Sorry for the long title. Here's the link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1178239/Computer-hard-drive-sold-eBay-details-secret-U-S-missile-defence-system.html
Before I dive into the article itself, I have to ask: Just who is wiping these hard drives, if anybody? Elmer Fudd?
From the article: " The disk also contained security policies, blueprints of facilities and personal information on employees including social security numbers, belonging to technology company Lockheed Martin - who designed and built the system. "
OK...this should really make you wonder. But if it's any consolation, disks from the UK, France, and Germany were found to have other sensitive information. Information was found from a nursing home which, according to the article, included "...pictures of patients and their wounds."
Also, according to the article, 34 per cent of the disks had " 'information of either personal data that could be identified to an individual or commercial data identifying a company or organisation.' "
I guess that would be another "duh" moment?? Just who is wiping these things, if anybody?
By wiping, I don't mean deleting, I mean wiping such as is done by a low-level format. Deleting typically just deletes the first few bytes of the file. This "erases" the file from the disk's FAT (File Allocation Table). The file (including whatever information was included) is still there, it's just that the hard drive thinks it's gone.
When you do a disk wipe, you overwrite every bit on the drive and rewrite them with either gibberish or 1's and 0's. That includes the FAT and the partition table!
This really isn't rocket science, folks. It really isn't. There are any number of programs out there (some of them are free!) that will securely overwrite the disk. This is not rocket science.
Yes, it takes time to securely overwrite a disk. If you do it correctly, it could take several hours to several days. But it's worth the effort.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
I Stumbled Across "Channel 103" Last Night
What is Channel 103(*), you ask? It it some new posh dance studio in towne? Well, no.
Is it some type of retro dance-hall, then? Nope.
Karaoke? Um ... NO!
Channel 103 is a radio station located on and in Jersey. No, not the US state of New Jersey, I mean the Bailiwick of Jersey(**). The radio station itself is located on St. Helier (which is also the patron Saint of the Bailiwick.
I found the station while I was researching something which I thought had absolutely nothing to do with Jersey. Hmph. You learn something new every day. :) They stream audio through their website and I must say I like the mix of music they offer. It got me through another night of not being able to sleep. :)
* - Channel 103 - http://www.channel103.com/
** - Bailiwick of Jersey - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jersey
Is it some type of retro dance-hall, then? Nope.
Karaoke? Um ... NO!
Channel 103 is a radio station located on and in Jersey. No, not the US state of New Jersey, I mean the Bailiwick of Jersey(**). The radio station itself is located on St. Helier (which is also the patron Saint of the Bailiwick.
I found the station while I was researching something which I thought had absolutely nothing to do with Jersey. Hmph. You learn something new every day. :) They stream audio through their website and I must say I like the mix of music they offer. It got me through another night of not being able to sleep. :)
* - Channel 103 - http://www.channel103.com/
** - Bailiwick of Jersey - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jersey
Monday, May 4, 2009
Sen. "Benedict Arnold" Specter and the liberal Super-Majority
Sen. "Benedict Arnold" Specter was elected in 1980. Previously a centrist Republican, he joined the Democrats on 28-APR-2009.
Why? Well, for that reason, you need to understand a few things about him. First, in spite of what his constituents said, he voted for President Barack Hussein Obama's porkulus. That's right, he didn't do what the people he "represented" wanted him to do.
He wanted, instead, to curry favour with the Obamessiah. He voted for the porkulus, and the people he "represented" got angry. He received numerous boos and cat-calls when he tried to speak, and knew that he would not get re-elected as a Republican.
So, instead facing the music, he did the political thing and switched sides. A keen politician, yes. A man who votes his conscience? Apparently not.
Instead of doing what his constituents told him to do, he voted for the pork in order to gain favour with the Obamessiah. Google it, you'll find it.
This is especially troubling because it now gives the Democrats a super majority. It's now 60 Dems and 40 Republicans. It's now fillibuster-proof.
I'll be blunt in that one of the other reasons I took a break is that I got tired of the vitriol in my email box. The threats, the name-calling, all of it. Apparently, I'm so full of shit that I'm pathetic and a waste of flesh. But I and others told you that the liberal super-majority would be coming. Here it is.
Look for every pet project that the libs want to get funded. And now the Obamessiah is going to be picking a new Supreme Court Justice. True that Justice Souter is liberal, but it's also true that according to sources, the Obamessiah's picks aren't good. I don't have the sources that Ms. Malkin does, that's true, but the scuttlebutt is that she's dead-on this time. Here's the link to what she wrote: http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/01/obamas-choices-gird-your-loins/
I'll let my record speak for itself. Yes, I've been wrong before. It's also true that I've been much more often right. I told you this was coming ... and here it is.
Is this the "change" you wanted?
Why? Well, for that reason, you need to understand a few things about him. First, in spite of what his constituents said, he voted for President Barack Hussein Obama's porkulus. That's right, he didn't do what the people he "represented" wanted him to do.
He wanted, instead, to curry favour with the Obamessiah. He voted for the porkulus, and the people he "represented" got angry. He received numerous boos and cat-calls when he tried to speak, and knew that he would not get re-elected as a Republican.
So, instead facing the music, he did the political thing and switched sides. A keen politician, yes. A man who votes his conscience? Apparently not.
Instead of doing what his constituents told him to do, he voted for the pork in order to gain favour with the Obamessiah. Google it, you'll find it.
This is especially troubling because it now gives the Democrats a super majority. It's now 60 Dems and 40 Republicans. It's now fillibuster-proof.
I'll be blunt in that one of the other reasons I took a break is that I got tired of the vitriol in my email box. The threats, the name-calling, all of it. Apparently, I'm so full of shit that I'm pathetic and a waste of flesh. But I and others told you that the liberal super-majority would be coming. Here it is.
Look for every pet project that the libs want to get funded. And now the Obamessiah is going to be picking a new Supreme Court Justice. True that Justice Souter is liberal, but it's also true that according to sources, the Obamessiah's picks aren't good. I don't have the sources that Ms. Malkin does, that's true, but the scuttlebutt is that she's dead-on this time. Here's the link to what she wrote: http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/01/obamas-choices-gird-your-loins/
I'll let my record speak for itself. Yes, I've been wrong before. It's also true that I've been much more often right. I told you this was coming ... and here it is.
Is this the "change" you wanted?
Well, it's been a while
Hasn't it? I've had quite a bit going on in my personal life, so I haven't given much thought to blogging. But things are, thankfully, quieting down so I'm back at it. Hopefully, I'll be here a while.
I'm going to be putting up some new posts ... commenting on things happening, and generally making a pest out of myself. Those "tolerant" liberals who were saying that I should be shot will have to put up with me again. That's their tolerance for you ... they disagree with you and their only option is to shoot. Oh, those tolerant liberals. Free speech guys, regardless of ideology. Sen. Kennedy (yes that one) himself said that. Well, actually, his exact words for "Free speech for everyone, regardless of ideology."
It means "I will not submit/surrender." It also means I won't shut up.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Follow the Money...
The link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&NR=1&fmt=18
For low-quality: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&NR=1
Let's see...according to the clip, who was one of the biggest obstructionists? In other words, people were warning about Fanny and Freddie. And who was one of the people saying there wasn't a problem?
Barney Frank. Here's what I wrote earlier:
"But, to get back to the article at hand.... Barney Frank (D-Mass.) has been accused of a conflict of interest in the Fannie Mae meltdown. And he may actually have such a conflict. Here's a link to the article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,432501,00.html
" "I am the only member of the congressional gay spouse caucus," [Herb] Moses wrote in the Washington Post in 1991. "On Capitol Hill, Barney always introduces me as his lover." "
The two were, in fact, lovers from 1987 to 1998. During their time together, however, Herb Moses was a top exec at Fannie Mae and, in fact "helped develop many of Fannie Mae’s affordable housing and home improvement lending programs."
Oops? No confict of interest? Now let's assume that Mr Frank was a Republican. We'd never and I do mean never hear the end of it. No double standard??"
Here's THAT link: http://gregb1967.blogspot.com/2008/10/barney-frank-conflict-of-interest.html
But who was another one? That same Mr Schumer that told us that we don't care about pork.
You wanted change? Is this the change you wanted?
(H/T: Safhire)
For low-quality: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM&NR=1
Let's see...according to the clip, who was one of the biggest obstructionists? In other words, people were warning about Fanny and Freddie. And who was one of the people saying there wasn't a problem?
Barney Frank. Here's what I wrote earlier:
"But, to get back to the article at hand.... Barney Frank (D-Mass.) has been accused of a conflict of interest in the Fannie Mae meltdown. And he may actually have such a conflict. Here's a link to the article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,432501,00.html
" "I am the only member of the congressional gay spouse caucus," [Herb] Moses wrote in the Washington Post in 1991. "On Capitol Hill, Barney always introduces me as his lover." "
The two were, in fact, lovers from 1987 to 1998. During their time together, however, Herb Moses was a top exec at Fannie Mae and, in fact "helped develop many of Fannie Mae’s affordable housing and home improvement lending programs."
Oops? No confict of interest? Now let's assume that Mr Frank was a Republican. We'd never and I do mean never hear the end of it. No double standard??"
Here's THAT link: http://gregb1967.blogspot.com/2008/10/barney-frank-conflict-of-interest.html
But who was another one? That same Mr Schumer that told us that we don't care about pork.
You wanted change? Is this the change you wanted?
(H/T: Safhire)
"That's Impossible!!"
If you've been reading this blog for any length of time, you'll know that I shy away from the word "impossible." Granted, I have used it before, albeit very very sparingly.
Today, when I was listening to the Obamessiah speaking about "...financial responsibility..." that single word virtually screamed for attention.
So, let's talk about the "impossible" for a moment.
First, we know that the Universe is 12.7 billion years old, give or take 100,000 years. Next, we know that our Earth is about 4.6 billion years old. We also know that our sun, Sol, is a G2-type star. And we know that within a few billion years time, around another 10 billion or so, the sun will swell into a red giant and if it doesn't consume the Earth, it will certainly boil off the oceans as well as the atmosphere. But is this something you or I should be concerned about?
Well, it is going to happen. The odds of that are 100% ... it will happen. But, I'm not going to be killed by it. You won't. Your grandchildren won't. Your great-grandchildren won't be killed by it either. So are the odds of the sun swelling into a red giant 100%, or 0%? How do you define those odds?
Next, we know that people used to be told that the human body couldn't withstand forces above 20mph or so. (Google this, you'll find it.) I don't know about you, but today on the way home, the car I was driving was going faster than 20mph. So I did the "impossible."
Then, we were told it was "impossible" for a person to go faster than the speed of sound. "Chuck" Yeager did that.
Then, we were told it was "impossible" for a human to survive in orbit. Enter Yuri Gagarin, the first human in space and the first to orbit the Earth. Although he's not alive right now, he used to be asked what it was like to do the "impossible."
Next, it was Neil Armstrong's turn. It was "impossible" for man to walk on the Moon, you see. Then, Mr Armstrong did it. You can ask him what it's like to do the "impossible."
Then (yes, I'm building up to something here) we were told it was "impossible" for a magnetar* to affect the Earth. Until SGR 1806-20** did in May 2005. And it happened from 50,000 light-years away. "Impossible?" That's what we used to think ... until it happened.
Yes, things are impossible. But as a scientist, I don't like to use that word. Most things are mathematically possible, at least, on paper. The odds of a black hole swallowing up the Earth? Yes, at some point in the remaining age of the Universe, it will happen. But I won't be killed by it, and neither will you. "Impossible?" Yes, it is theoretically possible. The odds? 1 out of 1 followed by "n" where n is the number of molecules in the area in question. In plainer words, it's going to happen ... in the order of one hundred thousand million billion trillion years (seriously.) Give or take a billion.
Here's what I'm getting at. The Obamessiah says he can balance the budget and pay for his massive spending spree by taxing only the top 2% of wage earners (the 2% of richest) Americans. My answer - impossible. You could confiscate everything they own and you still wouldn't have enough money to pay for his spending spree.
He says he can pay for his massive spending spree and that it won't be left to your children, or your children's children. My answer - impossible. To do it, he'd have to print more money (which would be backed by nothing) and the last time that was tried was in Zimbabwe.*** It didn't work there, either.
"Recent figures (as of 14 November 2008) estimate Zimbabwe's annual inflation rate at 89.7 sextillion (10^21) percent. [1]" (Links are Wikipedia's and are left intact.)
I'd like to consider myself a scientist. That means, among other things, that I don't throw out the word "impossible" very easily.
But the odds of Obama's tax and tax and spend baby spend policies working?
Impossible.
* - Magnetar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetar
** - SGR 1806-20: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGR_1806-20
*** - Hyperinflation in Zimbabwe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation_in_Zimbabwe
Today, when I was listening to the Obamessiah speaking about "...financial responsibility..." that single word virtually screamed for attention.
So, let's talk about the "impossible" for a moment.
First, we know that the Universe is 12.7 billion years old, give or take 100,000 years. Next, we know that our Earth is about 4.6 billion years old. We also know that our sun, Sol, is a G2-type star. And we know that within a few billion years time, around another 10 billion or so, the sun will swell into a red giant and if it doesn't consume the Earth, it will certainly boil off the oceans as well as the atmosphere. But is this something you or I should be concerned about?
Well, it is going to happen. The odds of that are 100% ... it will happen. But, I'm not going to be killed by it. You won't. Your grandchildren won't. Your great-grandchildren won't be killed by it either. So are the odds of the sun swelling into a red giant 100%, or 0%? How do you define those odds?
Next, we know that people used to be told that the human body couldn't withstand forces above 20mph or so. (Google this, you'll find it.) I don't know about you, but today on the way home, the car I was driving was going faster than 20mph. So I did the "impossible."
Then, we were told it was "impossible" for a person to go faster than the speed of sound. "Chuck" Yeager did that.
Then, we were told it was "impossible" for a human to survive in orbit. Enter Yuri Gagarin, the first human in space and the first to orbit the Earth. Although he's not alive right now, he used to be asked what it was like to do the "impossible."
Next, it was Neil Armstrong's turn. It was "impossible" for man to walk on the Moon, you see. Then, Mr Armstrong did it. You can ask him what it's like to do the "impossible."
Then (yes, I'm building up to something here) we were told it was "impossible" for a magnetar* to affect the Earth. Until SGR 1806-20** did in May 2005. And it happened from 50,000 light-years away. "Impossible?" That's what we used to think ... until it happened.
Yes, things are impossible. But as a scientist, I don't like to use that word. Most things are mathematically possible, at least, on paper. The odds of a black hole swallowing up the Earth? Yes, at some point in the remaining age of the Universe, it will happen. But I won't be killed by it, and neither will you. "Impossible?" Yes, it is theoretically possible. The odds? 1 out of 1 followed by "n" where n is the number of molecules in the area in question. In plainer words, it's going to happen ... in the order of one hundred thousand million billion trillion years (seriously.) Give or take a billion.
Here's what I'm getting at. The Obamessiah says he can balance the budget and pay for his massive spending spree by taxing only the top 2% of wage earners (the 2% of richest) Americans. My answer - impossible. You could confiscate everything they own and you still wouldn't have enough money to pay for his spending spree.
He says he can pay for his massive spending spree and that it won't be left to your children, or your children's children. My answer - impossible. To do it, he'd have to print more money (which would be backed by nothing) and the last time that was tried was in Zimbabwe.*** It didn't work there, either.
"Recent figures (as of 14 November 2008) estimate Zimbabwe's annual inflation rate at 89.7 sextillion (10^21) percent. [1]" (Links are Wikipedia's and are left intact.)
I'd like to consider myself a scientist. That means, among other things, that I don't throw out the word "impossible" very easily.
But the odds of Obama's tax and tax and spend baby spend policies working?
Impossible.
* - Magnetar: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetar
** - SGR 1806-20: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGR_1806-20
*** - Hyperinflation in Zimbabwe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation_in_Zimbabwe
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Article: "Soldier doubts eligility, defies president's orders"
I was wondering when this was going to happen. The link: http://www.wnd.com/static/89837.html
"A U.S. soldier on active duty in Iraq has called President Obama an "impostor" in a statement in which he affirmed plans to join as plaintiff in a challenge to Obama's eligibility to be commander in chief."
The actual word that 2LT Easterling is looking for is Usurper. And yes, that word - Usurper - does appear in the Constitution.
" Obama "has absolutely refused to provide to the American public his original birth certificate, as well as other documents which may prove or disprove his eligibility," Easterling wrote. "In fact, he has fought every attempt made by concerned citizens in their effort to force him to do so." "
Not only is that true, but Mr Usurper, Obama, has spent $800,000 in lawsuits to prevent the "vault copy" of his birth certificate from seeing the light of day.
What, exactly, are you afraid of, Mr Usurper?
Here's what I wrote about this, some time back (Note that I'm quoting from a quote.)
"... "And it just angers me because we've got people dying [our Armed Forces] every day over a document [the Constitution] that is being trampled on by these idiots in this country who don't know a good thing when they see it. We're living the good life, I mean we don't see people trying to get the hell out of the United States we see them sneaking into the United States to enjoy the freedoms that we have. The very same freedoms that are being trampled on by these Obama robots who think that this guy's gonna deliver us from everything - and yet he can't produce a freakin' piece of paper, he's gonna have to spend nearly a million [$800,000 - some of which appears to have come from the Council on American-Islamic Relations***] dollars in court costs so he doesn't have to? That's baloney, and I'm sick and tired of it."
As Dr Manning said "Produce your birth certificate, man! That's all you got to do! Hasn't done it. Know why? Doesn't have one! That's why." (emphasis his)
But what really burns my cookies is when I was attempting to get Wikipedia to recognize that there appeared to be a Cult of Personality forming around "the one." You'll notice the working - I didn't say there was one forming, I said there appeared to be one forming.
On the talk page, which has since been archived, the conversation also included the various lawsuits attempting to get the Usurper to produce the vault copy of his birth certificate. I've already mentioned here several times that I'm an Editor at Wikipedia. But the discussion ended when an admin (an admin!) told me that the press would look into the matter. And that since the press (aka: mainstream media) wasn't looking into it, well ... there was nothing to look into.
"I do understand your point (name redacted). However, you mean the same press whose reporters are fawning over Mr Obama during plane rides? (do a Google search, you'll find it.) Do you mean the same press that the respected journalist Mr Malone said was showing "sheer one-sidedness..." and "...bias.." Do you you mean the press that even the Wall Street Journal said appeared to be "...cheering it all on." Do you, perchance, mean that unbiased press? "
Another tip for potential employers - never attempt to placate me. What's worse is when you use lies to attempt to do it. If you make that mistake with me, you deserve the lashing you're gonna get. Because you will get it.
The American People have been distracted by the smear rags for too long. They've cared too much about what "celebrities" and "stars" are doing, who they're sleeping with, what drug of the day they're addicted to, etcetera.
I'll be the first to admit that I do like some movies coming out of Hollyweird, but these are just people who can stand in front of a flippin' camera and read a script. Oh, and they look good doing it. That's it.
Remember when the Hollyweird types were screaming about the dwindling ice sheet? Well, as we now know, that was due to a sensor glitch. Where are those screamers now? Oddly enough, they're silent.
Yes, they look good in front of a camera and yes, they can read a script. But they know just enough about their cause du jour to be dangerous. We don't need dangerous, misinformed (and dare I say it ... those with an agenda) and sometimes half-informed people spewing "facts."
We need facts. Period. Cold, hard, impersonal facts that withstand the light of scientific - not opinionated - scrutiny.
And we also need the Usurper to produce the vault copy of his birth certificate. Instead, he's spending $800,000 in lawsuits to avoid it. Some of that appears to come from CAIR.***
What, exactly, are you afraid of Mr Obama?
*** - SOURCE - The Dr Laurie Roth Show
"A U.S. soldier on active duty in Iraq has called President Obama an "impostor" in a statement in which he affirmed plans to join as plaintiff in a challenge to Obama's eligibility to be commander in chief."
The actual word that 2LT Easterling is looking for is Usurper. And yes, that word - Usurper - does appear in the Constitution.
" Obama "has absolutely refused to provide to the American public his original birth certificate, as well as other documents which may prove or disprove his eligibility," Easterling wrote. "In fact, he has fought every attempt made by concerned citizens in their effort to force him to do so." "
Not only is that true, but Mr Usurper, Obama, has spent $800,000 in lawsuits to prevent the "vault copy" of his birth certificate from seeing the light of day.
What, exactly, are you afraid of, Mr Usurper?
Here's what I wrote about this, some time back (Note that I'm quoting from a quote.)
"... "And it just angers me because we've got people dying [our Armed Forces] every day over a document [the Constitution] that is being trampled on by these idiots in this country who don't know a good thing when they see it. We're living the good life, I mean we don't see people trying to get the hell out of the United States we see them sneaking into the United States to enjoy the freedoms that we have. The very same freedoms that are being trampled on by these Obama robots who think that this guy's gonna deliver us from everything - and yet he can't produce a freakin' piece of paper, he's gonna have to spend nearly a million [$800,000 - some of which appears to have come from the Council on American-Islamic Relations***] dollars in court costs so he doesn't have to? That's baloney, and I'm sick and tired of it."
As Dr Manning said "Produce your birth certificate, man! That's all you got to do! Hasn't done it. Know why? Doesn't have one! That's why." (emphasis his)
But what really burns my cookies is when I was attempting to get Wikipedia to recognize that there appeared to be a Cult of Personality forming around "the one." You'll notice the working - I didn't say there was one forming, I said there appeared to be one forming.
On the talk page, which has since been archived, the conversation also included the various lawsuits attempting to get the Usurper to produce the vault copy of his birth certificate. I've already mentioned here several times that I'm an Editor at Wikipedia. But the discussion ended when an admin (an admin!) told me that the press would look into the matter. And that since the press (aka: mainstream media) wasn't looking into it, well ... there was nothing to look into.
"I do understand your point (name redacted). However, you mean the same press whose reporters are fawning over Mr Obama during plane rides? (do a Google search, you'll find it.) Do you mean the same press that the respected journalist Mr Malone said was showing "sheer one-sidedness..." and "...bias.." Do you you mean the press that even the Wall Street Journal said appeared to be "...cheering it all on." Do you, perchance, mean that unbiased press? "
Another tip for potential employers - never attempt to placate me. What's worse is when you use lies to attempt to do it. If you make that mistake with me, you deserve the lashing you're gonna get. Because you will get it.
The American People have been distracted by the smear rags for too long. They've cared too much about what "celebrities" and "stars" are doing, who they're sleeping with, what drug of the day they're addicted to, etcetera.
I'll be the first to admit that I do like some movies coming out of Hollyweird, but these are just people who can stand in front of a flippin' camera and read a script. Oh, and they look good doing it. That's it.
Remember when the Hollyweird types were screaming about the dwindling ice sheet? Well, as we now know, that was due to a sensor glitch. Where are those screamers now? Oddly enough, they're silent.
Yes, they look good in front of a camera and yes, they can read a script. But they know just enough about their cause du jour to be dangerous. We don't need dangerous, misinformed (and dare I say it ... those with an agenda) and sometimes half-informed people spewing "facts."
We need facts. Period. Cold, hard, impersonal facts that withstand the light of scientific - not opinionated - scrutiny.
And we also need the Usurper to produce the vault copy of his birth certificate. Instead, he's spending $800,000 in lawsuits to avoid it. Some of that appears to come from CAIR.***
What, exactly, are you afraid of Mr Obama?
*** - SOURCE - The Dr Laurie Roth Show
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
