The Fourth Turning Halftime Update

[Ragnarök_62]

(10-25-2018, 12:55 PM)WinterStorm Wrote:

(10-22-2018, 07:00 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: I agree with everything except for cashless society.  Too many problems there.  The first is privacy, next is it doesn't play nice with power outages. Finally, there are software fuckups that happen.  I blame the bank's use of contractors for this. That's oursourcing that happens. I experience schadenfreude every time any and all outsourced projects crash and burn like that.

The problems are easily resolvable.  Generally, when products are developed, you can only pick two between speed, quality, and inexpensive.  So many people ignore quality in favor of speed and cheapness.  This can be remedied simply by have regulations prevent poor software design.  As far as outages, that is a legit point.  However, we have already been on this road for about a couple of decades.  Again, I don't think cash will totally disappear.  Rather, it will slowly decline either linearly or looking like some sort of long tail.

OK, "remedied simply by having regulations...".   Well, this is the real problem then. Why aren't there regulations now, given all of the headaches we've had already?  As for cash, I see it as never going away, and there may be fat tails which occur every now and again that preclude a linear relationship of cash availability and time passage. The problems are not easily resolvable because they still exist. The real problem is that those making public policy are the wrong people.  We have the wrong policies to address certain issues.

OK, Let me explain. The largest issue is climate change. If climate change is not addressed in a realistic manner at present. Therefore our current policy which is in force supports the global warming process. It can be no other way. CO2 emissions are still rising because of current public policy. So as far as electric cars, current public policy ensures that only fat cats will be afford them. This is because as long as fossil fuels are readily available, most folks will just go, meh, electric  cars ... along with whole lot of other climate change items. So, there is right now, no path from A to B when it comes to anything like technoutopia. Given current public policy, well at least in the US, it's fossil fuels all the way baby. I know |Europe has made some adjustments to their public policy to address climate change. So, I'll give you say Germany perhaps achieves full conversion of electric cars. In any even Germany will have a higher per capita ratio.  I think the real problem is due to assorted groups' agendas.  

If one agrees that there are groups getting in the way of the goal, [address climate change per specific parameters.  ] A specific parameter would be the amount of CO2 emitted per year.

The next thing to do is to find out which groups are your opponents. I use the word, "opponents", to make sure I'm clear in explaining ideas and to pack as much meaning/word as possible.


So, the opponent I'm going to concentrate on are Neoliberals. Essentially, Neoliberals are opponents because, duh, they oppose everything I support and vice versa.

Now, to think of how to answer of Lenin, "what's to be done".  

The best way to play an opponent for me is to play a modified game of no limit Texas hold'em. So, no, there shall be no Call of Duty from me here.  However, Call of Duty has 2 things that matter. Like all things military, you need strategy and tactics. Texas hold'em has these as well. So when dealing with Neoliberals, one strategy is to undermine them via asymmetric tactics. So, the first strategy is to enact a carbon tax. Some tactics are to pair the tax with a citizens' dividend.  That is to say, since a carbon tax is regressive, then rebating the tax on a per household basis make the carbon tax, not a tax, but a gimme with some amount of prepayment. Neoliberals can't no go and say "carbon taxes = moar government".  The carbon tax screws people because it's a tax. The best part and asymmetric part is it decreases some Neoliberal's power over the long term. This is one thing I have in mind. This is like Texas hold'em because, I know playing it, that how you play the current hand  plays a role in how you play future hands, because your opponents register that event as well. This is something simple to poker players and few others. You are supposed to pay close attention to your opponents' behavior to allow you to play better poker. That is why I chose the carbon tax as the first agenda item. The tax will also cost your opponents money/power from now on and that's how you win public policy poker.   Notice how that forces Neoliberals to play a losing hand. If they say it's a tax then I can say no it isn't. It's a modified version of universal basic income. Besides it's y'all who keep bitching about unpaid for entitlements.  The money folks get will be called "carbon dividend".  If Neoliberals can enjoy dividends, then so can everyone else.

The next thing to do to make you utopia come true is a VAT tax. Now, I'm going to pair that with single payer health insurance, aks, Medicare for all. This hand must be played after the first hand and after folks are pleased with the first hand.  Neoliberals in general oppose this because VAT tax screws up profits. They'll have to eat some of the costs. Other Neoliberals are even more upset since this is an existential matter. Here is where I'm going to use electric cars for a good purpose. "With the advent of electric self driven cars", the at fault status is murky.  Therefore, we'll ensure nobody has to worry about medical bills which may arise from accidents. Likewise, the carbon dividend will help a bit with income difficulties.  Of course, the same will happen to folks who work at health insurance companies.  Most of these will go away with single payer. If concern about job losses gets to be an issue, then simply start up Germany's employment model. 

This whole thing is called #OperationMindFuckNeoliberals

Another player at the table is NeoConservatives.  This player has the well known profile of a maniac.

Neoconservatives' policies exactly math that of a poker maniac. They make policies based on ego trips, like "my country is perfect in every way", and performing aggressively to attract a following. The situation here is also a big problem.  Neoconservative public policy promotes chaos at the least and thermonuclear war at the most extreme. In addition, Neoconservatives have succeeded in attracting a following. On the plus side, all of their policies when enacted have failed. The goal is to undermine their power. The first tactic is to simply collect data on their past and current failures.   Some data for information purposes:

https://www.democracynow.org/2016/8/26/r...rrors_iraq
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/...me-change/
https://popularresistance.org/violent-co...s-in-nica/

This data and more supports the conclusion that every Neocon strategy has ended in failure based upon the criteria of "promoting peace and stability in the region".   With that remains the problem of the US is intent on implementing failed strategies. So, let's look at the tactics used with the strategies.  First we support proxy forces who have at a later time turned on us. These proxies have also sold arms on the black market. Next , we just drop bombs everywhere because the logical alternative of boots on the ground is political suicide. The tactic of bombing of curse does nothing to winning people or influence overseas. One other problem is a big one. There is no tactic installing a replacement government addresses the folks' in regime changed country
legitimacy.  Rather, Neoliberals use Neoconservatives as patsies to get access to resources, irl. So the goal is to exile Neoliberals from public policy, plain and simple. Perhaps someone running for office will try this sometime since just making folks aware of the tawdry record of  Neoconservative policies actually are. I think one thing to do is to have a commercial spot showing how Libya now looks in contrast to how it look before the "human rights" intervention will inform many as to how screwed up that sort of policy actually is.   And be sure to add the slogan "Mission Accomplished!" as a cherry on top.


So, you see, this 4th turning has just 2 enemies, but they are for the most part domestic. I'm sure their defeat will expand the options for the future a whole lot.

Quote:Quote=Ragnarök_62

1. I think only 10 year olds who are trustfund babies can afford those cars.
2. I don't think very many proles can afford those cars.
3. Home generators make lots of smog, so no thanks.
4. Flying cars?  Well, here in Oklahoma we have wild weather. Said cars would have to work with thunderstorms which have high winds and hail.  Would the cars still work after their apparati get hail dings? What happens if they get struck by lightning? Best of all are our howling blizzards. How would flying cars work in those? Blizzards cause the airports to cancel all of the flights. I have an idea for a prototype though.
First, we mandate that all private planes be self flying. It's best after all to use fat cats as our guinea pigs. After a sufficiently low death rate from plane crashes, then the software could then be migrated to cars. Next, only cars for fat cats would be outfitted. The reason for doing it this way is because only fat cats have enough money to afford prototypes and the private planes. There is absolutely no reason to spend money subsidizing test vehicles for proles who can't afford them. Private planes are just perfect because those make a perfect starting point since they're also already around. Just add software and apparatti and off ya go! I agree we can get to safe flying cars, though I'm sure we'll have some fat cats taking some dirt naps.
I say that's  a win win, IMHO.  

Tesla?  Oh yeah,  I sorta wonder how long folks will stuffing money into it.   Those financials look awful, man.

Even if Tesla ends up doing bad, the revolution has already occurred.  Every major car manufacturer is slowly adding EVs to their lineup and the number of charging stations is increasing.  

OK, I agree that the per capita number of  EV's will go up. However, if Big Fossil Fuel gets its way, then there shall be a long time to wait.  So I think if you want the above, you need something along the lines of what I wrote above to happen first. The other problem folks have is they never consider what's on the other end of the cord.  At present, there's a lot of coal plants on the other end. That makes a lot of EV's "coal burners".


As for affordability, it will be much harder for a Crisis society to be able to afford it anyway.  The average man in 1936 was a long way from being to afford a Levittown style house, but the economic explosion after the Crisis made it possible.

The above assumes a 1950's type of high.  A "high" isn't really a good name, IMHO.  I prefer "recovery period". For example, the US could experience something like post WWII Europe. Our industrial base looks bombed out. That's because globalization has been the next best thing to bombing to wreck assorted industrial bases.
Climate change was not an issue last time either. If climate changed isn't addressed in a proper manner, then it's gonna suck for a very, very long time.

 Only the rich will afford it at first, but it will filter down to the masses in about a decade or two because most people drive cars that are less than 20 years old.  Also, if you already have a car, then someone (Maybe it will be me.  Who knows?) will start a service to add automation to existing cars.  In 2025, these cars will be only for the Cadillac class.  By the 2040s, it will have filtered down to the masses.  As far as flying cars, totally agreed.  Having humans pilot it will cause too many 9/11 style crashes.  

I like the idea of using the rich as guinea pigs...

Quote:Quote=Ragnarök_62

On Agile.  So when is it going to put secure programming and secure hardware in the process?  Given the number of security screw ups, it ain't part of the plan anywhere. Secure programming shouldn't be a nothought or afterthought like it is now.

Yup.  It is my experience that you simply make it a compliance issue for software.  Compliance always gets pushed to the top of the list as the most urgent issue whenever it is discovered that your software is not in compliance.  All other development will be put on hold until the issue is resolved.  

I would hope so. I'd like to make sure say Sarbanes Oxley applied to protection of personal information held by assorted online platforms. The provision is as you say below.  All such information must be encrypted, and a defined security policy is enforced.

It's not like this stuff is really hard.  The vast majority of incidents happen because of things as simple as leaving the front door unlocked.  Don't use Password1234.  Lock your screen when you are away from the terminal.  Don't click on that weird looking link in that suspicious email. Don't store personal data (usernames, passwords, SSNs, etc.) in plain text files without encryption.  Once you have the basics of cybersecurity covered, then it requires a lot more effort (such as the backing of a large and powerful organization) in order to conduct cyber attacks and cyber breaches.  

Don't forget patching software. Companies have been taken to the cleaners for blowing off patching. Since patching isn't done , that's another one to add to Sarbanes Oxley. Even script kiddies can exploit that stuff.

Quote:Quote=Ragnarök_62

Germany already does this.  Corporate America is too fucking cheap to have apprenticeships and the US government shovels way to much money on the defense offense budget.  There's also a problem with higher education. It's just another racket and the tuition is too damn high.  I bet nobody gets the nice $4.00/credit hour I had anymore.

Tuition's too damn high!






In some places the rent is too damn high also.  However, the rent's not too damn high in Oklahoma.

Quote:Quote=Ragnarök_62

Pfffftttt.  Why do folks even use Outlook, Word, and excel when there's Openoffice?

Simply because it's the corporate standard and because there is already too much integration with Microsoft products anyway.  A lot of organizations don't have the time, money, or personnel needed to make changes.  So it gets put on the backlog, or discarded.  It would probably require a political rather than economic change for OpenOffice to become standard.  


Or they have now-nowism disease. A proper way of deciding is to determine the cost of the switch and the amount of savings if any. Next, determine the pay off period, if any.  Yeah, it's not gonna pay for itself this quarter, bu ok, how long?

Quote:Quote=Ragnarök_62


I shall have nothing to do with Google because Google is an evil company that sends data to the deep state!  There's nothing that tastes as good as freshly churned butter.   The stuff at the supermarket is gorp.

There's no place like home.
127.0.0.1  google.com

Quote:Quote=Ragnarök_62

Smart homes are for sheeple , aka NPC's.



I suppose there those who don't have a hacker's outlook.
Smartspeakers.  eavesdrop on those. I bet the alphabet agencies do that as well. If there's one in the bedroom, PORN city.
I'd love to hack lightbulbs.   I'd make them work like Christmas lights by making them turn off and on a bunch of times.
Washing machine.  I'd like to keep it in the start cycle, add soap, and let it overflow.  Operation bubble bath, man.
Window blinds, up and down all around.
Water faucet.  Turn 'em on and run up a huge water bill for the victim.
IOT.  It's old news, but spam engines and DDOS  doers.

So , if hacked life won't be easier or more predictable.  Imagine coming home to the stuff mentioned above.

Roomba = cat chaser.
Smart mirrors = more PORN
Alexa/Cortana = hack in and order dildos and pocket pussies from Amazon.

This will become an issue for the next saeculum.  However, I can simply do it all myself and avoid those concerns, and I suspect many will too.  It will come to a point at which all IoT devices will be regulated.  They will have to match some security standard for you be able to sell it in the marketplace because any cyber weakeness will by the end of this 4T and the next 1T will be seen as a national security issue, something that is already becoming a trend with the federal government.  We still have many more years to go.  Although I don't want to experience it, there is still a very high risk of a damaging cyberwar.  If there is real cyberwar (which is likely to coincide with traditional war), then we will build a robust cybersecurity infrastructure that will allow most people to sleep at night.  Too many people are still computing like it's the 1990s, with no thought to cybersecurity.  By the 2030s, I suspect that Americans will have been scared into practicing good cybersecurity.

Yes, cyberwarfare is a teal thing. And yes, like all things that provoke assorted conflicts, the exile of Neocons will help mitigate against this. Yeah, China And Russia have the ability to do this stuff. Neocons make this worse by hawkish statements and policy.  A better approach is to assume Russia and China are run by sane people. I rather doubt they'd like their lights getting turned off as much as we.

And, the people who are squawking about Russia,Russia,Russia need to STFU.  First, who wouldn't use nice big fat juicy targets like Facefuck and Twatter to cause mischief. There they were in 2016, just 2 big fat sitting ducks. So Russia had nothing but a troll farm full of shitposters and a few thousand for ads and just look at the results. I have to say that's one hell of a bang for the buck.  As for foreign interference.  Meh, we let Saudi Arabia and Israel among others to meddle a whole lot more than Russia. The proper thing to do is forbid any foreign influence whatsoever, period.  Social Media should just post a big fat warning on their pages. "The information displayed here is for entertainment only and the opinion of the posters."  Now, with that closing, you can see why Texas Hold'em is a good bet in the US. The amount of misinformation does find it's way to the tables in the USA.