Posts Tagged ‘AT&T’

Why Ron Paul has a claim on his name on the Internet

April 10, 2013
Plaque on the ICANN (Internet Corporation for ...

Plaque on the ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

These guys wanting a quarter million means that the web site means a lot of money for anybody who owns it, BUT I DO think they know that they can never get the use of it, nor get the liberty-message mileage, AND their demand for a quarter million speaks volumes to the FACT that they are VERY MUCH into getting something just for being the first to take advantage of a GOVERNMENT-CREATED monopoly on DNS names and the DNS system for the entire world.

ICANN independent you say, not government? No more than the Federal Reserve, right?

The assumption that somehow Ron Paul is using government force to rob something from somebody that they “homesteaded”. NOT SO!

The DNS system and the government-protected monopoly mandate ICANN has to control the names, is a government “virtual” reality.

That’s why I think eventually Stephen Kinsella may even change his mind about this issue, because I agree with his view that a government-created “virtual” property is a speech-suppressing fiction and distortion on the free market. It’s not a telecommunications monopoly like AT&T was before their breakup, BUT it is a “virtual” monopoly.

He said in one interview that if not for trademark law, Ron Paul would have no basis for a claim.

My answer to that is that without a government protection for the ICANN monopoly, and its de facto control over the names by virtue of an Internet that grew as a government creation instead of “organically” like it was before ARPA “took them over” –whether by intention or by accident. It is also a government so bloated out of proportion to the “free” economy, such as it was, that the thing was warped from the beginning by government presence, because by then it was the biggest thing going in the economy.

When you go to visit somebody in the physical world, you look for what the address is. There is no easy such system for the Internet, and when you “lease” the “rights” to the name before somebody else from this government-created committee, you also implicitly are forced to agree that the same ones who granted this monopoly on the name in the DNS servers across the country, have the right to abide by their own rules, or at least make judgments based on those rules, to give it to somebody else.

In other words, all Internet named addresses have to go to the government-created name clearinghouse before you could get to your address, and they tell your computer where to go.

I’ve seen the mentions of other famous people who could not get sites with their names, BUT the examples I’ve seen are NOT examples that equate AT ALL. billclintonsucks.com is NOT billclinton.com.

Truth is, for awhile there were maverick companies making a bit of money by setting up other primary domains. One of them was dot-info, before the ICANN “approved” it. At the time, anybody with a DNS server on the Internet who wanted to was able to direct traffic that ended in that suffix to that DNS server, or download its name-to-address tables.

So get with it people. I once went to ronpaul-dot-com expecting it to be the good doctor’s own web site, and as soon as I realized it wasn’t I lost interest in it. That’s just me but it is worth something.

But the arguments against Ron Paul getting his name back from the government monopoly on virtual names, well, that’s just fair.

And these guys have apparently done okay by the message, while building a business. But when they say they’re barely “breaking even”, get skeptical, or, if they are barely “breaking even”, then why do they think the name is worth a quarter-million?

I recommend also reading Lew Rockwell’s article on this “controversy”, as he also adds a few facts that were ignored when the story broke. Like for example, the name-grabbers and present “owners” saying Ron Paul was going to the United Nations for this. Somebody picked up on this to go to the utterly ridiculous headlines. It’s a fictitious “ownership” because ICANN ultimately controls the naming anyway, and you have to keep handing them the recognition of the ownership fee annually or it “lapses” to someone else.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/132275.html

So there you go, you think about that.

* Ron Paul and ronpaul.com: The argument I haven’t seen out there (trutherator.wordpress.com)

Can IBM’S Big Blue Or Watson beat THIS?

March 16, 2013
Animation of the structure of a section of DNA...

Animation of the structure of a section of DNA. The bases lie horizontally between the two spiraling strands. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

DNA is a biochemical analogue of a memory chip with programming. mRNA, RNA, is like the hardware that interprets the machine-language instructions for the epigenetic environment and the cellular machinery.

The DNA itself is a recording of a written coded language. Computers today store all information in bits, charges of “zero” and “one” in magnetic or optic media. A gene is stored in a DNA molecule in a medium of the arrangement of nucleotides linked in a chain. The A, C, T, G nucleotides are the ONLY letters in the completely digitized SYMBOLIC language to store the data.

The clincher for me is that the language in the DNA has NOTHING to do with the eventual effect it has in the cell. Run source code through the CPU and the machine does nothing, or freezes, or stops. Source code has to be translated. So does DNA.

It’s mind-boggling. A computer has to have a programmer. DNA indeed has one:

Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.(Psalm 139:16)

That verse actually exposes the modern counterfeit translations. One guy once asked me why I changed the words in my quote of the verse to make it “look like” DNA. I didn’t. The other modern versions DO change the words to make it NOT look like DNA.

Darwinian evolution is nothing new though. It’s a very old idea that Satan used Darwin to cloak in modern lingo:

Jeremiah 2:27 Saying to a stock, Thou art my father; and to a stone, Thou hast brought me forth: for they have turned their back unto me, and not their face: but in the time of their trouble they will say, Arise, and save us.

That verse in Jeremiah 2, part of the introduction of the book of prophecies of the judgment coming to Israel for such beliefs, actually shows that (1) the beliefs, that life “came forth” from rocks that were eroded and scorched and melted into the primeval ooze, are NOT a “discovery” of the 18th and 19th centuries, but were there way back in the effort to avoid God searing their conscience, and (2) the belief that humans are evolved from lesser animals like “stock”, is also an ancient myth.

They modern academic ruling class censors this history, along with the history of unions, the Roosevelt statist policies that made the Great Depression much worse and longer than it had to be, the criminal actions of the Federal Reserve and its traitorous passage in 1913 in the US Congress.

They hide the fact that Karl Marx included a “Graduated” income tax in his Communist Manifesto platform, plus a “central bank” in every nation of the world. This is the anti-capitalist? Sneaking in a policy of private-sector Wall Street types and international banksters to control the world’s currency, interest rates, mortgages, and economies?

But did Mao Tse-Tung push economics or even Communist Party doctrines into the first things he pushed into his schools after taking over? Nah, he pushed evolution as the first priority in education in China.

Jesus believed in the six-day Creation, too:

Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

So did Paul:

1 Corinthians 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

Government created the Internet as we have it today?! Oh yeah?

September 3, 2012

 

English: Portrait of Antonio Gramsci around 30...

English: Portrait of Antonio Gramsci around 30 in the early 20s Français : Portrait d’Antonio Gramsci, vers 30 ans, au début des années 1920. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

 

This is what Lenin meant by “useful idiots” and this is what Saul Alinsky‘s teacher Gramsci meant by destroying capitalism by getting those “useful idiots” to bankrupt its governments by making them spend too much money and drying up the private sector.

 

The private network of networks was already in formation, you had the online computer services like AOL, Prodigy and thousands of independent bulletin boards, and it would have/could have formed a network by sheer commercial necessity, because that is exactly what has made it successful in the real world.

 

Without private investment, ARPA would have stayed as it was already.

 

Standards and “cooperation” OF COURSE happen without government involvement, ALL THE TIME, when they leave it alone.

 

Government didn’t invent inches and feet, or pounds and miles per hour. There are private and NGO standards organizations too.

 

The existence of the DARPA network simply made a convenient center to coalesce around, and the fact that government had infused money into it attracted commercial interests away from the natural organic network that could have evolved independently.

 

Saying the government “created” the Internet is like saying the Federal Communications Commission “created” the cell phone network in the country.

 

It’s like saying the federal government “created” the telephone network we have today when it gave AT&T the phone monopoly in the early 20th century.

 

Or acting like there was no way we could have had a decent telecommunications system if the federal government had not legalized that monopoly. It’s ridiculous.

 

Free market innovation finds a way when it is allowed to.

 

As soon as government restrictions were lifted, commercial interests saw dollar signs in their eyes, and it was a ready-made network of organizations with money, so of course investors made it grow.

 

 

A thousand cheers for the Boy Scouts and for Chick-Fil-A too! Stand up to Big Brother Media and Groupthink!

July 24, 2012
History of the Boy Scouts of America

History of the Boy Scouts of America (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Logo of the Family Research Council.

Logo of the Family Research Council. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Chick-fil-A

Chick-fil-A (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I didn’t make it too far in the Boy Scouts, but I wish I had. It was a great organization and I guess it still is. They did the right thing, and if they had caved they would have lost a lot more people than they have lost as it is, and I’m sure that factored into it.

I hoped AT&T and Ernst & Young get out. Their CEO’s said they’ll continue on the board and push for a change.

But HEY! Nobody said you couldn’t do YOUR OWN version of the Boy Scouts!

That tells us this is NOT about anybody’s “rights” because they can go start an alternative organization anytime, any day! Please go do it! You’d probably get plenty of tax money from the people that don’t believe in you with all the government sponsorships you get.

It’s bad enough that so many Christian church organizations have abandoned any pretense of following BIblical principles or even caring about them, but instead justify whatever the dictates from cultural dictators are.

Get government out of it, and stop trying to force your morals on the rest of us and on the families of America!

By the way, I’m going to make a point to get my fast food at Chick-Fil-A, and my pizza from Domino’s. Chick-Fil-A is getting pounded with all the free air time and newsprint they’re giving away to a boycott that was brought simply because they donated $1,000 to the Family Research Council one year. (The deceit is they gave away a lot more to a lot of other organizations, but the Masochistic Dictator-Loving Control Freak crowd, Vladimir Lenin‘s “useful idiots”, are marching lock-step in what they’re being told to think.

Orwell’s Oceania, Josef Stalin, they should have it so good.

Not only do they demand that the government confiscate the money from the economy that could have been used to give them jobs, they act like they’re demanding to be told what to do next.

Time to think for ourselves, people!

And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.- John 8:32