I am so very, very sick and tired of the Welfare State mentality. If the “feddle gummint” is going to steal income from productive citizens to give to those who are–forwhatever reason–not productive, then the recipientsof that largesse should be required to contribute to society in substantive, meaningful ways.
While my grandfather disparaged the 30s Roosevelt “feddle gummint” WPA as “We Piddle Along” quasi work, I do walk across a WPA bridge here in my lil home town regularly, and there are several enduring public works edifices that are in daily, constant use here in America’s Third World County. I say, let’s revive the WPA and put ALL adult (by age, since so few are adult by emotional/civic development) welfare recipients to work, as long as they’re on the dole in any way, shape, fashion or form. Sure, some of them are “disabled” in some (often indiscernible to common sense, manufactured by an institutionalized victimology) way, but even those can be compelled to work at some sort of clerical work, freeing those who can walk and see (or whatever) to do manual labor, building things for those who provide for their sustenance… and actually providing benefits for themselves and their often over-abundant progeny along the way.
In projects such as improving the (still) millions of miles of dirt roads in the many places like America’s Third World County where travel in wet or winter weather can be treacherous, perhaps using a nearly all-manual labor method based on Roman road construction techniques, such people could become net benefits to society instead of being, as now, simply leeches.
Side benefits: most would enjoy (though not in a necessarily pleasureful sense *heh*) better health as a result, and others would likely drop dead from performing the first real work in their lives. Win-win, IMO.
#2: This post, asking whether ISPs should block service to computers infected with botnet malware, brings this response from me:
Definitely. Block people who INFECT THEMSELVES with such a bot. It’s little difference to no tolerance for drunk drivers on the roads or shouting cell phone users in a restaurant. All are the result of stupid people who have no regard for others, and absent tarring and feathering, ostracizing and otherwise punishing them for their rude, willfully stupid behavior is the best tactic.
And no, users’ computers do not “get infected” with malware. Users infect themselves by poor, unsafe computing practices. Allowing them to inflict their bad behavior, causing network slowdowns and worse, on others is simply wrong. Ideally, tarring and feathering would be on the table… *heh*
#3. Speaking of drunk drivers above reminded me to once again plug for justice for drunk drivers who harm or kill others. Physical damage to property? Value of the property times seven to be assessed against the drunk and paid ONLY to the person harmed (the drunk CHOSE to get drunk and then drive, and any person with half the brain capacity of a boiled head of cabbage knows the dangers of driving drunk). Bodily damage to person(s)? Whatever assets the drunk has forfeited to those damaged and double the injuries assessed actually performed on the drunk’s body. While the drunk is sober and conscious. In public. Broadcast. Drunk driver kills someone? All assets forfeited to the victim’s family and drunk driver made into road paste by dropping his car on him until only a gooey smear is left to be hosed off the road. In public. Broadcast.
You think a few of those would cause some folks to reconsider getting drunk, strapping on their homicide and mayhem weapon and driving off into the night? I do. Just make sure there are NO exceptions. None. Zilch. Zero-with-the-rim-kicked-off none.
Sure, I’d go for it on a basis limited by whatever State might choose to enact such a draconian measure. Let the feds say it’s a violation of the 8th Amendment, claiming some sort of 14th Amendment extension of the 8th Amendment (as has been improperly done with others). ANd let that State grow a pair and tell the “feddle gummint” to “Stick it up your nose, blow it out your ears and rub it in your hair. Now, go away or we shall taunt you a second time-a.”
It’s about time for some justice for victims and for the States to tell the “feddle gummint” to take a long walk off a short pier.
BTW, re:#2 above, from the intro to a recent white paper:
“…a substantial amount of malware is spread simply by sending a link to the malware, together with some social engineering to try and induce the recipient into clicking on the link. This trend has presented traditional anti-virus and anti-spam engines with a problem. Since the malware itself is not present in the e-mail, conventional scanners are unable to detect even simple and well known threats.”
Quite true. “…a substantial amount of malware is spread simply by sending a link to the malware…” and only careless or lazy idiots click on such links. Doesn’t EVERYONE know to screen any html emails for such things, or, better yet, accept/read ONLY plain text emails? *sheesh* Asking for trouble… If checking the links in emails is too much trouble, a user should at least have someone who’s bothered to become a technically competent computer user set their system up to open links in emails in a sandboxed browser, so that any links to malware-infested sites (or direct links to malware installations) can’t actually infect the user’s computer. OR, use something like AVG’s Linkscanner andonly check mail in a web browser, OR use a modern web browser that warns about unsafe pages–and pay attention to the warnings! Any of these less-effective methods are better than simply letting oneself be gulled into CLICKing on a link to malware out of laziness and stupidity.
