redfox

boring

Perhaps,.yes.

I have been ruined by crap American swil 😆

Don't get me started on Starbucks...

Now that I think about it, Johnny Harris did a really good report about insider trading by Congress.

I hear what you're saying, you're not wrong.

I would argue that the technical implementations, the ones that are about a quantified or Boolean evaluation, that's not the case.

Sure, STIGs can be open to interpretation like any benchmark or compliance standard and are open to the reviewers personal discretion or trends in the industry.

I wouldn't suggest that stigs are more relevant than CIS, since it's mostly only used by federal government, but it is something to be aware of and a skill set that's in demand.

I wouldn't say cis, or stigs, aren't a security practice by themselves. Security practices come from implementing good policies and evaluation, and I would suggest that the new cybersecurity framework 2.0 would help inform good security practices.

Have you never found ambiguous standards anywhere else?

The comment was meant to be syndical and sarcastic.

Of course it's not representative of the entirety.

But it does express my frustration with political hypocrisy and insider trading. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find me any politicians that haven't engaged in that at some point, to some degree. One of the famous ones that comes to mind is Nancy pelosi, but she is not alone, and this is not particular to one party or another, they both definitely engage in it, it's been well documented and is irrefutable.

If you look past one party or another, you'd see that it's a broken system. The fact that it's legal for our elected representatives to conduct in activities that would otherwise be illegal for the general population is outrageous, and the fact that we all know they do it and they are the only ones that can control it in police themselves is also outrageous. It's the only self-serving career that I can think of that is completely unchecked, has unlimited benefits for only 4 years of service, and the only ones that can control it or police it is themselves.

This might not be popular, but I don't care for any Columbian blends. I've even tried local stuff, or different brands, nope. All terrible to me now.

I can however drink mass produced like lavazza espresso and crema aroma.

restaurant and bar lobby

I am betting this is pretty accurate.

I imagine, without reading anything yet, that downtown businesses like restaurants and bars are a pretty decent tax revenue for the city. What else gives them revenue other than income tax, property tax?

I wonder if they've talked about anticipated tax increases due to that.

I feel like this is evidenced in the state's forced three days in office policy. The state gov is spending millions leasing buildings downtown, while downtown businesses are whining about reduced patrons. I understand since they are getting killed by leasing rates.

Just seems like these are measures to support the owners of the city. I guess income means more budget, which could mean better roads and hopefully education.

I like the side effect of getting to carry out drinks.

They'll all over the place time wise.

I skip forward when he goes on tangents, though I can usually relate to them 😀

Yeah, he's an acquired taste. I could see being friends, but you have to be interested in wading through a lot of friendly commentary, or do a lot of skipping forward.

I like the domain admin dance.

Ha, if it was that easy, I think the NSA would have solved that problem by now...

Imagine for a moment that the business world transitioned to Linux, and now there's enormous incentive for all adversaries from state sponsored to financially motivated criminals to spend all their time hunting through linux source code.

• Do you think the ideas above stand up? (I'm not saying they dont)

• Would linux vulnerabilities be found at a higher rate? I wonder if they aren't now because there aren't as many eyes on them. Sure there's corporate side project efforts and volunteers, just curious how that stacks up against the amount of research happening to break Windows systems.

• NSA would definitely want to keep some linux exploits around if their adversaries were using linux instead of windows. I think the result would be the same regarding eternal blue.

being spied on by the government of the country I live in than by a government from a foreign country

Ha, that's a decent point. I don't really care for either. I think about these things among others:

• China has proved they are interested in conflict. They haven't used any kinetic/traditional warfare against anyone lately, though they seriously want to with Tiwan.
• China has been using nonstop cyber related warfare to conduct espionage, steal trade secrets, position themselves for assisting kinetic warfare with cyber warfare, etc.

I am not a direct target of these, but China killing the power grid or disabling telecommunications does have the potential to have a huge impact on my life.

• The US government has used nonstop kinetic and cyber warfare over the last 20+ years.

The US playing world police doesn't directly threaten my safety, but I definitely would be more worried about the US than China if I wasn't a US citizen.

The US government spying on me:

• Super annoying mostly due to the principle of a lack of privacy, regardless of whether I do anything bad or not
• Becomes a serious problem if I was an active opponent of government policy and elected officials, and the government/leadership deems me a terrorist/insurrectionist/etc.

Their discretion of what's my free speech and right to criticize the government vs leading insurrection would be more complicated if they were using the NSA to own my life and try to use any excuse to lock me up.

I guess I weigh what's more likely to be a problem in my current/future life.

I don't like either of these scenarios.

I hear what you're saying. I counter with low effort LLM reply. I don't live by what LLMs say, but they generate some good starting points to go and do much more narrow research.

I don't think it's entirely Reagan's fault, I think the idea existed before him. He just sold the idea to the American public. So I guess I could fault him for either believing in it, or just saying he did to support the desires of the wealthy.

this really is Reagan’s fault with his so-called trickle down economics

CLAUDE 3:

"Did any American politicians, economists, or general capitalism principles regarding 'trickle down economics' exists before president Reagan? What examples of trickle down economics existed before him? Did he invent the idea, or just the phrase?"

The concept of "trickle-down economics" predates President Ronald Reagan and his administration's economic policies. However, the specific phrase "trickle-down economics" became more widely used during Reagan's presidency to describe his economic policies, which were based on the idea that reducing taxes on businesses and the wealthy would stimulate economic growth, creating more jobs and wealth that would eventually "trickle down" to the broader population.

Examples of trickle-down economic principles before Reagan include:

1. The "Horse and Sparrow" theory, attributed to the French economist Jean-Baptiste Say in the early 19th century, which suggested that if the rich were allowed to get richer, their increased consumption would benefit the working class.

2. In the 1920s, Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon, under Presidents Harding and Coolidge, advocated for lower taxes on the wealthy and businesses, arguing that it would spur economic growth.

3. The "Laissez-Faire" economic policies of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which favored minimal government intervention and regulation, with the belief that unfettered capitalism would benefit society as a whole.

While Reagan did not invent the underlying economic theories, his administration's policies and rhetoric, particularly the use of the phrase "trickle-down economics," brought the concept to the forefront of public discourse and became closely associated with his presidency.

It's important to note that the effectiveness and fairness of trickle-down economics have been heavily debated among economists and policymakers, with critics arguing that it primarily benefits the wealthy and does not necessarily lead to broad-based economic growth or income redistribution.