Category Archives: Technology

UPDATE III: HealthCare.gov : ‘Please Wait. We Have A Lot Of Visitors …’ (His Proctology)

Barack Obama, Glenn Beck, Government, Healthcare, Political Economy, Socialism, Technology

The message that greeted future patients who logged on to HealthCare.gov was, “Please wait. we have a lot of visitors on our site right now and we’re working to make your experience here better. Please wait here until we send you to the login page. Thanks for your patience.”

The message @ HealthCare.gov is a good metaphor for what will unfold under Obama Care: long lines precipitated by the inevitable inability of centrally planned exchanges to bring supply and demand into balance.

The Affordable Health Care Act’s motto will become, “Please wait, we have a lot of patients, and not enough of your money and everything else needed—doctors, supplies, equipment—to treat them.”

Obama, however, compared the inauguration of Obamacare—the website practically crashed, as will The Plan—to the bumpy “launch of iOS 7, the new mobile operating system released by Apple on September 18th.”

Obama was referencing a bug that came with the launch of iOS 7, the new mobile operating system released by Apple on September 18th. The bug allowed anyone to bypass an iPhone’s lockscreen and access their personal information and content. Apple released a patch for it a few days later.
“I don’t remember anybody suggesting Apple should stop selling iPhones or iPads or threatening to shut down the company if they didn’t,” Obama added. “That’s not how we do things in America. We don’t actively root for failure.” According to Obama, issues with the site have been caused by a heavy influx of new users and general launch bugs. Wait times on both the site and hotline have been longer than expected.

(HuffPo)

What an Ass With Ears (although Fox News’ Greg Gutfeld also failed to zero-in on why the comparison was so stupid, saying instead that the one item was a neat product that everybody wanted; the other not so much).

Nobody is forced by law to purchase or subsidize an iPhone or an iPad, or any other product produced by Apple.

UPDATED: Glenn Beck and his very funny team went to Healthcare.gov to see what gives. Not much:

When Glenn attempted to access the site, he was promptly greeted with the Internet equivalent of a “hold button.”

“I’m here, and I don’t know if you can get a shot of this… but I just went to Healthcare.gov and I’m on this exciting page right now: ‘Health insurance marketplace, please wait. We have a lot of visitors on our site right now and we’re working to make your experience here better. Please wait here until we send you to the login page. Thanks for your patience.’”

Below is a screenshot of the message:

“The government is the only business that has actually come up with a ‘hold’ button on the Internet,” Glenn said. “I’ve never seen anything like it. We’ve got a hold button. Hope you don’t have anything really wrong with you. So I’m just waiting now. They have a lot of visitors on their site right now and they’re working to make your experience better.”

“We appreciate your patience. You are Number 477,326 in line,” Pat quipped. “Please continue to wait, as you will be taken in the order in which you arrived. Thank you for your patience.”
Advertisement

After being completely kicked off the site and told to “try again later,” Glenn finally reached the log-in page on Healthcare.gov.

“I just got a login. Oh my goodness. I refreshed. I tried again later, and it just… ‘New to healthcare.gov? Create an account. Log in.’ I think, well, I am new to healthcare.gov. So I should create accounts.”

Stu, meanwhile, was not quite as lucky.

“I was trying to log in as well. I just got a new message,” Stu said. “Would you like me to share it with you because it’s important for your healthcare. It’s ‘???.ee.shared.header.learn???’ followed by ‘ffeee.shared.header.getinsurance???’. That’s what came up on the screen when I refreshed. That is good. I feel healthier already.”

Pat was somehow able to avoid the ‘question mark, question mark, question mark’ error, but his experience was not anymore pleasant. “Now, this says ‘Get ready for the Marketplace.’ I’m at that page. It’s asking me a question, and I fit into none of these categories,” Pat lamented. “‘Do you want information on any of the following situations? This will help us provide material about coverage options.’ ‘Dependent under 18:’ No. ‘Self?employed:’ No. ‘Low?income coverage options:’ No. ‘Disability:’ No. ‘Pregnancy:’ No. ‘Veteran:’ No. ‘American Indian or Alaskan native:’ No. ‘Preexisting conditions covered’ and so there’s either yes or no, and those are the only options. I can’t click anywhere except ‘go back.’”

“Hold on. We’re trying to make your healthcare experience even better. Stand by,” Glenn joked. “Question mark, question mark, question mark.”

Very funny.

UPDATE II: “Worse Is the New Normal” by Mark Steyn:

So, as in banking and housing and college tuition and so many other areas of endeavor, Washington is engaging in a kind of under-the-counter nationalization, in which the husk of a nominally private industry is conscripted to enforce government rules — and ruthlessly so …

UPDATE III: “100 Unintended Consequences of Obamacare,” Trader Joe’s is at #80:

Even though it has previously provided health-care coverage for its part-time employees, an uncommon practice in the industry, next year Trader Joe’s will give employees who work less than 30 hours a week $500 to purchase a plan in the upcoming Obamacare exchanges. With federal subsidies and possible earnings from other employment, the company said, workers can find coverage that will be just as good. One employee described her soon-to-be lost coverage as “one of the best parts about the job,” and her reaction to hearing it would be dumped was “pure panic, followed quickly by anger.”

I’ve been paying higher deductibles and co-pays and know full well why this has come about. There is no free lunch. Perhaps, like Michelle Malkin, I too will lose my healthcare coverage. Nevertheless, I feel nothing but glee at any discomfort experienced by those who voted for Obama and lectured us about the glories of his proctology.

Taki On Twittering Twits and Twats*

Intelligence, Internet, Pop-Culture, Technology, The Zeitgeist

This is too good not to post: “… The Ancient Greek philosopher Taki calls people that Tweet and spend their time on Facebook the closest thing to subhumans. Cicero, John Gray, Taki—three great thinkers known for their silences and (I can only speak for the latter) not owning a mobile phone.”

[SNIP]

[To comport with Taki’s claim to greatness, and with respect, I would have edited that last sentence to read: “… known for their silences and (I can only speak for the latter) FOR not owning a mobile phone.”]

Hey, Taki, this writer beat you to it, writing in “The Dumb Generation’s Hand-Held Devotional” that “Myself, I have no interest in hand-held devices. I use my well-appointed PC for work. Away from the PC—during a jog, for instance—I think. Ideas flood my mind during physical exertion and solitude. On the rare occasions that we both go away on vacation, we do not take our work along.”

Yes, I confessed to not owning a mobile phone. I do not plan on acquiring one. My blog posts propagate to Twitter automatically. Facebook is used for the same purpose: post the work, interject on the Timeline when it’s educational, and leave.

But even more interesting, in my opinion, is an item also shared in “The Dumb Generation’s Hand-Held Devotional”:

“I live with an individual who is intimately involved in the design of some wonderful gadgets. Yet he himself hardly uses them in the little spare time he steals for himself. They frustrate him; they don’t seem to satisfy his creativity or sate his intellect. His greatest pleasure is found in composing and playing complex thematic pieces of music in his home studio. To do so he follows eternal, timeless rules of composition. Low-tech, if you like.”

*Twats: I don’t expect the twittering twits to know the word. Suffice it to say that it is a good, honest crudity, perfect for the occasion.

Surveillance Societies Condition Helplessness, Anxiety and Compliance.

Constitution, Individual Rights, Internet, Justice, Law, Liberty, Regulation, Technology, Terrorism, The State

“It’s slow and subtle,” writes Cato Institute’s Julian Sanchez, “but surveillance societies inexorably train us for helplessness, anxiety and compliance. Maybe they’ll never look at your call logs, read your emails or listen in on your intimate conversations. You’ll just live with the knowledge that they always could — and if you ever had anything worth hiding, there would be nowhere left to hide it.”

An superb piece by Sanchez, which I’ve followed, below, with a Sanchez segment on Stossel:

Some of the potentially sensitive facts those records expose becomes obvious after giving it some thought: Who has called a substance abuse counselor, a suicide hotline, a divorce lawyeror an abortion provider? What websites do you read daily? What porn turns you on? What religious and political groups are you a member of?

Some are less obvious. Because your cellphone’s “routing information” typically includes information about the nearest cell tower, those records are also a kind of virtual map showing where you spend your time — and, when aggregated with others, who you like to spend it with.

It’s precisely this kind of analysis the NSA is likely interested in doing to help “fingerprint” either specific suspects or the general profile of a terror suspect. Link that information to other data sets being collected, like credit card bills, and you can even deduce when a woman is pregnant before her own family knows. Think of big data analysis as a statistical Sherlock Holmes, capable of making surprising inferences from seemingly insignificant details and patterns.

But fine, so what if a bunch of strangers in a room in Fort Meade could, in principle, discover these things about you? There’s no reason to think they’re digging for that kind of stuff, and even if they did, it’d be like learning there are naked photos of you circulating in a Mongolian village: A little creepy, maybe, but unlikely to have a concrete effect on your life.

Assuming you don’t match a profile that gets you flagged for more intensive surveillance, that’s probably right — as long as they’re only using that vast, rich database to look for specific terror or espionage suspects. If they change their minds about the rules governing access to the database or how it’s put to use, of course, we’re unlikely to ever know; we didn’t know what the rules were before the leak either.

That’s one problem with bulk collection of data. The information often sticks around indefinitely, while the rules only stick around until someone decides to change them. The IRS is all fired up to use big data to hunt for tax cheats, and in principle, the NSA can disseminate evidence of some crime. Sooner or later, other agencies may start to wonder why such a juicy data set is going to waste.

But the average person is unlikely to pique the NSA’s interest, even when those sweeping surveillance powers are abused for purposes ranging beyond terrorism. It probably won’t affect you personally or directly.

However, that seems like an awfully narrow way to think about the importance of privacy. Folks don’t usually say (aloud, anyway), “I’m white, why should I care about racism?” or, “My political and religious views are too mainstream to ever be restricted, so why should I care about the First Amendment?”

READ ON.

And watch (no transcripts, of course) Stossel, as Sanchez explains that “most cellphone carriers have the capability to install remote spyware on your cell phone,” in addition to the dozens of [other] ways we can [and are being] tracked.

‘When People With Guns Meet You At The Airport’

Homeland Security, Intelligence, Journalism, Literature, Media, Technology, Terrorism, The State, Uncategorized

The New York Times is playing catch-up. It is running an in-depth feature about Laura Poitras, the heroic woman who “helped snowden spill his secrets.” The article is by investigative reporter Peter Maass, who has done work for the NYT, but is not a insider. A subplot in the Snowden case, of course, is how corrupt US media was usurped and sidelined by necessity.

Here’s an excerpted from “How Laura Poitras Helped Snowden Spill His Secrets”:

This past January, Laura Poitras received a curious e-mail from an anonymous stranger requesting her public encryption key. For almost two years, Poitras had been working on a documentary about surveillance, and she occasionally received queries from strangers. She replied to this one and sent her public key — allowing him or her to send an encrypted e-mail that only Poitras could open, with her private key — but she didn’t think much would come of it.

The stranger responded with instructions for creating an even more secure system to protect their exchanges. Promising sensitive information, the stranger told Poitras to select long pass phrases that could withstand a brute-force attack by networked computers. “Assume that your adversary is capable of a trillion guesses per second,” the stranger wrote.

Before long, Poitras received an encrypted message that outlined a number of secret surveillance programs run by the government. She had heard of one of them but not the others. After describing each program, the stranger wrote some version of the phrase, “This I can prove.”

Seconds after she decrypted and read the e-mail, Poitras disconnected from the Internet and removed the message from her computer. “I thought, O.K., if this is true, my life just changed,” she told me last month. “It was staggering, what he claimed to know and be able to provide. I just knew that I had to change everything.”

Poitras remained wary of whoever it was she was communicating with. She worried especially that a government agent might be trying to trick her into disclosing information about the people she interviewed for her documentary, including Julian Assange, the editor of WikiLeaks. “I called him out,” Poitras recalled. “I said either you have this information and you are taking huge risks or you are trying to entrap me and the people I know, or you’re crazy.”

The answers were reassuring but not definitive. Poitras did not know the stranger’s name, sex, age or employer (C.I.A.? N.S.A.? Pentagon?). In early June, she finally got the answers. Along with her reporting partner, Glenn Greenwald, a former lawyer and a columnist for The Guardian, Poitras flew to Hong Kong and met the N.S.A. contractor Edward J. Snowden, who gave them thousands of classified documents, setting off a major controversy over the extent and legality of government surveillance. Poitras was right that, among other things, her life would never be the same.

Greenwald lives and works in a house surrounded by tropical foliage in a remote area of Rio de Janeiro. He shares the home with his Brazilian partner and their 10 dogs and one cat, and the place has the feel of a low-key fraternity that has been dropped down in the jungle. The kitchen clock is off by hours, but no one notices; dishes tend to pile up in the sink; the living room contains a table and a couch and a large TV, an Xbox console and a box of poker chips and not much else. The refrigerator is not always filled with fresh vegetables. A family of monkeys occasionally raids the banana trees in the backyard and engages in shrieking battles with the dogs.

Greenwald does most of his work on a shaded porch, usually dressed in a T-shirt, surfer shorts and flip-flops. Over the four days I spent there, he was in perpetual motion, speaking on the phone in Portuguese and English, rushing out the door to be interviewed in the city below, answering calls and e-mails from people seeking information about Snowden, tweeting to his 225,000 followers (and conducting intense arguments with a number of them), then sitting down to write more N.S.A. articles for The Guardian, all while pleading with his dogs to stay quiet. During one especially fever-pitched moment, he hollered, “Shut up, everyone,” but they didn’t seem to care.

Amid the chaos, Poitras, an intense-looking woman of 49, sat in a spare bedroom or at the table in the living room, working in concentrated silence in front of her multiple computers. Once in a while she would walk over to the porch to talk with Greenwald about the article he was working on, or he would sometimes stop what he was doing to look at the latest version of a new video she was editing about Snowden. They would talk intensely — Greenwald far louder and more rapid-fire than Poitras — and occasionally break out laughing at some shared joke or absurd memory. The Snowden story, they both said, was a battle they were waging together, a fight against powers of surveillance that they both believe are a threat to fundamental American liberties.

READ ON.