There’s No Such Thing as Private Data

I hope most people have learned this lesson but I’m sure some have not: there’s no such thing as private data if you don’t entirely control the server that data resides on. This lesson should hold especially true for those who use Facebook as it appears that company is more than willing to throw privacy to the wind in the name of making a buck (and don’t get me wrong I have no issue with that, it’s a service that is free to me and I decide how much personal information to give them). Facebook is now giving Politico access to a lot of previously private data:

A partnership between Facebook and Politico announced today is one of the more far-reaching efforts. It will consist of sentiment analysis reports and voting-age user surveys, accompanied by stories by Politico reporters.

Most notably, the Facebook-Politico data set will include Facebook users’ private status messages and comments.

Politico is going to have a field day with the politically oriented posts I throw up on Facebook.

The Rumors of SOPA’s Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

Everybody is cheering about the death of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA):

In a surprise move today, Representative Eric Cantor(R-VA) announced that he will stop all action on SOPA, effectively killing the bill.

Huzzah! Hurray! Let’s all go out for drinks and celebrate!

Before we do there is one minor detail that needs to be brought up, SOPA isn’t dead. While the house version, H.R.3261 is effectively dead, it’s sister bill in the Senate, S.968 the PROTECT-IP Act, is still alive and well:

PIPA is less well known than SOPA, but the provisions are basicly the same. It still includes the same DNS blocking and censoring system that the original SOPA did, just without the SOPA name. There are around 40 co-sponsors of the bill in the Senate so far, with no word on how many senators support the bill in addition to that. There will most likely need to be 60 votes in the Senate in order to invoke cloture and end an almost guaranteed filibuster.

Much like the need to remove every head of a hyra, both bills in our legislative body must be killed before this erroneous legislation is truly dead. Hell I’m pretty sure our “representatives” purposely gave the bills two different names in the hope one’s death would lull people into a false sense of security while the other bill was ramrodded through both houses and signed by the president.

Manowar Week: Warriors of the World United

I went ahead and posted a Manowar song for Monday Metal and found out that a single song by that band isn’t a proper contribution to the Metal Gods. To save my soul from eternal damnation and banishment from Valhalla I’m promptly declaring this week Manowar Week. Every day this week I’ll be posting a song by Manowar and hopefully satisfy the Metal Gods with my offering. This evening the song is Warriors of the World United:

Huntsman Bows Out

I’m sure all three people who were supporting the Huntsman campaign are sad to hear about his departure from the race:

“The governor and his family, at this point in the race, decided it was time for Republicans to rally around a candidate who could beat Barack Obama and turn around the economy,” campaign manager Matt David told the New York Times.

On the upside it appears as through we just netted ourselves another Ron Paul endorsement…

“That candidate is Governor Mitt Romney.”

Or Huntsman is an idiot, that was my second guess.

Apparently the best way to “beat Barack Obama” is to run a carbon copy candidate against him and hope the voting public will get confused and check the box next to Republican Obama instead of Democrat Obama. Romney winning the next presidential election isn’t a victory for anybody but the big government and police state advocates.

The EFF Files Suite Against FAA Regarding Drone Flights

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has filed a suit against the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regarding drone flights in the United States:

Today, EFF filed suit against the Federal Aviation Administration seeking information on drone flights in the United States. The FAA is the sole entity within the federal government capable of authorizing domestic drone flights, and for too long now, it has failed to release specific and detailed information on who is authorized to fly drones within US borders.

Up until a few years ago, most Americans didn’t know much about drones or unmanned aircraft. However, the U.S. military has been using drones in its various wars and conflicts around the world for more than 15 years, using the Predator drone for the first time in Bosnia in 1995, and the Global Hawk drone in Afghanistan in 2001.

[…]

Now drones are also being used domestically for non-military purposes, raising significant privacy concerns. For example, this past December, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) purchased its ninth drone. It uses these drones inside the United States to patrol the U.S. borders—which most would argue is within its agency mandate—but it also uses them to aid state and local police for routine law enforcement purposes. In fact, the Los Angeles Times reported in December that CBP used one of its Predators to roust out cattle rustlers in North Dakota. The Times quoted local police as saying they “have used two unarmed Predators based at Grand Forks Air Force Base to fly at least two dozen surveillance flights since June.” State and local police are also using their own drones for routine law enforcement activities from catching drug dealers to finding missing persons. Some within law enforcement have even proposed using drones to record traffic violations.

The FAA, having total control over all aerial flights in the United States, are the only entity who is likely to both know where drones are flying and be unable to hide behind various military classifications. Obtaining this information would be of great value because it would allow us peasants to know if the government is using drones to spy domestically as well as abroad.

Why Minimum Wage Laws Hurt the Unskilled Laborers

Many people who do not understand basic economics believe minimum wage laws are a positive thing. It’s easy to believe this but the truth of the matter is these laws are actually detrimental, especially to unskilled laborers who the laws are purported to protect. The following video does a great job of explaining this fact:

Another argument this video doesn’t address is the claim minimum wage laws are the reason we get paid what we do today. I’m not talking about unskilled laborers in this case but everybody, especially those in higher paying positions. Some advocates of minimum wage laws claim the abolition of these laws will cause everybody to receive far lower pay but this isn’t at all true. If your employer pays you an hourly wage of $30.00 and the minimum wage is $10.00 and hour abolishing the minimum wage law won’t drop your pay by $10.00 and hour. The reason you’re paid $30.00 an hour is because your employer believes you bring at least $30.00 and hour of value to the company, not because you bring at least $20.00 an hour in value beyond minimum wage. Were minimum wage laws to be abolished tomorrow it’s unlikely anybody would receive a pay cut, but a huge number of unskilled laborers would find themselves with opportunities to work as factories were brought back to the United States (unless other rules and regulations continue to make manufacturing in this country too cost prohibitive).

Yet the Anti-Gunners Think They’re the Only Ones Who Should Carry Guns

Anti-Gunners continue to claim average citizens such as you and me shouldn’t be allowed to carry guns yet somehow police officers have some kind of magical training that makes them able to do so. I still don’t understand this because most of the shooters I know practice far more with a firearm than the average police officer. It also appears as through police officers are far more likely to beat their wives than the average citizen:

Law enforcement officers beat their wives or girlfriends at nearly double the rate of the rest of the population, and trying to control that is not only difficult for the victims but potentially deadly, experts say.

Explain to me again why police officers are somehow more qualified to carry a gun than the average citizen? Police officers aren’t magical beings gifted with skills above that of another average person. That badge does not make them more capable of handling stressful situations or making the correct call on whether or not lethal force is warranted at a particular time. Yet those who are against the right of average citizens to carry guns usually believe it’s OK for a police officer to carry one.

It’s an idiotic belief that has no grounds… come to think of it it’s no different than other anti-gunner beliefs. Oh, the following line was just comedy gold (or depressing, depending on how you look at it):

One of the hallmarks of a good cop is to radiate authority and control, and in the wrong hands, those characteristics can be misused, domestic violence counselors say.

One of the hallmarks of a good cop is to radiate authority and control? Really? I always thought the hallmark of a good cop was the ability to resolve non-violence situations without initiating violence. Needless to say very few officers appears to have the virtue.

Exactly What I Need for My AR-308

I love my AR in .308 but it has one limitation; the 20-round magazines make it slightly harder to blow through an entire bank account during one range drip. Apparently XS saw the blight of AR-308 owners and is offering a ridiculously awesome solution:

Serious firepower in a small package. The X-25 is a .308 caliber 50 round single stack compact drum designed for AR .308 SR/25 rifles.

Now if they would just make a 100-round version of this.

The Fallacy of Passively Resisting a Rapist

I’m not sure who started this trend but some asshole decided it was a good idea to advise woman to “passively” resist rapists. That advice follows the “just give them what they want and they’ll go away” mentality except in the case of rape what your attacker wants is you. I use the word passive in quotes because passive resistance isn’t resistance in the case of rape. When you become passive you’re still surrendering and once you’ve surrendered control to an attacker you’re situation is entirely lost. A friend on Facebook posted a link to a research paper titled Fighting back works: The case for advocating and teaching self-defense against rape.. The most interesting statement I found in the study was the following:

A thorough review of the available literature has led us to some surprising conclusions about the effectiveness of traditional anti-rape advice. Women are often advised to use non-aggressive strategies against sexual assault (Storaska, 1975; Channing L. Bete Co., What every woman should know about rape, 1989; Channing L. Bete Co., What women and men should know about date rape, 1989). Research suggests that this is poor advice. According to one study (Zoucha-Jensen and Coyne, 1993), women who used non-forceful verbal strategies, such as crying or pleading with the assailant, were raped about 96% of the time. In the same study, women who did nothing to protect themselves were raped about 93% of the time.

“Passive” resistance actually slightly increased a woman’s chance of being raped. To me this makes sense as rape is about power, not sex. By crying and pleading you’re giving the rapist what he wants, which is to break your will and force you to submit to him. On the other hand bullet holes, stab woulds, and/or a collapse trachea are great at stopping a rapist. In fact forceful physical resistance has the best chance of stopping a rapist:

Forceful physical resistance was an extremely successful strategy. The completed rape rate dropped to between 45% and 14% when the rapist’s attempt was met with violent physical force (Kleck and Sayles, 1990; Siegel et al., 1989; Ullman and Knight, 1992; Zoucha-Jensen and Coyne, 1993). Striking was more successful than pushing or wrestling (Quinsey and Upfold, 1985). Physical resistance also appears to be more effective when assault occurs outdoors (Quinsey and Upfold, 1985).

That’s a pretty large drop from the 96% of completed rapes followed by passive verbal resistance. On top of that women who forcefully resist a rapist stand little chance of additional injury:

Second, this argument overlooks the fact that a woman who does not resist is virtually guaranteed to suffer the emotional and physical injury of the rape itself. Even when resisters are injured, the injury is typically much less severe than a completed rape would have been (Kleck and Sayles, 1990; Marchbanks et al., 1990; Siegel et al., 1989; Ullman and Knight, 1991). Of those 40% of resisters who suffered physical damage, only 7% suffered injury as severe as a dislodged tooth. A woman who fights back incurs no demonstrable chance of additional injury, but she gains a 55-86% chance of avoiding rape altogether (Kleck and Sayles, 1990).

The last sentence is most telling, while a woman’s chance of injury goes up negligibly her chance of getting raped dropped dramatically. In addition the physical and emotional damage done by rape is almost always going to be far greater than damage received during forceful resistance. Did I mention woman who used firearms or knives stood a phenomenal chance of avoiding a rape:

Women who used knives or guns in self-defense were raped less than 1% of the time. Defensive use of edged or projectile weapons reduced the rate of injury to statistical insignificance (Kleck and Sayles, 1990).

As I said bullet holes and stab wounds are very good deterrents.

Self-defense classes are invaluable not just for the training in proper fighting methods but for mentally preparing people for self-defense situations. Many people do freeze up when they’re being attacked because they’ve never been taught the proper actions to take in such a scenario. Being able to fight back is only one part of the battle, you must also be willing to fight back.

If you’re one of those unfortunate people who believes passive resistance is the best way to handle a rape situation please do yourself a favor and read the linked paper.