Posts by Crazy Operations Guy 2513 publicly visible posts • joined 29 Jun 2009
Why is Google even allowed to vote on Privacy-related proposal when they are exactly the kind of organization we need privacy from?
I'm assuming that its because they make a browser, but their other activities create a massive conflict of interest and they should either abstain or be kicked from the group altogether.
Started out as a store, but now is the framework for -everything-. It started out as a package manager, but eventually a lot of code that should be separate daemons got pulled into it. It looks like Google's intention is that Google Play Services becomes the entire ABI/API for 3rd party packages ("apps") to run.
It could be a well-intentioned, if misguided, attempt at reigning in misbehaving apps. But since its one of the few Google Proprietary binaries in Android, I am a bit more cynical and believe that Google's motivation is to pull as much away from the OpenSource parts so that they can gain 100% control over Android.
I wouldn't be surprised if in the next few years, Android becomes nothing more than a Linux Kernel, a massive binary module for interfacing with hardware correctly, the Google Play binary blob to act as the entirety of the User Mode OS components, and a monolithic Shared Library. Although the more cynical part of me believes that they'll jettison the Linux Kernel entirely and roll their own so they no longer have to comply with any Open Source licenses.
Standard greasy legal speak. "Few" is one of those words that makes something ambiguous enough that the speaker can't be held accountable for it. If he were to say and actual number, then the company will actually have to do it. This way, they can just be lazy about it and delete old data whenever they feel like it rather than having actual retention procedures.
I have to deal with that crap at work a lot. Management will declare privacy policies, but then when I ask about specific time frames for retaining data or what data we should be deleting, I am met with silence or the company lawyer telling me not to document anything except specific wordings. Even specific time-frames like "6 months" get the same treatment. We have to mark it down as '6 months" and never anything like "180 days" or "8035200 seconds". Simply because if we do document something like that, then we are legally responsible for ensure that those numbers are actually followed.
That would probably be quite difficult to pull off correctly. Games are becoming more and more 'realistic' each day. Even if they do figure out how to determine how to automatically figure out where the line is between real and virtual, I would be afraid of shitbags putting filters on their videos to reduce the realism just enough to fool the AI into considering it to be game footage, kicking off a technological arms race.
The only things I can think of to head of an arms race between terrorists and the AI builders would be to:
a) implement some kind of steganographic function into game footage for identification (But you'd need some kind of system to prevent that same steganographic feature from being re-implemented as a video filter)
b) Create a delay/human censor system before a stream can be broadcast. (It would be prohibitively expensive and difficult to create, plus issues with needing some kind of oversight system to ensure the censors are acting appropriately. Not to mention the whole censorship concept)
c) End live streaming altogether
d) expand the AI to also pull in contextual information outside of the stream. EG, if an act of terrorism is reported near where the stream is being created, the stream's broadcast gets cut off.
-or-
e) The most difficult and expensive: Begin tackling the underlying social issues that cause people to engage in terroristic activity in the first place.
But it is the legal way according to the Department of State, the Geneva Conventions, and the US Supreme Court (As well as many lower courts).
The US Attorney General is merely the head of the executive branch's legal department and holds zero authority on the interpretation of the law. The US Attorney General has about as much control over the law, and whether something is actually legal or not, as those crappy cut-rate lawyers you see advertising on late-night television.
A collection of very low latency I/O libraries that a -lot- of games and drivers used. Pretty much if you needed a user-mode bit of code to safely read/write from a peripheral's memory, we were your first stop. Our code eventually replaced a bunch of components of DirectX, and the Windows Driver Framework, and became part of Hyper-V.
We were brought into the fold during the Longhorn development period in 2004 when they decided to reset all their development efforts. We were scooped up to save time in developing code that they had failed to write properly the first time around, or hadn't gotten around to writing it yet.
Probably looking at least a decade before that can happen, I worked with a company that got absorbed by Redmond, took several years before we were actually fully integrated into Redmond, then a few years before our products got absorbed into actual products. Before that, we were just kind of an independent company that happened to exist within Redmond.
We were fairly small and the product we made was installed on massive number of Windows machines anyway to the point where our code might as well had shipped on the Windows install disks anyway. It still took 6 years for our code to actually ship with Windows instead of as a separate download. I shudder to think how long something as big and non-Microsofty as GitHub will take to integrate, let alone these new folks.
If you follow proper data handling procedures, you have much less risk with a home than a rented office building. A home is going to have a very small number of people coming and going and even fewer people with access to the systems.
Including myself, only three people have access to my home, and I know them extremely well. I do my work in a dedicated home office that has its door closed at all times (mostly for keeping the temperature consistent), and to get to it, you have to pass through my bedroom. While, with the office my employer issued me, there are literally hundreds of other people that have access to it in addition the dozens of cleaning and maintenance staff.
On the networking level, my office has its own Internet connection, which goes through a firewall that allows nothing in and does a lot of filtering on stuff going out. I can verify my network hasn't been tampered with since its a very basic layout with each of the 4 computers in that room being connected right to the backside of the firewall / router. Since its all my own traffic, there is very little that needs to be allowed, and I can heavily filter the stuff that is allowed. While my workplace network has to deal with everyone's traffic, devices being added and removed on a daily basis, not to mention how permissive the network needs to be to handle the wide variety of needs for the other projects operating. And I don't have to worry about some PHB downloading a bit of malware and infecting the whole network.
In my experience, the vast majority of code bugs come not from incompetent programmers or problems with the languages, but programmers forced to ship code as soon as it does what is needed of it, rather than doing what is correct. Like most of the buggy code I've encountered has been from competent programmers under unreasonable deadlines being forced to ship less-than-acceptable code. Thats not to say there aren't incompetent programmers, just that they aren't the only source of bugs.
I used to be a developer in a company that made industrial / office automation systems, but then shifted to home automation. Before the shift, we would write quick-and-dirty code that technically worked, but we'd take the time to go back over it 5-6 times, making it better and cleaner each time. After the shift, the new management started reducing the number of iterations until one day we were just shipping our first draft versions. Our development cycle became longer and longer with each version we shipped because more and more of our time was spent trying to write new stuff -and- fix/work around flaws we made in the previous version. But, management kept imposing the same deadlines on us (Prototype for CES, release for Black Friday). We went from shipping the rare patch to deal with other manufacturers' devices not following their released specs to issuing monthly batches of patches with some emergency patches thrown in as well.
Of course there isn't a reason to delete the deceased anyway. At 18 GB for 20 million people is quite compact, and the trade off of disk space used versus benefits of being able to look that data up easily seems to very much favor keeping it. That works out to be about 1 MB per person, even if you are storing multiple redundant copies on something as expensive as an all-NVMe array, each record is only going to cost you pennies to keep (And it may very well be more expensive to purge a record from the database).
The presence of old records may very well indicate that they have completed back-filling with historical records. Or it could indicate that this includes everyone that has lived or worked in Ecuador. If its a database of ID cards, that would include foreign nationals there for study, tourism, work, journalists, etc.
The code is still in the source, you can bring it back with the proper incantations in your config. Developers can still test to see if their code breaks, but normal users aren't affected.
With the code, pushing audio over DisplayPort via an AMD Vega 56 card to a stereo-out jack on a monitor will cause PulseAudio will end up spewing mangled audio for a few seconds, then core dump.
I wonder how many people will actually pay them for it when backup software / media is going to be much cheaper. A blue-ray burner, a 50-pack of disks, and some software is going to set you back, maybe, $200. External Blu-ray burners can be had for around $100 and 100-pack spindles of 25 GB discs are another $75.
I keep a physical copy of my OS and the backup software nearby, so if I have to, I can restore my system in an afternoon, especially with how much stuff is up in the cloud. I also keep a copy in my safe deposit box, so even if my house burned down, I'd be back up and running in no time (And that is assuming I wasn't able to grab my laptop before evacuating)
The cost of the repairs, fuel, accommodations / new fares for the now-stranded passengers, finding another aircraft to handle the routes this aircraft was supposed to fly, and reputational damage will easily blow past the $640,000 cost, might even exceed $6,400,000 when all is said and done.
There is supposed to be a circuit breaker for the ACPs. But sounds like Airbus bundled the power supply for the ACP with some other devices instead of giving them their own breaker, like they should. I sure hope they didn't bundle it in with the radios themselves, since that provides a failure mode where a malfunctioning ACP could cause all three radios to die at once.
It is normally splash proof, water-resistance is even part of the EASA/FAA requirements for aircraft of that weight class. It sounds like a technician failed to install the foam/plastic sealing layer when they last serviced the ACPs. Or the pilot might have spilled a lot more liquid on it than reported.
I interned at Thales's returns department when I was in school getting my Electrical Engineering degree (The group I interned with evaluated returned avionics to identify common failures). We received a lot of returned avionics systems that were missing their seals even though we include 2-3 in each of our service kits.
Yeah, but the person paying may not actually be aware that they are paying for it. The fraudsters could be using a stolen credit card to pay for hosting, or just hijacking someone's cloud account. I've seen more than a few occasions of employees of large corporations throwing their own instances in with the company's massive fleet, I wouldn't be surprised if some of those were used for nefarious purposes.
Just because a programming language is popular, doesn't mean there is much written in it. A lot of studies of 'most popular' are done by just looking at common code repositories (Usually github or Sourceforge) and checking the extensions of the files (Some are even lazier than that and just look at project tags). Such studies rarely consider such factors as lines-of-code, activity, etc.
You may end up with situations where a repository has two JavaScript projects that might have a dozen lines each and only have been touched twice in the last decade, and only a handful of people in the world actually use it. But the you have a single project written in C that encompasses tens of millions of lines of code and is seeing contributions several times an hour, and its used by literally billions of systems around the clock. In that case, these studies would still show that JavaScript is the most popular language.
For every Linux Kernel, you have hundreds of trivial projects written in simple languages, many by CompSci students as a term project.
The problem remain as long as we human stay obsessed with tacking numbers onto things that can't be easily quantified. Like, do you count the popularity of a programming language by number total software projects that use it? Lines of code? Number of contributions? Download count? Installation count? Execution count? Number of cycles the code has used globally? Or do you go with something based on humans and ask everyone what their favorite language is? Which one they use most often? Or even some subjective factor like what language is most important to humanity?
It seems really weird to me that an interpreter for a programming language can't handle code written for older versions of the code. Like I have some old K&R C that still compiles just fine with a C18 compiler. I have ancient Java that works with a recent JRE, I have 10+ year old JS that works in modern browsers. Sure, I get warnings about deprecated functions and constructs, but the compiler / engine is intelligent to work around that by simply branching to the old compiler's code So what happened to Python 3 that is making migrating from the 2.x series so difficult?
I have very, very little experience with Python, but a wealth of experience with plenty of other languages ranging from ADA to Java, and even PowerHell. And they all have some method of running the old code, and when introducing incompatible updates to previous code, they'll almost always just implemented new functions instead.
California's Attorney General Xavier Becerra received money from a PAC during his election that receives a large amount of money from Google. Participating in an investigation against Google, would result in the PAC losing money (Or the PAC removing their support for his re-election campaign), which in turn, would very likely result in him losing a re-election bid.
Since Citizen's United, this has become the norm. Massive corporations push money into PACs, the PACs support certain candidates, but the second those candidates do anything to cause that corporation to lose a bit of money, the PAC will swing their support behind a rival candidate for the next election, or in some cases, the PAC may fund a recall campaign.
Just because you can automate something doesn't mean that you should. And something like missiles seems like something you want regular flesh-and-blood humans to do. I've seen industrial robots trying to move boxes that aren't there, or trying to shove objects into containers despite the container already being full. Or pick-and-place machines that got miscalculated and are trying to place a capacitor into a space that is currently occupied occupied by the PCB.
I am worried that we'll get a bomb loading robot that mistakes a bulkhead for a bomb rack and attempts to smash a 1000-pound bomb into it . Or drops a nuclear warhead into the ocean because it doesn't realize the ship departed an hour ago. Or a broken sensor causes a torpedo loading robot to not realize the torpedo tube is closed and instead smashes an armed torpedo into the tube's closed breech.
Not sure about those particular cannons, but I've worked with some that were fiberglass but had a tube wedged inside for detonating pyrotechnic shells. When the thing goes off, it creates a huge bang and a plume of smoke. Along the bottom was some pneumatic cylinders to push the whole thing back rapidly when 'fired'.
The idea of 'female' voices for automated systems was based on some flawed research done by the RAF and USAF when choosing voices for the audio alerting systems in aircraft.
When reproduced, such studios come to conclusion that the best voice for an automated system isn't universal, but rather based on the voice of the user. The best 'voices' to use in a system are those that are different, but not significantly different than the speakers' own voice or those differing from people they interact with frequently. In safety situations, this voice should also be switched periodically (EG, twice a year or so, depending on how commonly heard the voice is).
Really, to be effective, such systems should be equipped with a wide variety available voices. With Adobe's Voco tools and other similar software, you can make a nearly infinite number of voices that are tailored to the user.
Something I've noticed rising in Silicon-valley style companies is this weird cult-like culture forming. When I started my career, I had a standard 40-hour work-week, a pension, a union card, and a very balanced work-life ratio. When I left work at 5 pm, I could take off my work ID, tuck it in my pocket, and I"d be my own person until 9 am the next work day. We wouldn't talk politics or working conditions at work, but we had sufficient free time to do so after work or at our union meetings.
A few years ago, the company was bought up by a Google-like Silicon Valley company, and the whole thing felt super creepy. All the various 'features' of the company, such as the video games, toys, alcohol, food, and so on. It felt like they were saying "You have no life of your own, we are your life now". I find myself spending 60+ hours in the office now, and being shamed for doing anything less. I find many of my coworkers already at work when I get in, and staying long after I leave for the day. I found conversations with my coworkers have shifted from non-work topics (EG, our lives outside of work) to now its all about our company, our competitors, the industry, etc. The bland walls of the office have been replaced with bright colors with quotes from the founder and corporate logos. Standard dress has gone from standard 'business casual' to shirts with the company's logos splattered all over. My title of 'Director of Information Technology' got replaced with a meaningless one that included the company's name.
But, really, the two big things that bother me the most are that my pension has been replaced with a pile of a ridiculously volatile stock that I worry will either double immediately after I sell it or I hold on too long and it tanks. But also, the company has made it so that my union card is now just a piece of power (Less than 1% of the company is Union, so being union holds very little power). The stock thing bothers me since it means that any time we air a legitimate criticism of the company, we risk seeing our retirement just go up in smoke. Anytime we don't make our unreasonable deadlines, again our retirement gets chipped away...
In essence, I went from a boring, but stable job to chaos and cult-like worship of the company. Ironically, I enjoyed so much more freedom and felt so much happier in my blue-ish cube in my beige office than I did in the "Chuck-e-Cheese with laptops" office I work in now. Pretty much everyone that I had worked with before the acquisition feel the same way, and not just the grey-beards like myself, but also everyone from upper management down to the interns.
Really, we wouldn't be talking about anything controversial like politics or workplace grievances at work if we still had our other venues to do so.
I love the consistency of the configuration files. I've been using the same config files since 4.0, which were just minor changes from my 3.x series installs. The configs are even compatible across versions and OSes, I have a bunch of system where my home directory is a simple NFS mount and I can trust my customization are present across all my systems.
The computer should also throttle the CPU when there is a tiny amount of load on the system. Why run the CPU at 1.9 GHz when you're only throwing a few hundred cycles of the chip's time? The CPU running idle instructions still wastes more power than just cranking the frequency down and running the CPU at 100% @ 200 MHz. A CPU running @ 2 GHz with a 10% load will use over double the energy as the same CPU clocked at 200 MHz and running at 100%. The difference might even be more extreme, especially if the workload is spending most of its time waiting on I/O anyway.
I've been tinkering with this on one of my laptops, I have a modified Linux Kernel that instructs the CPU to throttle itself in response to the system's load. I've been able to get the system down to 25 MHz, which was more than enough to process hardware and software interrupts. The system was a fairly basic Kernel + Busybox system, though, so not much for the system to do. Doing this extended the battery life of the system to the range of several days. Entering the BIOS config utility and leaving it there burns more battery than my tests. Putting actual load on the system will have it spun up and running at the expected speeds. The amount of time I wait for the CPU to spin back up is nothing in comparison to the amount of battery life I am saving.
The GPU is also able to throttle its clock in response to demand (IIRC it is based on a multiple of the CPU's speed). Really, the GPU could be operating at a much lower performance level than normal since that low level is enough to fulfill the meager demand of drawing Task Manager and the desktop and pushing the pixels out to the display.
Really, in a well-engineered system utilizing performance throttling technologies, every component would report a usage of 90% or greater. IE, just enough performance to handle the workload without wasting watts to run their idle loops.
In any case, the problem here is that Windows crashes at such low speeds even though load is almost nil. A properly-made OS should be able to run at any speed so long as there is enough performance to keep from exhausting queues (Well, also enough to prevent the CPU cache from decaying before the instruction is complete, but that's a silicon issue, not an OS issue).
We can play 'who watches the watchers?' all day. No system is perfect and without the possibility of corruption, I just want something that is less imperfect.
But my point is having at least something a little less terrible than the current IAB system. My big problem with the IAB system is that it reports up to the Chief of Police and/or the Police Commissioner, both people that are politically motivated to protect the police department from scandal. A lot of IAB offices also tend to be staffed with former cops that either got injured and can no longer work as regular cops, or washed out of the police academy, or at least that is how it is around here. My other big problem with the system is that in many cities, it is the IAB that has full authority over whether to file charges for police misconduct or not. There have been multiple cases of crimes committed by cops against other cops that IAB, under pressure from the police chief, the IAB never files charges. In other cases, there have been reports of officers mishandling evidence, but the IAB investigation is ended under pressure of the District Attorney since an accusation of mishandling evidence would be grounds to re-open every case that cop was involved, which can seriously damage a prosecutor's win record f people are found to have been wrongly convicted.
What I am proposing is an agency that has no law-enforcement powers over the people, only the law enforcement agencies and their employees. Essentially, they'd be the answer to 'Who watches the watchers', as to who watches them, I would say have the organization controlled by a board of commissioners that is half made up of State/Federal legislators and half elected by the people directly.
The problem is that current bodycam programs are set up is that the bodycam footage is held by the police themselves and no-one else. This leads to situations where the police are accused of malfeasance, the evidence just straight up disappears. This is kind of the same problem with the concept of oversight by an "Internal Affairs Bureau" in that its asking an organization to oversee itself, which causes massive levels of conflict-of-interest.
This country really needs some kind of agency or organization set up for the sole purpose of providing oversight of our law enforcement system (Perhaps something that reports up through to the state / federal legislature since the police are ostensibly a part of the Executive branch and the legislature is supposed to be a counter-weight to executive power).
But, to your point of using the 'blockchain', the blockchain is only useful in verifying a chain of transactions involving an arbitrary block of data (Thus "Block chain"). In this case, a simple cryptographic signature would be sufficient, especially if the data included such metadata as an accurate timestamp, GPS coordinates, and possibly some data from some gyros to determine the camera angle. Include that data in each frame, then run a SHA256 against the frame itself. Then when the file gets closed out, do a hash of the hashes and/or the video data itself. That would be sufficient to prove authenticity of the video itself.
In Canada and the US, the regulation for IFR is just an additional set of instruments that are independent from your primary instruments. Most people use the old steam gauges because those are known-good and already designed in. I recently upgraded my old C172-J to a full glass cockpit, no steam gauges at all, not even a mechanical compass, and its approved for IFR. I was going to need to replace the instruments anyway due to its age, and decided to just toss it all and go full-glass.
All I needed in my panel was:
2x Dynon Skyview display (Only 1 needed)
1x Garmin G5 w/ backup battery
1x Garmin GNX-375
1x Dynon 2-axis Autopilot kit.
I carry a handheld Aviation radio and a compass as backup, but they're not required.
If the pilot is only a few seconds from crashing, they already fucked up. A pilot assumes everything is operating properly all the time is a pilot that is going to get themselves killed regardless of any malicious activity. Any pilot worth their weight in piss is constantly planning for worst-case scenarios and how they will resolve that. A pilot on approach has already performed a dozen landings mentally with many different scenarios ranging from "What if the runway isn't empty? What if there is a sudden cross wind? What if my engine fails?". If they failed that, then its time for a go-around.
Besides, flaps aren't really quiet or fast, and they are visible from the pilot's seat on nearly all small craft. The only aircraft I've flown that don't have the flaps visible from the pilot's seat are aircraft that don't have flaps int he first place. Flaps take longer to retract than it would for a pilot to open the throttle and raise airspeed above clean-stall.
GOt a chance to try it. Most of the utilities that came with Win 1.0 work well enough, but attempting to start a graphical session results in it crashing and burning. The screen goes black, then full white, then a bunch of lines and static-like effects, then the machine just crashes and reboots.
You can run Windows 1.0 on top of FreeDOS, which will boot on EFI. FreeDOS will even work on massive systems like the 8-cpu behemoth I just got in (Using FreeDOS to update the firmware of the system). Now I'm tempted to copy the Windows 1.0 binaries over to my FreeDOS stick and see what happens...
Ken Thompson demonstrated that in his infamous "Reflections on Trusting Trust" speech at the 1983 Turing awards. He built a version of cc, the c compiler, that had enough logic to recognize when it was compiling the Unix login code or when it was compiling the c-compiler. When it detected that the compiler was building the login code, it would inject itself into the resulting binary. If it detected you were compiling the Unix login code, it would insert an extra line into the case statement that processes the username. In this case, if you used the username 'ken', the case statement would just jump over the code to check /etc/passwd and just set the UID/GID to 0 and proceed to setting up the session.
You could have clean source for both the login page and cc, then re-compile the compiler before building Unix and still have his backdoor present on your system. You could only get rid of it by using a different compiler, used an old compiler to build the new one, or manually remove the backdoor code from the binary.
They may have that much in -total- storage, they aren't partitioning it as one big virtual volume like what ORNL is doing.
The point of this storage is to keep a single data set while it is being digested by the supercomputer, they may even have it set as a single contiguous mount point / partition. The intelligence services are going to break their storage into small chunks, one for each data set they are working with.
Kinda like the original model where an advertiser would pay the website to display the ad, then send them a simple jpg, gif, and/or chunk of HTML. The website owner then drops it into the site's pages. The advertising site then gets paid when they see a link with the advertising site's url in the referrer field of the http request. Figuring out how much was owed was a simple matter of a few command line utilities (Like grep and sed). But then, that led to such situations where websites were able to cut out the ad men from the deal, and if there is anything that useless scum like admen hate more than being cut out, I've never heard of it.
I miss the days of when you'd be on a forum like an amateur aircraft builder's forum and you'd have simple static, or simple, non-eye-searing gifs provided to the operator of the forum by various aircraft parts companies and the like. The image was a simple link to the store it was advertising, no redirects, no third-parties, nothing but simple link. Periodically, the advertised store would look at their logs, pull out the web access logs and counted the number of unique visitors and also number of visitors that bought something, then cut a check.
Clients will still cache pages and objects no matter the transport. Caching on a network is fairly pointless now as the bulk of your data is going to be single-view images and videos anyway (EG, images that change uri based on the person looking at them. Like how a social media site is going to provide a fresh uri for each user viewing the same image)
I do use a decrypting/re-crypting proxy to do content filtering and malware detection, I did do some caching, but I ended up with a less than <1% cache hit percentage, and only saved a piddling amount of bandwidth as the items that were in the cache were tiny icons, 1K css files, and other minuscule files that the client would cache anyway; while it was missing on all the image and video data, which made up like 99% of our traffic.
Ran a few documents through it to test it. A document written in standard English version worked alright (A few minor errors), but then started getting a little worse with docs in German and French. But it just feel over and puked when I fed it some documents written in Chinese, Korean, Arabic, and Hindi. Pretty much the further you got away from ASCII characters, the worse it performed.
All of these were just translated versions of the same marketing document.
I'm hoping they use something like bitmaps or plain text to store their scanned data rather than some proprietary format. Like right now I am dealing with recovering some 10-year old scans of contracts that were scanned in some archaic format that the only bit of software that can read it runs only on Windows 95/98 and requires a special image processing card that doubled as the interface to the scanner.
For reference, I believe that the World would be better off if the Catholic Church just up and disappeared overnight, or at least their management and central organization. But they are holding on to some historical records that are quite important from when they went through their World Domination phase and stole everything that wasn't Catholic, and burnt everything they couldn't abscond with; making them the only people with any written information left in Europe / Western Asia.
Also, they are still holding on to a lot of files that are quite pertinent to on-going criminal investigations (Although I'm pretty sure those aren't going to be making it into their archives)
Sure they say they only reveal information when compelled by a court order, but are they bothering to check that the order itself is valid?
This is something that has always bothered me about corporations: They never bother to actually challenge the order. They see a piece of paper with a judge's signature on it and will do whatever the hell it says without question. A judge could tell them to punch themselves in the face and 5 minutes later every employee is sporting a couple of black-eyes.
"And just how many nations had the US overthrown in 1965? 0?"
By 1967, we had used the overthrow of several nations as a negotiating tactic. Panama during the Canal, pretty much the entire history of the United Fruit Company, Operation Ajax, the Bay of Pigs, the overthrown of Queen Liliʻuokalani in Hawaii, numerous coups in Central and South America. And this is just the stuff off the top of my head...
In 1967 alone, we attempted many times at overthrowing the governments of Cuba, the USSR, China, and a handful of other nations that had adopted communism, or we suspected might aligning themselves with the Soviet Union.
America didn't invent global violence, xenophobia, Might Makes Right and White Man's Burden bullshit. Guess where they learned all that from, I'll give you a hint, it's a nation whose flag is also mostly red and white stripes with some chunks of blue.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
