cybersecurity
Cracking the cyber world: NSA, hackers, and the complicated ways that digital information can threaten our personal lives, politics and national security.
'Big brother' apparatus to create a state of obedience
So in the brave new world of the miliary-industrial complex how do you turn a public relations dilemma and media pushback within the pseudo-democratic matrix into a smooth transition to all-out dystopian domination? Well, that seems to be the quandary facing Palantir at the moment.
By Steve Harrison12 days ago in The Swamp
Crunching numbers to turn us all into police informants
In the first part of this investigation into the “Miami lice sucking away our civil liberties” I suggested the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) was probably fairly satisfied with its relationship with Palantir, the National Health Service (NHS) less so – although still committed to a seven-year deal signed in 2023 – while British police authorities seemed to have some serious misgivings about the tech giant, however I harbour sneaky suspicions it’s just rhetoric to placate a fragile public perception of the surveillance monster.
By Steve Harrison12 days ago in The Swamp
Inside the belly of the beast also known as Palantir
Just guessing, but I figure I’m one of very few people from my generation who has not read J R R Tolkien’s “The Lord of the Rings” or watched Peter Jackson’s cinematic adaptations of the epic created by the “father of fantasy”.
By Steve Harrison12 days ago in The Swamp
The Missing Argument in the Stay-at-Home Parent Subsidy Debate
Preface: Video Context: Video Credit: Timcast / Tim Pool This article is a response to a recent Timcast segment discussing the proposed policy that would allow qualifying married couples with a stay-at-home parent to receive childcare subsidies of roughly $9,000 per child per year. The video frames the central debate around whether this amounts to additional welfare or whether it simply redirects money government is already spending on childcare toward parents who choose to provide that care themselves. Around 9:32–10:20 , Tim argues that the welfare expenditure already exists and that the important change is where the incentive points: instead of subsidizing families specifically when parents work and children are cared for elsewhere, the same funding could begin supporting married parents who raise their children at home.
By Peter Thwing - Host of the FST Podcast26 days ago in The Swamp
A Better Buyout: Paying Married Parents to Buy Back Their Time
A Different Kind of Buyout I previously proposed what I called a Family Support Buyout: give families the option to voluntarily exchange a large portion of the government benefits and services already being spent on their behalf for one predictable, untaxed monthly payment they control themselves. Instead of administering SNAP, childcare subsidies, housing assistance, refundable credits, cash assistance, and other ordinary supports through separate bureaucracies, government could calculate the avoidable cost of those programs and offer families perhaps 65, 70, or 75 percent of that value directly. The family would relinquish the benefits being replaced, taxpayers would retain the remaining savings, and the household would gain dramatically greater control over how its resources are allocated. Medical coverage, disability services, catastrophic healthcare, and other specialized needs could remain separate because those costs are less suitable for a simple cash conversion. The central idea was straightforward: if government is already spending $100 supporting a family, perhaps both taxpayers and the family can benefit if the family receives $70 directly instead.
By Peter Thwing - Host of the FST Podcast26 days ago in The Swamp
