possibly noteworthy wrote:

Shortly after 9/11, Senator Bob Graham, the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, called for “a symbiotic relationship between the intelligence community and the private sector.” They say you should be careful what you wish for.

... As it happened, the dot-com bubble had burst shortly before 9/11, cutting loose a generation of technology entrepreneurs who, when the government came calling, were only too happy to start developing new data-mining algorithms and biometric identification programs.

There is nothing inherently wrong with all this.

The problem is that the “symbiotic relationship” has turned decidedly dysfunctional, if not downright exploitative.

What do the generation of tech entrepreneurs who were "cut loose" by the dot-com bust have to do with billion dollar "boondoggles" at massive, old school pillars of the military industrial complex like Boeing and SAIC??

... As it happened, the dot-com bubble had burst shortly before 9/11, cutting loose a generation of technology entrepreneurs who, when the government came calling, were only too happy to start developing new data-mining algorithms and biometric identification programs.

You and your damn posts. Especially those works of art you put together with a gazillion articles linked by some theme... They eat hours of my life. Regardless of how much benefit lies within, I see days flash before my eyes when you post sometimes.

You realize we pay attention to the man speaking in bold. That's good. Just realize I don't always have a chance to reply to it, as good replies should be in the realm of public discourse as well. And I'll only tell you to go screw yourself in private, as I'm just "that kinda guy"..

I so rarely have the time to compose a post that contains a reasonable argument addressing this, that and the other thing.

That's fucking work.

Hell, I don't always have a chance to read the articles linked.

Yeah, I know China is a big issue. You work in the DoD's sphere of influence, so you well understand that I can come up with ten [give or take] different ways to (incorrectly) simplify the situation, just like anyone else.

If nothing else, we got a case of a one-party state versus a two-party state, on a global level. I'd rather figure out the algebra via battle in the global economy, while trying to figure out how to make a three party state as a collective effort, than to start shooting down Rupert's satellites to make a point when some cartoon pisses someone off too much.

Granted, if we screw up the global economy in the process, more people will die than in WWII. However, it will be slower, and course changes will be possible.

Your mission is to stare at a map of Iraq and find the flaws in this weakly presented argument.

MemeStreams will promptly self-destruct five seconds after you read this message.

No fear (tm). We will take no preemptive action, nor will anyone else. History provides reasonable proof it is in no ones best interest to do so.