human intervention."

There will never be self driving cars that replace driver control of the vehicle.  The clear and simple truth about the goal and objective is that there will be self monitoring cars that control the live driver behind the wheel and to a lesser extent the passengers in the vehicle. It is all about controlling people not direct control of vehicle independent of a person.

The way that this control of the driver, not the vehicle is to be implemented is to design all internal and external inputs to a vehicle's computer that would produce the direct output to the various systems that would autonomously "drive" the car totally independent of the driver.  That would all come standard with the vehicle.  However the computer output and the physical means to mechanically control all the various robotic self driving systems would never be installed or only installed as a standard or optional feature.  For example; the current Mercedes self braking system if an imminent crash situation is detected. 

The purpose of this self driving vehicle concept is a Trojan Horse to sneak in control of the driver not the vehicle.  Input of all data necessary to self drive a car will have little or no output to actually drive the car.  It will all be input data recorded to a black box with relatively no output to mechanical systems but recorded for information purposes about the driver.

Much recording of vehicle and driver data and retention to memory in the vehicle computer and external transmission to some server is already being done.  My prior blog entry about the Progressive Insurance dongle on the OBD2 system describes that.  Future increased data input is described by my prior blog entry identifying patents filed by Google for future input to vehicle computers related to everything necessary for a self driving car that will never really self drive but will totally self monitor all inputs including driver inputs and related data like location and external circumstantial information.

A dongle is just an after the fact computer device added to a computer because the functionality of the dongle was not built into the computer in the first place.  A means to update an old computer to new functionality by a physical device attachment.   However it is an attached physical device that can as easily be detached like pulling the plug on a household electric device.  The OBD will be renamed some day soon with some euphemistic description when it becomes a computer with total functionality built in (built in to the extent that it is the default control system without which the vehicle cannot be operated or fiddled with).   The fiddled with part will be justified by crypto protection to avoid vehicle hacking by anyone for any reason.

Airliners already have a very sophisticated pilot monitoring system as well as auto pilot control systems.  Drones do not even have an on board human pilot.  However, those systems can be hacked is shown by the recent hacking of a commercial passenger plane to take over flight control:

Feds Say That Banned Researcher Commandeered a Plane.

The object of the self driving car is total information all the time about the vehicle and its driver.  It is not the control of a vehicle to chauffer a  person, never will be.  It is about control of the person chauffering a computer that sees all and reports all.  

For what purpose?  The general welfare?  

Seat belts and helmets are law because failure to wear them are a potential burden on society and avoidable tax on medical system resources when accidents result in medical bills.  It is for our own good.  How much more can be justified for out own good but in reality the corporate good to increase profit and decrease cost?

Creeping corporatism sold under the banner of marketing one thing (driver less cars, leave the driving to us) but delivering something that makes more money:  "Let Us Drive You While You Are Driving Car,  we know who you are, where you are and exactly what you are doing."

Several prior blog entries looked at the pay as you drive gas tax plan that is currently being tested in the state of Oregon.  It requires a dongle now to record and report milage.

Creeping corporate control that has creepy aspects related to information collection in domains that were previously unknown and assumed to be private simply because the state of the art technology was not in existence to monitor them.

It is now and more to come..........how the skids are being greased is a tribute to the state of the art in marketing technology to disguise the old business model of bait and switch.  

The self driving car and all its wonders is what we might be lead to expect but that certainly is not what we will get and anyone is takes the bait is ignorant of the switch.  Actually a very elegant strategy that I have often written about at this site in prior blog entries describing the self skinning cat concept.

I wanna get me one of them self driving cars and ride around in the back seat like one of them 1% ers smoking a big cigar and drinkin champagne.  My apologies to people who speak like that, stereotype is not intended.  Those that buy this concept that leads us down the road of being controlled are however as ignorant as the Fox news stereotype implies even if they are English Majors.

 

A Citizen's Social Pledge of Allegiance -

My prior post grabbed an idea and wandered around with thoughts about it.  The idea was a restructuring of the relative importance and priority of an individual's social/economic/political relationships and "Pledge of Allegiance" on the basis of what is closest to home.  It is all about local mutual support alliances as a first order of priority.

This morning being Sunday is a good time to think about a Pledge that works and how it would benefit us as free citizens in pursuit of happiness both individually and collectively.  Any number of people more than one is a social matter.  This link appearing this morning rounds out one aspect of my thinking from the prior post:

The New Progressive Agenda: A Return to Citizenship by Toni Morrison

 "The difference between understanding oneself as a citizen and understanding oneself as a taxpayer is not merely wide; it is antagonistic. A citizen thinks primarily about his or her community and is preoccupied with the safety of the neighborhood, the health of the elderly and disabled, the well-being of the young. A taxpayer thinks mostly about himself or herself, about who or what is taxing -- that is to say "taking" -- his hard-earned money to give to some undeserving body or some other distant, wasteful thing..................

The Progressive Agenda seeks to return us to citizenship, the happily adult responsibility of being citizens to each other. It's concerned with how to ensure a livable wage for all of us; how to improve schools in all our neighborhoods; how to protect working-class jobs and pensions from predators who rely on exploitation and selfish behavior; how to welcome the immigrant, the "huddled masses" we all (except for Native Americans and slaves) once were."

The Army Soldier's Creed sets and order of importance:

I am an American Soldier.
I am a warrior and a member of a team.
I serve the people of the United States, and live the Army Values...........

This link about bonds formed by combatants:

“What the military learned pretty early on . . . is that people die for the person beside them, not for their country or for any ideology,” McQuinn said.

This link illustrates the same motivation for super heroes.

The social bonds are often directly related to shared experience with the strength of the bond determined by the length of time shared and the magnitude of the shared emotion.  People that by chance simply happened to be the few survivors of a plane crash bond together to the extent that they may reunite annually.  Married couples attain the same degree of bonding by sharing many years together.  Mutual dependence and sharing and the degree of dedication related to them establishes social bonds.  So does shared fear, as long as it is perpetuated, often beyond reason when there is a focused narrow interest agenda that benefits from it.

The nature and relationship of motivation through fear or altruism is an interesting thing to ponder and apply to the the social order.  Fear shared among a social entity creates bonding as well as altruism among those in the social entity to be.

Interesting side note here.   Read the link to get the full context.

"The Pledge of Allegiance was written in August 1892 by Francis Bellamy (1855–1931), who was a Baptist minister, a Christian socialist,^[5][6] and the cousin of socialist utopian novelist Edward Bellamy (1850–1898)....  and formally adopted by Congress as the pledge in 1942.<sup>[1]"

The Pledge has been challenged for various reasons.  Challenge is thought provoking but to be constructive the social entity of the object of a shared pledge either included or excluded or placed in a relative priority is the free choice of an individual.  One may choose to put God above nation or honestly, any other social entity relationship.  

In Japan, the corporate employer gets a pledge from its workers and a company song of dedication.

Robert Reich proposes this pledge of allegiance by companies since they are people:</sup>

"The Corporate Pledge of Allegiance to the United States

• We pledge to create more jobs in the United States than we create outside the United States, either directly or in our foreign subsidiaries and subcontractors.
• If we have to lay off American workers, we will give them severance payments equal to their
• The [fill in blank] company pledges allegiance to the United States of America. To that end:
• weekly wage times the number of weeks they've work for us.
• We further pledge that no more than 20 percent of our total labor costs will be outsourced abroad.
• We pledge to keep a lid on executive pay so no executive is paid more than 50 times the median pay of American workers. We define "pay" to include salary, bonuses, health benefits, pension benefits, deferred salary, stock options, and every other form of compensation.
• We pledge to pay at least 30 percent of money earned in the United States in taxes to the United States. We won't shift our money to offshore tax havens and won't use accounting gimmicks to fake how much we earn.
• We pledge not to use our money to influence elections.

Companies that make the pledge are free to use it in their ads over the Christmas shopping season."


 <sup>I like it!

The best expression of individual affiliation with a social entity is the one they make for themselves.  While we are all in service to the joint social union we have created (USA) like soldiers in the army we fulfill that service to ourselves by first and foremost dedication above all to the most immediate, most personally important social entity of our choice.  It is our freedom of choice as long as it does not impinge on the rights of others in our country.

In conclusion, it would be a good thing to set the allegiance record of our lives straight by each citizen deciding where their most immediate allegiance is and ordering their citizenship accordingly.

What would be the result of that?  God of course for most in first place.  However we serve our country most by choosing other than country in second place.  Sequential order of linear priority orders the entire list of priorities from most to least.  How can it be stated that we serve our country best by a unique relationship statement of  each individual citizen's priorities that at the end of the list says "This is how I serve my country (fellow citizens united) the best".  

Maybe what we need to establish our personal "Mission Statement" in a context of our accomplishing it in the social order we collectively support. 

Mission "Pursuit of Happiness"

Statement of personal social entity allegiance priorities in service of the general welfare aimed at "Mission Accomplished".

Every citizen (and corporation and all other social entities) should have a Citizen's (Social Entity) web page and the "About" being their own personal "Pledge of Allegiance" (and historical record of change throughout their life time).  Maybe that is a good way to get our eyes collectively on the ball. 

Just all random free range thoughts on a Sunday morning. 

"I Pledge Allegiance to Myself" by Gary Lindorff.

Gary is David Lindorff's brother.  I am familiar with and respect the thoughts of David Lindorff often read at CounterPunch.com and was surprised to discover that his brother Gary thinks along the same lines.  That is not surprising after reading here about their father; Dave Lindorff Sr.
who evidently left a strong ideological legacy to his sons.  Dave Lindorff Sr's personal Pledge of Allegiance changed over his life time to become that legacy his sons inherited as their own to change and continue to express over their lifetimes.

Gary Lindorff's writings here.

It is often initially strange to find serendipitous relationships between and among previously known independent entities that become new found connections as I free range wander on the internet.  Perhaps not so surprising after all since the general rule of relationships is that everything is connected.  The more I roam, conceptually or geographically the more I find the connection  of everything.</sup>

The joy of discovery!

Gary wrote "Tribute to Snowden".  A fitting poem to illustrate the power of Allegiance to Myself.

The legacy of father passed to son named Edward? 

I would hope.

Perhaps are journey through life is marked by mile posts where allegiances changed and a new course was followed.  The quality of the journey defined by the clarity of their purpose and.....what?
 

 

TPP Policy Cuts Both Ways? Japanese citizens organize to sue because: TPP

TPP would establish rules allowing a corporation to sue a government for profits or future profits lost due to government regulations.  The suit would be presented to a non-governmental arbitration board.

In the USA citizens cannot (generally) sue the government.  This link for background.  If they did (and in some permissible cases actually do) it would of course be a mater for our judicial system.
  
"Over 1000 Japanese Citizens Band Together To Sue Their Government Over Participation In TPP"

Fast Track means there is no additions to the proposed treaty.  If an addition could be added to the treaty then all nations party to the treaty must allow citizens that form an international corporation based in another country (Cayman Islands) to sue their own government for their financial and non-monetary losses (pain and suffering) caused by TPP.

What does it take to set up an International Corporation?  Not much, I think.  Ever heard of a Dummy Corporation?

Hey, Mr. International Corporation and Governments, just playing by your rules.  

Any settlement of a citizen corporation suit would of course be passed on to the tax payers in general.  So was the banking failure.  Looks like legal precedent unless anything too big to fail is too big to win a judgment against.  Perhaps the Citizen Corporation should sue the specific international corporation jointly and government?  Like suing the crook and the horse they rode in on.  Government admitting to wrong doing and the international corporation paying the penalty fine.

How many American citizens would participate in a suit against our government under the cover of being a foreign corporation?  Clearly a funny thing!  In court the US government as plaintiff meaning (on behalf of) the citizens of the USA bring legal action against the accused.  In international arbitration the USA is the accused.  Something that is not allowed within our system.

International Class Action:  Citizens of the USA suing the USA for financial damages in an international arbitration court established under the TPP treaty where there is no appeal of the final decision.  

If we could directly sue our own government for wrong doing (favoring the few at the expense of the many) we could all get as rich as the 1%!  It would only work if the 1% were required to form their own conglomerate corporation that would be required to pay the fine. 

The general rule of "citizen belonging relationship" is that all citizens belong to a national sovereign government nation.  No person is without a country.  It is an absolute relationship.  Perhaps that relationship should be restructured.  No person is without a corporation.  That relationship leaps the bounds of geographical domains.  That, of course, can only happen when corporations become the dominant power structure over nations.  

Doesn't TPP do that? 

In an intriguing way the change in relationship of a citizen to their nation would reverse the default nature of the democratic vote.  It would become what a citizen is voting directly against rather (being ripped off) than who they are voting for that becomes an agent facilitating the rip off by international corporations that have no moral imperative other than profit.  If business and profit is all this world is about and it is business vs business then perhaps citizens should form their own corporations rather than nations.  

A citizens corporation would (of course) be non profit. 

Would that be called a Union?

Workers of the World Unite?

Workers of the World Inc. ????? 

TPP puts US citizens in an adversarial relationship to their own government.  Perhaps we must remind ourselves to our right to representation by a lawyer in a court of civil or criminal justice against our own government when it abrogates its responsibility to its citizens by actions related to a greater responsibility to international treaties that demand payment from citizens (via our government) that are financially damaging and contrary to our national sovereignty and right to establish our own laws of the land.

Scapegoat Economics - Us vs Them- Richard Wolff

The subject line of this entry is the topic of this talk by Richard Wolff.

I have been thinking about the politics of division for the past week.  While my entries focus on what money is, what money does is economics.  The politics of division that get the press relate to sex and race, national origin, religion.  I think that economic "Us vs Them" is as great a division factor as any of these because it relates across the board to the greatest number of people.  Everyone relates to what money is.

Without money there is no food or shelter to be obtained.  However, most have enough money for the needs of food and shelter.  What most don't have is enough money to satisfy wants, not needs.  Satisfaction of wants are a relative thing stimulated by marketing to create them.  Needs and wants are the subject of a simple sentence where the subject is the personal pronoun "I" the verb is "Need/Want" and the object of the sentence is some "Thing".  Money is the universal "Thing" that like potential energy can be transformed into anything and everything.

NeedWant is an interesting verb to parse.  Yes, a verb.  Not a noun.   Think of it in its Infinitive form as explained here.  Verbs are more readily recognizable simply by putting the word "to" in front of them.  The concept of NeedWant is a continuum.  Think of it in the scientific domain of Space/Time as defined here.  Hard to know where one thing becomes another on the continuum line because they are transformations of the same thing.  Each is the other and can be defined in terms of the other.  A scientific representation of Yin and Yang as described here.

Economics as described here is: 

"Economics is the social science that seeks to describe the factors which determine the production, distribution and consumption of goods and services."

Money as described here is:

"Money is any item or verifiable record that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts in a particular country or socio-economic context."

People can believe anything they want on the continuum of thought regarding the social issues of sex, race, national origin and religion.  One thing that everyone can agree on without any doubt is the belief that money gets stuff.  It permeates our lives as a value more than anything else.

What money does socially as an Economic thing is a great uniter and divider.  Like Space/Time, it does both things and each can be explained in terms of the other.  Money is a creature of the social conceptual domain.  What Money "Is" is a simple thing to explain.  What money "Does" to unite and divide people is complex.

My recent line of thinking asks the question:  What groups of society does money and economics unite and divide?  That line of thinking was kicked off with a joke I can't remember but I recall the premise of the intended meaning of the joke.  This is an explanation which of course will not make anyone laugh but it will convey the idea of the joke without the amusement.  Maybe that is the way Economists look at the world.

The joke compares the way three different nationalities look at the relationship between God, country, and family and individual in the order of importance.  Parsing the joke it is evident that if told to three people, each a stereotypical representation one of the nationalities.   Each person would laugh and get it.  However, the object of the amusement would be the other two nationalities and their ordering of priorities.  The 2nd order of the joke would be each nationality laughing at the order in which members of the own nationality order priorities that are different than theirs. 

Get it?

Ha! Ha!

It is subtle.

As subtle as Us vs Them.  Me vs You.

As subtle as Patton's speech to the Third Army:

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. You won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.^[22]"

The Economic Capitalism riff on this in the rip-off killing mode is self evident. 

Richard Wolff is a Socialist.  Maybe call him a Heterodox Economist but Socialist is a term that is getting greater respect recently, so is Bernie Sanders.  A term and respect that creates fear in the heart of a Capitalist in the Us vs Them war.

Capitalism is increasingly aggregating wealth to the top 1%.  This accumulation of wealth to the 1% is in large part due to the accumulation of monetary debt to the 99%.

There is a difference between Wealth and Debt.

"Wealth is the abundance of valuable resources or valuable material possessions. This includes the core meaning as held in the originating old English word weal, which is from an Indo-European word stem.^[1] An individual, community, region or country that possesses an abundance of such possessions or resources to the benefit of the common good is known as wealthy."

A debt generally refers to money owed by one party, the borrower or debtor, to a second party, the lender or creditor. Debt is generally subject to contractual terms regarding the amount and timing of repayments of principal and interest.^[1]

Debt is related to money.  Money obtained by contractual debt spends just as well as cash held as debt free by the owner.  (but is a representation of debt held by someone else because all money is created by debt and is therefore 100% debt based).

A better definition of wealth is the extent to which personal ownership of things is free from a debt relationship.  Some people have a greater amount of debt than the value of the things they own.  They are not wealthy.  At social economic levels beyond the personal level of wealth/debt individuals have greater common interest in the general level of wealth or opportunity for wealth (increased wealth or reduction in debt as the case may be).  The order of individual economic priorities as they relate to social economic segments depends on what maximizes benefit (or potential benefit) to the individual.

The most immediate economic benefit to an individual is to be in the lifeboat.  Once in it then a rising economic tide is the next benefit of being on board that specific economic boat which is just a metaphor for Economic Tribalism:

Tribalism is the state of being organized in, or advocating for, a tribe or tribes. In terms of conformity, tribalism may also refer in popular cultural terms to a way of thinking or behaving in which people are more loyal to their tribe than to their friends, their country, or any other social group.^[1]


Everything that preceded this paragraph was an elaborate stage setting that if used as a presentation by a teacher to a class would find the class asleep at this point.  However, it gets to what Richard Wolff is saying, the current economic situation and the antidote to national capitalism distribution of wealth to the 1%.

What is that solution?

Creation of wealth at the local level.  That is the tribe of choice for the 99%.  Creation of wealth at the 1% National level means a race to the bottom for everyone else.  How many in the 1% owe their wealth to a less than national level source?  Is there some writing on the wall here?

On the economic order of priority level, the local level, nearest to each of us, is most important for wealth accumulation at the local level.

My town is my tribe if that is where my income I transform into wealth is derived.  My town vs your town.  My state vs your state.

Produce Local.

Buy Local.

All politics is local?

All economics is local.

All (fill in the blank) is local.

All social justice is local.  Interesting idea.  The term "All Social Justice is Local" gets no hits on a google search.  I therefore claim bragging rights to be the first to say it as far as Google is concerned.  If it is true for politics then why not for social justice which is really what politics is all about?

So, I come to the conclusion of the formation of this idea:

In the same manner that our balance of payments is of vital concern to the wealth of our nation, the balance of payments at the corporate level is vital to the existence of a business and the balance of payments at the community level is vital to the wealth of our communities.  It all depends on taking in more than is given out?

Me and my balance of payments (to take in more money than I give out) and translate that difference into wealth (net worth) is the prime rule in personal economics.  My tribe taking in more money than it gives out and tribal wealth is the next most important level of economics relating directly to me.  That tribal level may be national, state, county, city, district, family.  Whichever gives the most economic security.

Big Question:  For most people that level of economic security is closest to primary or secondary local geographical level?

Buy local.  A good idea.

Sell at and beyond the local level and buy at the local level more than above that level.

A good idea for personal and local geographic wealth accumulation?

If that is true it leads to the concept of community geographic wealth.

My town as an economic corporate capitalist enterprise in which I am an economic stake holder?

My town vs your town?

Do we trade or exploit?

Is capitalism a trade or an exploitation?

It seems to me that in the Wall Street vs Main Street the situation is that Main Street holds all the resources that are being exploited by Wall Street.  Wall Street owns national level politics.

The Us vs Them economic relationship is therefore National Political/Economic Level vs Local Political/Economic Level.  That is the battlefield of Economics where the playing field must be leveled.  Local economic entities are the source of wealth and have greater aggregate economic power than national economic entities.  Why is it that the economic wealth is aggregating at the national economic entity 1% level?

Simple:  National level corporate economics is extractive of the local level using the same model of world level corporate entities that are extractive of nations.

In conclusion to all the above:  Here is the test question......................since us vs them, me vs you is the primary decisive and divisive social relationship of the day.  The training ground for first person shooters training for youth and the model for economic warfare...I mean competition. 

What entity and its interests is it that you are going to fight for and what is it that you are fighting for?

God and salvation?

Old Glory and Freedom?

Your tribe ( employing entity, race, school, state, city, ideological group, family) and mutual support/benefit commitment?

Yourself and your own best interests?

Maybe one way of determining the order of importance and priority is determining the degree of benefit/survival related to entity affiliation.

Money is a substantial and universal measure of benefit for both those that have it and those that do not.  The economic entity relationship that is most important is the one that gives the greatest monetary benefit/return.  Working up successively higher levels of entity relationship applies the same logic but in relationship to the individual higher level entities become multiple as well as directly less important to the individual but each higher level entity has its own most important Parent relationship.

The most important economic entities to an individual are those closest to home and where we live.  Geographically or conceptually. 

The economic importance of our own city and its contribution to the general economic welfare of all those that live in it is a potentially exploitable economic resource that does not receive the economic attention of its own population.  If a city had the business model of our nation then government and business in the city would work together as a corporate enterprise to maximize a balance of trade to increase city net worth with each citizen being a stock holder.

Us vs Them would become My City vs Your City in a zero sum game.

The moral imperative in this relationship would be that like a family, nobody in the city screws another member of the city.

In the domain of Capitalism there is an important term called "Utility".  A search of the term 'Capitalism Utility' presents many different views of the term.  At the individual worker level, their Utility is what they get paid for.  The same is true up the line of parent business/economic entities at higher levels.

If a city were to maximize the exploitation of its resources for economic gain using a business model then each of its citizens would have a degree of utility to the business (or not as the cost/benefit of an individual is evaluated).  The city as a business would maximize external governmental income as well as collective city private enterprise income.  Measurement of success would be a balance of trade balance sheet and profit and loss statement.

All economics is local, at least the most important self serving economics as far as the individual is concerned.

Buy as much local as possible to benefit the economics of the city.

The flip side of that is that money does not drain out of the city.

Sell as much external as possible.

The flip side of that is that income to the corporate city exceeds expenditure.

It is just business.

Socialism gets a bad rap.  Maybe it is a least effective economic model at the federal level, even the state level.  However at the local city level, if the city uses and "our tribe, our family" moral/economic model then perhaps "Socialism", taking care of our own on a moral/business model basis at the city/family level is the competitive path of the general common welfare?

What would that lead to?  "Gated" states, cities, neighborhoods?  Each gated entity seeking to admit the lowest cost employees to maximize its economic profit and keep out economic burdens that do not contribute?  Or would it lead to benevolence and sharing of abundance. 

What kind of business model is benevolence and sharing of abundance?

A moral/business model at the city/community level?

If corporations are people, my friend, then make cities a corporation rather than a political entity.  The idea that a city is purely a political entity is fallacious anyhow.  It really is a pseudo business and has an alliance with the business community more than the citizens it serves.  Just like the national level government.