Hacking is the future

We have some of the world's best tech people concentrated in the Silicon Valley. One would think we could easily gain the upper hand.

Which is offset by the worst people in the world running our government and controlling our response to foreign intervention, as we've seen repeatedly for the last 2 years and 189 days.

China arguably has some of the best hackers in the world. But, then again, China doesn’t need to rely solely on that to dominate the world - they have 1.4 billion people who can be mobilised, they have nukes, and they’re now an integral part of the world outsourcing economy thanks to Globalisation. Because of the latter, domination was practically handed to them on a plate.

Best hackers are everywhere. Russia also has many great ones, the US, Japan, Korea, the EU, they're all over.

I once read that Diabold, which makes voting machines, are owned by far-Right wingers.

Votes are held and tallied by local figures at the State level or lower. So, they may need guidance from the Fed level but at the same time, I think it’s good that the Feds aren’t heavily involved in managing the voting process.

Yeah, those evil Feds will do some crazy shit, like count every vote and make sure every citizen can vote.

Com’on, R7. Would you want Trump or his Fascist followers dictating nationwide voting requirements? If any single entity is running the show, it means a single instance of illegality can be spread nationwide. Maybe every 10th Dem vote is not counted? Or certain Dem precincts don’t get tallied at all?

Oh, OP. You are a child.

You should read about the Portuguese and British opium trade in China from the late 1600s through the late 1800s that wholly undermined China, led to two wars and finally the Boxer Rebellion. Under Mao, all opium was made illegal and 10 Million addicts were forced into camps for treatment. Just in one province, the collected *taxes* on sales were equal to over $300 Million in current dollars.

TEN MILLION. Over 1 million soldiers were regularly smoking opium when Japan invaded.

Opiates control a country much more easily than hacking - and the country you take over will pay for it.

OPIATES.

I once attended an interesting talk given by some college-kid hackers (they were a mixed international group, Dutch or British, can't remember). They previously hacked a newspaper's front-page and pulled some prank on it. They were hunted down and thrown in prison for that (which I think was a bit excessive, but anyway). They mostly talked about what their punishment was.

For example, they were forbidden from using the Internet for a certain time period under the "conditions" of their release. AFAIK, they weren't even allowed to use email! I had to laugh trying to imagine their restricted life. How do you do research in college without access to the web? How do you communicate with prospective employers without email? It's like they were forced to live back in the 'olden days' of carrier pigeons :).

*period of time

I, for one, genuinely believe the 2016 election was hacked, and that Trump did not win. Trump did not win the electoral college. Hillary Clinton did. The tallies were hacked and it was reported that Trump won 3 states by a narrow margin, than 1%. Approximately 78,000 votes.

Not only did Clinton win, but it wasn't even particularly close. Ponder that thesis and it explains SO MUCH.

How many others also believe this?

*less than 1%.

R12, I don’t know, but I am open to the possibility.

r12 I do and It is 100% the truth. Everything you said, happened.

On another point- should we flood Russia with Oxy?

Hacking is, indeed, terrifying. They can steal your money from banks, cripple grids......the list is endless.

R12 I believe it. Recent stories are warning about Russian meddling and others are now ‘poised’ to change votes. I believe they already had this ability and did so in 2016.

R12, I’ve always believed that. Trump “won” several places by just enough to barely win...it’s statistically unlikely that he could win by the exact same margin in several different races.

I also think someone replaced screenshots inside the way back machine to smear Joy Reid. That could be done quite easily. Just doctor a tweet to appear homophobic, & replace the original wayback image with the doctored image.

So if Trump’s presidency is illegitimate, then so are his scotus appointees. They need to go.

R12 Um, i believe it!

Trump didn’t win the election. I’m not into conspiracy theories but the margin by which he “won” needs to be investigated one day. The US has been hacked for nearly 3 years now. I’d bet my life on it.

Remember after the election they were trying to do recounts and Trumps lawyers showed up and shut that shit down?

[quote] R18: So if Trump’s presidency is illegitimate, then so are his scotus appointees. They need to go.

His SCOTUS appointments probably can’t be forced out. The independent judiciary is supposed to be isolated from politics. And those justices were also Senate confirmed.

Instead, the next Dem President could get the SCOTUS expanded by a few new Justices, to dilute the Trump appointments. I think that would be easiest. They could even arrange to shrinking the court back to 11, by attrition, afterward.

but, r22...if he stole the election, then he’s a fraud. And his appointments are fraudulent, too.

R23, but there is no mechanism for firing a justice. As for stealing the election, once the electoral votes are certified, as they were, there is no mechanism for declaring them invalid.

I would love to see that corrupt Clarence Thomas kicked off. His wife is a big DC lobbyist.

R24 "no mechanism" Our forefathers planned ahead for a lot, but no way could they have imagined this. As wonderful as our constitution is, it clearly needs to be reviewed and updated to keep up with the many and overwhelming technological advances. So much of it is obsolete. You can't use the Constitution in it's current state to address the horrible crisis we are in right now.

And how many believe Boris Johnson is the new Prime Minister of the UK legitimately?

R25, I hope so. Watergate resulted in campaign finance regulation, and other rules and customs.

I wish they could create a work-around for the Citizen’s United decision. Otherwise, that’s a mess that keeps on giving.

‘Me, r26.’

We need to oust Putin from office, with extreme prejudice. It would send a message that our enemies would all appreciate. Just like the kill/capture order for Osama bin Ladin.

Well then sign up for the military and do it yourself, R29.

I love when people say "we need to..." and actually mean "anyone but me, I'll stay over here on my porch, thanks".

[quote] And how many believe Boris Johnson is the new Prime Minister of the UK legitimately?

Everyone knows he's legitimate, R26. Because the elitist Tory party has a well-known, long-standing hard-on for him (appointing him as Foreign Secretary, supporting his candidacy for Mayor of London, etc). And the Tories are in power because Labour pissed away the election by in-fighting, and the 3rd main party (Libdems) self-destructed a while ago.

Just because you don't personally like a party leader doesn't mean he's not legitimate.

Flooding Russia with meth is certainly a good option.

For those who aren't aware, Russia has a crippling AIDS crisis and heroin addiction problem. Not unlike the US, Putin and his party exploited social fabric issues to gain power and hold onto it. You see drug addicts everywhere on the Moscow Metro, same for Saint Petersburg.

Putin's solution has been to block the media from showing them. Problem solved!

R27 I mentioned this in a previous thread.

I know MIchael Bennett is one of the least exciting Democratic candidates, but getting rid of Citizen's United is at the top of his platform. I doubt he'll make it to the top tier, but I hope his platform does.

Let’s no punish the Russian citizens...they are currently protesting in the streets.

We need to be surgical about ending Putin. Hillary has the right idea with sanctions...it makes his rubles worthless.

Otherwise, he is the richest man on the planet. He basically owns all of Russia’s assets.

What do you mean it's an "option", R32? It's already a reality, there are no "options" left - heroin specifically is flooding China and other nearby countries. So let's trace that back:

Who is the top producer & exporter of heroin in the world? Afghanistan (thanks to the US military invasion):

[quote] "Afghanistan's opium poppy harvest produces [bold]more than 90% of illicit heroin globally[/bold], and more than 95% of the European supply."

And who currently still controls Afghanistan and its opium regulation (or rather lack thereof) - Pentagon.

Only problem is it's biting not just China, Eastern Europe, but everyone in Western Europe in the ass too. Because the heroin (and other drugs) produced in US-controlled Afghanistan don't stop in the interim, halfway countries - but make their way to the endpoint by flooding Western Europe as well.

"You're welcome, Western Europe" - Dubya Bush.

Foment discord: "The Russian Spring"

There needs to be a rogue Russian media outlet reporting outside Putin's reach what is really going on in Russia. But then Putin is not afraid to poison his enemies even outside Russia.

The real problem is the right wing media selling the narrative that Trump won legitimately and that it was all the fault of Hillary and the Democratic Party. It's pretty much official that Russia fucked with the 2016 election and the GOP refuses to do anything about it to prevent it from happening again, because they benefit from that outside act of terror. And everyone, including the Democratic Party, is pussyfooting around the issue, because nobody wants to rock the boat.

The fact is that Trump is illegitimate. The Senate is illegitimate because of Russian intrusion that benefitted Trump and the GOP/Senate in the first place. As a result every single judge appointment is illegitimate.

To my knowledge, Putin was never appropriately punished for his international murders. I wish we would dramatically engage in some appropriate, though deniable, payback. You can’t have functioning diplomacy if adversarial countries are murdering people on your streets.

I liked the way Obama put it, referring to payback for meddling in our elections. He closed two Russian clubhouses, kicked out a slew of Russian spooks, embargoed a number of oligarchs, and added that there would be additional reprisal “at a time and place of our choosing” and he said something to the effect that some of it will be covert and not released to the public. The shame of it is that Trump has no doubt stopped all of that, that he can stop.

Trump probably outed all the US assets in Russia to Putin.

Nothing is going on there, R37. Just like most of the rest of Eastern Europe (Hungary, etc) and Central Asia. People seem to think that removing one person will turn it into Switzerland. The Swiss probably have the most efficient type of democracy - direct democracy. But countries that big (China, Russia, etc) will always lean towards autocracy - because otherwise they’ll collapse into chaos.

China is too big in terms of population (an electorate of 1.4 BILLION is unmanageable without an iron fist). And Russia is too big in terms of geography (11 time zones, multi-ethnic Muslim sub-republics - unmanageable without autocracy).

Removing autocracy in Central Asia can risk creating regional chaos (like in the Middle East), which will spill over to the rest of the world.

R41, ok, then explain India?

The US is #3 in population, and covers 4 time zones, more or less. Yet we have a functioning democracy.

Brazil is more populous that Russia, and is also a democracy, isn’t it?

I think size is not relevant. Culture and history seem to be more important.

IIRC, British colonies had the most stable post-colonial democracies. The French were next, and the Spanish were last.

R42, India was conquered (directly & unconditionally) and ruled for 200 YEARS by the British Empire. The British Empire, while a monarchy, had certain democratic customs (e.g. parliamentary limits on the king’s power) that were passed on to India OVER CENTURIES of occupation. For the same outcome to happen to both China and Russia - another more politically advanced nation needs to conquer them both and hang on to that rule for 200 years. Good luck with that.

And, unfortunately, India’s recent 2019 election might be the unraveling of its nascent democracy. It’s only been independent for ca. 70 years and, like most of Asia, it’s already teetering on the edge of future authoritarianism:

[quote] “Narendra Modi’s resounding victory in the 2019 Indian elections may well pave the way for India’s transformation from the world’s biggest liberal democracy into its largest ILLIBERAL one. By the time of the next election, India’s key public institutions – its media, universities, and law courts – may have been subordinated to a [religious, Hindu] government that regards opposition as an illegitimate obstacle to an overarching aim: creating an India entirely different from the secular dream of Nehru and Gand.”

R44, I essentially agree with your view of India, but it is in opposition to your earlier argument that it’s the size and diversity of Russia and China that makes them authoritarian.

I can see China evolving into a kind of liberal Democracy, but it will be a tough transition. They haven’t had a recession since the 1980s or maybe 1970s. The populous has been satisfied since Tiananmen Sq. in 1989 to cut the Party slack, crediting them for economic growth and keeping their diverse country together and peaceful.

But there are problems with the exploitation of factory workers as bad as anything Marx ever fought for.

There is massive pollution and they are going to have to come to grips with that soon. They have unbreathable air and toxic water. Eventually, they’ll get the same pushback there, that the US had.

There is shoddy construction in their haste to build, and that may become a serious, premature problem as it ages. One problem with their building spree is that all of their infrastructure will reach its end-life around the same period. That’s decades from now, but will be a huge financial drain on them, then. Just based on the US experience with our infrastructure.

And their people will crave real freedom.

China could make the political transition. It could take 20 years, easily, but they could do it. If the economy tanks in the mean time, then we could see revolution.

Recommend "The Great Hack" on Netflix.

Here’s a question for international finance Gays: I understand how it can be a problem for the US to have so much debt in the form of treasury bills owned by the Chinese. They could threaten not to buy any more, greatly increasing the cost of our debt to us, and increasing interest rates, causing a recession. Or, they could dump all their treasuries, selling them all at once. This would have the same effect, except causing a worldwide Depression, instead of Recession. I think they are too integrated into the world economy today, to try this, as it would also be suicide for them.

Ok, whatever. But their must be a flip side to this problem. It must be likewise bad for China to own and continue to buy so much Chinese debt. Is it not? How is this so?

R43, Brazil is one of the most corrupt democracies. Even their Head of Anti-Corruption is now being investigated for corruption himself :). The irony would be hilarious, if it wasn’t so distressing for the electorate. An (excessively) corrupt democracy is not a real democracy.

As for the US - yes, it is a democracy, but take a step back and it looks dangerously close to an oligarchy-type of democracy:

(1) Having only 2 parties, with the pendulum swinging between only them for centuries is not very liberal. There should be (at least) a 3rd (major) party once in a while. (Sanders shouldn’t even have been in the same party as Clinton - he’s further to the left and she’s closer to the central marker).

(2) The executive branch is dominated by ‘family clans’ (Kennedy clan, Bush clan, Clinton clan). A real democracy shouldn’t have that happen so often - it’s concentration of too much power in the hands of the few.

(3) The election campaign is too long and expensive. Precisely because of the huge SIZE of the US - it takes a long time & a lot of money to CRISS-CROSS the country for the campaign trail. That’s why the US has one if the longest campaign periods. But it makes politicians too dependent on extra funding from corporations & elite business interests. Such a long campaign process is also EXHAUSTING for prime candidates and disadvantages smaller candidates, as they often lack the funding for such a colossal, long campaign.

I worked for a company once where the VP head of Ethics was ousted after 20 years for making two long distance calls, to his wife, at his home. TWO! This was before cell phones and when 20 miles, a normal commute, was long distance. It was obviously a coup and just an excuse. A pretty feeble one, if that was all they had in him, but it was effective. Funny, no?

The President of this company was found to have been really corrupt. Millions of dollars worth. It was a defense contractor, so national security was also an issue. He fled to Greece where he had dual citizenship, and was not extraditable. “But his phone calls!” I’m sure the ethics guy was completely flustered.

R48, I think that the design of our government encourages the perpetuation of two parties. The parties will generally oppose each other on every subject, otherwise such a subject would be addressed and would go away as an active issue. In Liberal times, both parties will swing Left, but by different degrees. Vice versa for Conservative times. For example, both parties today oppose child labor (with a few exceptions), but that wasn’t always so. It is a shame that we don’t have a third party that supports a different mashup of issues, but our system doesn’t encourage it. Even if the pendulum swings back and forth between parties, they, themselves aren’t static. Their core values evolve.

As for domination by clans, it’s actually common in democracies (Adams, Harrison, Roosevelt). Even monarchies try to link a current ruler back to one that might have greater legitimacy. Also common in Fascist countries, too, such as Juan Peron’s Argentina.

I don’t think that two politicians in a Clan are two much to worry about. Three, maybe. The Kennedys and Clintons have been neutered. Probably Bushes, too.

I’d like to see the Citizen’s United decision reversed or worked-around. We now have American companies that actually have foreign ownership donating huge sums to Presidential candidates. And the Watergate campaign reform laws that expired should be reinstated. If the Dems win in 2020, I anticipate a slew of laws to prevent someone like Trump from doing what he’s doing.

All Hail the Boris of our future! We only hear and listen to what Boris feeds us! Next we get the Americans to eat beets.

In most countries that operate like the US (hint: the US is not a first world democracy), Trump would be removed from the White House and publicly executed for high treason. More than half the population wants it. Americans just roll over and take it without lube.

R15 - no need to flood Russia with Oxy. They have their very own Krokodil problem.

R47. China’s far less reckless than the US in its budget planning, bluntly. Its total debt is about $1.5 trillion which is under 50% of GDP. The US is at 103%, but China has been consistently expanding for almost 3 decades and most of its spending is on core infrastructure.

In a time of dubious investments, China has created its own High Yield Bonds for its debts that pay more than 7% and are sold on the Shanghai exchange. Technically, they’re junk bonds so they’re high risk. But they’re attracting a lot of investment.

China is also moving towards a currency basket approach to make one of its currencies convertible. There’s the domestic currency, the yuan. The convertible currency, the renminbi, is backed by a mix of international currencies and a rapidly growing pile of gold the Chinese hold to stabilize their economy. This has helped them in proposing an alternative market arrangement with Russia and India which has gained some support. There are 8 member states and a number of observer states like Iran and dialog partners like Turkey that see this is a counterweight to the US’s outsized influence on world market’s with the dollar.

The dollar, incidentally, is the world’s most popular currency. 10 countries have dollarized, or adopted the US Dollar as either their primary, official currency or as an official, legal currency. Another dozen or more officially or unofficially peg their currency to the dollar as a hedge against inflation. The dollar is also the currency used for valuing oil, which directly influences China’s economy.

That brings us back to China, which had pegged the convertible currency, the renminbi to a fixed value against the dollar in the 1990s. But, fluctuations in the dollar have eaten against China’s economy. China’s central bank has to maintain much higher dollar reserves and this can spur domestic inflation.

Measured, consistent expansion is how China is paying for its infrastructure and rolling its debt quarterly through these bond sales is one of keys to getting off the dollar. Persuading other countries to join in their cooperative agreement and expand their common currency ideas in an effort to shunt Washington’s influence and reduce the use of the dollar helps China pay down its debt faster.

Interesting, R54, thanks.

I read once that neither side wants to solve the immigration problem, because both parties fundraise based on the issue. This was pre-Trump. It might be different now, because he’s gone way over the line.