What $5 Billion of Your Tax Money Buys

So what does $5 billion of your tax money buy? Fancy upgrades for Taiwan’s F-16 fleet:

The US has confirmed plans to upgrade Taiwan’s ageing fleet of F-16 US-built fighter planes.

[…]

US officials said the F-16 A/B fighters will undergo a retrofit which will bring them up to the same standards as the more advanced C/D models.

“After the upgrade, the air force’s combat capability will be advanced hugely,” Taiwanese Defence Minister Kao Hua-chu said at a late-night press conference in Taipei.

This is only one tiny example of American tax dollars being used to arm another nation. When somebody says you must pay your taxes for the benefit of the American people you may wish to remind them that much of the money stolen from us by our government doesn’t go to help anybody here but instead goes to other nations within our empire.

Queue Pants Crapping Hysteria

Uh oh the anti-gunners are going to get their panties all in a bunch over this:

This is a near fully printable 5.56mm X 45mm or .233 REM AR-15 magazine. It is current only a 5 round magazine. I left my printed spring design out on purpose for saftey reasons. However, with a little printing experimention and some range time it can be made easily.

What is included is the magazine body, anti-tilt follower, and floorplate.

I have used this magazine, no jams or feed problems….. YET. It works, but be reminded it is only a printed ABS magazine. If you end up using a printed ABS mag spring be prepared for stress relaxation of the polymer over time, especailly if it is kept loaded over a long period of time.

That’s right blueprints are now available that allow you to print your own AR-15 magazines. I’ve mentioned 3D printers before and believe the technology is the next logical leap to take for the post-industrial revolution world. Currently most 3D printers are only able to work with plastics but eventually ones capable of working with other materials, such as powdered metal, could become cheap enough that most households could afford one. Imagine being able to print out almost any part that you need. Theoretically you could manufacture and entire AR-15 with a 3D print (although I believe the barrel could be problematic but certainly not impossible).

This will likely be another technology the anti-gunners will have to attack. Although current laws allow you to manufacture your own firearms for personal use the anti-gunners will claim printing off firearm components violates various “common sense” gun control laws. This will likely lead them to present impossible to conform with legislation that would require 3D printer manufacturers to prevent their prints from printing firearm components.

But as logical human beings we can sit back and enjoy the ingenuity that went into this project and also benefit from it. When I finally get a MakerBot this will likely be one of the first things I print.

The Free Market in Action

A short while back DigiNotar, a Dutch certificate authority, was hacked and their signing certificates were stolen. This lead to incidents where hackers were able to create certificates for any website they chose and those certificates would appear to be valid to every major web browser. For instance a phiser could create a site and the web browser would see the certificate and say it was valid as it was signed by DigiNotar, a trusted certificate authority.

DigiNotar’s business is literally trust so their reputation is everything. Unless people can trust that websites whose certificates were signed by DigiNotar are who they claim to be DigiNotar has no business. Well people can no longer trust certificates signed by DigiNotar and now they’re filing for bankruptcy:

DigiNotar, the Dutch certificate authority (CA) which was recently at the centre of a significant hacking case, has been declared bankrupt.

This is the free market in action. People trusted DigiNotar and DigiNotar failed to uphold that trust so people are no longer willing to do business with that company. As one of the entities DigiNotar’s failure negatively affected was the Dutch government it’s unlikely the company will receive any kind of bailout or otherwise be artificially propped up meaning this is a rare case where we get to see how the free market actually works.

Agorism Alive and Well

For those who are unaware agorism is a counter economic system that strives to make an flourishing underground economy. That is to say it strives to make an economy free of government interference. Whenever you do work for a friend in exchange for cash and don’t report that income to the government you’re practicing a form of agorism. As the world economy falls further and further into the pit of failure agorism seems to be becoming more prevalent:

The United States continues to suffer from mass unemployment. People have had to adjust their lifestyles to the new reality—fewer jobs, lower wages, mortgages to pay that are now more than their homes are worth. Millions have dropped out of the job hunt and are trying to find other ways to sustain their families.

That’s where the underground economy comes in. Also called the shadow or informal economy, it’s not just illegal activity like selling drugs or doing sex work. It’s all sorts of work that doesn’t get regulated by the government or reported to the IRS, and it’s a far bigger part of the economy than most of us are aware—in 2009, economics professor Friedrich Schneider estimated that it was nearly 8 percent of the US GDP, somewhere around $1 trillion. (That makes the shadow GDP bigger than the entire GDP of Turkey or Austria.) Schneider doesn’t include illegal activities in his count– he studies legal production of goods and services that are outside of tax and labor laws. And that shadow economy is growing as regular jobs continue to be hard to come by—Schneider estimated 5 percent in ’09 alone.

So the underground economy in the United States alone is estimated to be roughly eight percent of our gross domestic product (GDP). That’s rather impressive, especially when you consider the fact that that statistic doesn’t including illegal activities but only activities that are legal in all ways except their complete ignoring of tax and labor laws.

I personally am in complete support of the agorist movement as I find the very concept of government involvement in the economy detestable. While the government and statists views agorism as theft I view it as a peaceful means of telling the government where they can stick their market interference, wars, and other activities they fund with money obtained through taxation. But as I said the government and statists view it as a form of theft which can be seen by how they refer to the underground economy:

Economist Edgar Feige estimated in 2009 that unreported economic activity was costing the US government $600 billion in tax revenues, and the growth in that number—from the Internal Revenue Service’s 2001 estimate of $345 billion—indicates the growth of the informal economy. Reporting on Feige’s work, Dennis Chaptman noted, “As the recession deepens and regular employment opportunities decline, unreported activities tend to grow, thereby swelling the tax gap and worsening the government’s budget deficit.”

Notice the wording, “costing the US government $600 billion in tax revenues.” Statistis view the product of all labor as property of the government as evident by the fact they consider taxation a form of revenue. Using this line of thinking you would be robbing the government of tax revenues if you took a pay cut that caused you to pay less income tax.

The product of your labor is not the property of the government, it’s your property. If you do not report your income to the government you’re not robbing them of revenue as the money they would have obtained from taxing your income was never rightfully theirs in the first place. Something can not be considered revenue if it would have never been rightfully yours in the first place.

Another way of thinking about this is through the example of a mugger. Let’s say a mugger robbed 10 people one year and obtained $100.00 from each of his victims for a total of $1,000.00. Now let’s say, due to these muggings, eight of the mugger’s victims went out and obtained a firearm and a carry permit. The following year the mugger attempts to rob the same 10 victims for the same amount but is only able to successfully mug two of them as the other eight pulled a gun on him and he ran off. As the mugger was only able to mug two victims for $100.00 each his take for the year was $200.00. Would you say that he suffered a $800.00 loss in revenue? Most people I know would not but that’s exactly what the government and statists are claiming.

Personally I’m glad to see the underground economy growing at such a rapid rate. Government interference in the free market is what originally lead to our economic woes and their attempts to lessen or shorten this depression have only caused it to linger longer and become more severe. Why should the government receive a cut of our labor if they are the reason we as a country are becoming less prosperous every day? Would you continue to pay an employee who continued to cost you money through his actions? No, you would fire that idiot and try to find somebody competent to replace him. Let us fire the government from our economy and instead move towards more underground activity where all transactions are voluntary and each participant gets to keep the entire product of their labor.

Apparently Making Pistols Isn’t the Only Thing Gaston Glock Knows

It seems building damn fine pistols isn’t the only thing Gaston Glock is good at, he’s also good at picking up women younger women:

Gaston Glock, 82, founder and owner of Glock g.m.b.H., has married Kathrin Tschikof, 31, after a seven year relationship. Kathrin is the CEO of the Glock Horse Performance Center, an equestrian organization owned by Gaston Glock.

Not bad for an 82 year-old man. It is my firm belief that Mr. Glock needs to write a book, I’d read it.

That’s Called Charity

There was a recent story in the Red Star about Comcast’s new program that allowed students to get online access at a greatly reduced rate. As usual somebody is complaining:

I see that Comcast is making a big splash on your editorial pages (“Comcast helps poor get online,” Short Takes, Sept. 15).

Why don’t you give the credit where it is due — to the other Comcast customers who pay full price every month?

The ones who receive their bills and say, “Hey, hon, Comcast raised the rates again.”

Lower access fees, no equipment rental fees, computer vouchers for the poor– full-paying customers are the ones who gave away all these niceties.

Are we really to believe that Comcast is not passing the costs along?

EDWARD MCHUGH, East Bethel

What Edward doesn’t seem to understand is that this concept is known as charity. Personally I’m all for Comcast’s new service so long as they aren’t receiving any government subsidy to provide it and I’m a paying Comcast customer. I realize that programs such as this aren’t free and customers such as myself are likely paying for the offset but as it’s a means of giving voluntarily I’m all for it.

Unlike the government Comcast hasn’t put a gun to my head and said that I will pay more money to provide subsidized service to those who can’t afford the standard Comcast service. Comcast has said they will provide this subsidized service and I’m more than welcome to either continue using Comcast or find another Internet provider. If Mr. McHugh is unhappy with the possibility that some of his money may be going to provide cheaper Internet access to families who can’t afford Comcast’s standard service then he can demonstrate his unhappiness by using a different service provider.

Unless there is a government subsidy involved anytime a company gives money or subsidized products or services it comes from the profits they obtain through their customers. When Glock writes a big check to veteran associations that money originated from paying customers. When Apple matches employee donations to charities that money also originates from paying customers. If you believe you’re paying too high of a price for your good or service due to the manufacturer’s or provider’s charitable donations then you can simply stop doing business with that company.

I’m a huge fan of voluntary charity and it may surprise many to learn that I donate money to various causes that I support. The problem I have is when an entity like the government puts a gun to my head and forces me to give money to causes regardless of my opinion.

Everybody’s a Critic

Uncle via Fausta’s Blog points out a rather grim story about Mexican drug cartels targeting bloggers who post articles relating to drug cartel violence in Mexico:

Social media users who denounce drug cartel activities along the Mexican border received a brutal warning this week: Two mangled bodies hanging like cuts of meat from a pedestrian bridge.

A woman was hogtied and disemboweled, her intestines protruding from three deep cuts on her abdomen. Attackers left her topless, dangling by her feet and hands from a bridge in the border city of Nuevo Laredo. A bloodied man next to her was hanging by his hands, his right shoulder severed so deeply the bone was visible.

Signs left near the bodies declared the pair, both apparently in their early 20s, were killed for posting denouncements of drug cartel activities on a social network.

“This is going to happen to all of those posting funny things on the Internet,” one sign said. “You better (expletive) pay attention. I’m about to get you.”

The gruesome scene sent a chilling message at a time when online posts have become some of the loudest voices reporting violence in Mexico. In some parts of the country, threats from cartels have silenced traditional media. Sometimes even local authorities fear speaking out.

This is yet another example of why the right to keep and bear arms is so important. Although you may believe something you posted online is trivial and of no consequence it very well may offend or anger the wrong type of person. In this case posts denouncing drug cartel activities lead to brutal murders but you could replace the drug cartels with any group or individual who uses violence to achieve their goals. There only needs to be one psycho to take a statement you made in the wrong way and target you personally either for harassment or physical attack.

Everybody should have a plan and means of defending themselves because you never know when, where, or why somebody may attack you or somebody you care about.

More Delays Caused by TSA

At this point I almost feel bad picking on the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). It’s not because I feel sorry for them but because it’s so easy that it makes me feel lazy as a blogger. The TSA have become on of my personal punching bags because every program they implement in the name of security ends up causing further headaches for those flying while offering no additional security. Case in point their new profiling scheme which ended up causing a four hour backup at the Logan International Airport in Boston:

New security procedures being tested at Logan International Airport caused significant backups at security checkpoints Thursday, according to airlines.

Backups lasted for about four hours after the Transportation Security Administration began testing a procedure that requires more human interaction between security agents and passengers.

The process takes about 30 seconds, but it caused many passengers to be delayed. TSA agents engaged in “chat downs” while checking their IDs and boarding passes.

So now instead of arriving two hours early to make your way through airport security you’ll be expected to arrive four hours early. I’m seeing a market in the not too distant future for people with mobile cots. After a couple more TSA programs jack the wait time up to 24 hours you can rent out a mobile cot and pay an airport employee to push you through the security line while you sleep.

The funniest part of this story though is the fact that the TSA was happy with their performance:

An airline worker said the lines were the worst he had seen in 30 years, but the TSA said they were pleased with how the pilot program has gone over the last month and in time it will help them decide who needs more screening and who needs less.

I’m not surprised by this as the TSA is a government agency and thus doesn’t understand efficiency.

Overblown Security Statements

There have been several stories floating around the web about a recent security flaw in OS X 10.7 that allows a user to change the password of another user without knowing that user’s current password. Although there is a security flaw related to passwords on OS X 10.7 it’s not nearly as severe as many websites are making it out to be.

An overview of the flaw can be found here. In summary the flaw is related to the Director Services command for reading and changing passwords. By entering the following command you can get the shadow hash of any user’s password:

dscl localhost -read /Search/Users/[user]

The value [user] should be replaced with the short name of a user who’s shadow hash you want to obtain. This is a rather serious flaw as there are scripts that can crack shadow has password (in fact one is available on the linked site for OS X 10.7). The other part of this flaw involves changing users’ passwords using the following command:

$ dscl localhost -passwd /Search/Users/[user]

Once again you replace the value of [user] with the system short name of the user whose password you want to change. What most articles I’ve seen regarding this flaw have claimed is that this command allows you to change another user’s password without knowing their current one. This is incorrect as the command requires you to enter the user’s current password before changing it. What this command does allow you to do is change the currently logged in user’s password without knowing their current one. Once again this is a rather serious security flaw but not nearly as severe as many are making it out to be.

I’m not trying to defend Apple here as they royally fucked up by allowing users to grab other users’ shadow hashes. They also fucked up be allowing somebody besides a directory administrator to change a currently logged in user’s password without entering their current one. But this flaw requires one major thing, access to a currently logged in user account. In most cases this means you must have physical access to the machine in which case all bets are off as far as security is concerned (it’s generally accepted that once an attacker has physical access to a target machine it’s game over).

The important question you should be asking right now is how can you defend against this? It’s simple, don’t leave you machine logged in when you’re not around. You should have a password set on your account (if you don’t you have no means of preventing unauthorized access anyways) and the account should be set to require a password immediately after locking the screen. When you walk away from you machine lock the screen (the keyboard shortcut on OS X is control + shift + eject). Remote access shouldn’t be a concern as it requires a remote user to know the user name and password of somebody on the system already (in which point this flaw matters not as they could change the password for the account they known the credential for).

Finally this flaw allows an unauthorized user to change the password of a currently logged in user without knowing that user’s current password but it does not allow that unauthorized user to change the currently logged in user’s keychain password. This means the password, certificates, and notes stored in the keychain will remain encrypted and out of reach unless the unauthorized user is able to crack the user’s shadow hash (in which case they have the password to unlock the user’s keychain).

If you need to give other users access to use your machine it would be smart to create a separate account for them and use the parental controls to prevent access to all applications they do not need (especially Terminal in this case). This isn’t bulletproof by any means but it’s an extra layer of security that should be done anyways.

I’m Sure People Will Take PETA’s Message More Seriously Now

I doubt I even need to make any comment on the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’s (PETA) latest idea for getting their message out:

The non-profit organisation, whose controversial campaigns draw criticism from women’s rights groups, said it hopes to raise awareness of veganism through a mix of pornography and graphic footage of animal suffering.

“We’re hoping to reach a whole new audience of people, some of whom will be shocked by graphic images that maybe they didn’t anticipate seeing when they went to the PETA triple-X site,” said Lindsay Rajt, PETA’s associate director of campaigns.

Right, because when organizations want to be taken more seriously they always turn to pornography.