My point is that the higher tax rates were not responsible for the prosperity we enjoyed in the 90's. In an economy with little or no growth like it is now, it would be even more stifling to raise taxes on anyone. Flat tax. You earn a dollar you pay a %, you earn a billion, you pay the same %. That is the essence of fair.

dot com boom?

1, 2, 3......what's really fair?

so we are still trading, the computer is just doing the grunt work.

It's more important that what a day is be the same across the globe not what the hour is. Like you said, our time is relative to the where the sun is in the sky. It makes perfect sense.

Why should time ;)

I don't think /. or the article mean to imply anything other than what you took it to mean. The headline of the story

simply means that Facebook, the service helped Israel compile this blacklist, the same way the activists used it to coordinated their efforts. The context of how Facebook is used isn't clear from the headline, which actually makes it a good headline because people will read it. Hopefully they will understand once they do, that they were referring to the service, and not the company when they say Facebook.

This story isn't about Facebook, as a company helping Israel blacklist these activists. This is a story about how Facebook's service was used as a tool to compile this blacklist. Slashdot, nor the linked article mean to imply that FB, the company actively provided any assistance other than what the service already provides, to everyone. When it's said the Facebook aided Israel in spying on the activist, the correct context again is that Israel used Facebook's services which aided in monitoring these individuals, in the same way FB aided the activists in coordinating their efforts.

If your inbox were your house, it would be standing room only.

#1 Under general description says, "Intelligence analysts in theater do not have the tools required to fully analyze the tremendous amounts of information currently available in theater." DCGS-A is one of the tools used in theater for this purpose. Is is not? In the article, former intelligence officers are quoted as saying, "the system is still unusable. “You couldn’t share the data,” says one former officer, and they both agree that the system is “prone to crashes and frequently going off-line." Also in the article the Army issued patches for known problems with little effect. Is this untrue? The effective of this system can be qualified and quantified. I would agree the article was slanted if DCSG-A is an effective system, and the author is bringing forth false evidence of it's deficiencies. You indicate there is a motive for undermining this system, because they are backing Palantir, but the failures the article outlines are either true or false. Can you show me the system is effective, and if it's not, can you show me that it was never intended to be used to meet the needs outlined in the memo?

I town hall where being saved by the bell is the format.

Is it possible for someone who did have that information, and who understood it thoroughly, to make a generalized assessment of whether what is being sought is unattainable at the moment within the budget available and current or in development tech, or whether the concept is sound,and just not ready at this point, and not cost effective to iron out the kinks? Should someone have realized this would have been a waste of money beforehand, or is it something where we would have had to spend the money to find out? The government hemorrhages so much money on failed IT projects. Is this the cost of innovation, or the result of incompetence, and bad management?

On page 1, #2 of the memorandum Michael Flynn does in fact state that the ineffectiveness of the system leads to lost lives, however I feel he is blaming the reliance on a broken system as being the cause, as opposed to blaming the system itself. He is saying the system is not comprehensive enough to rely on operationally, but they are forced to rely on it anyway. If he were a mechanic informing a racing team of faulty equipment on their car, effectively rendering it unable to compete in a race, and the team owners decide to run it anyway, the continued reliance on the faulty equipment would be the factor for losing races. Switch out the car, and you've mitigated the problem, the ineffectiveness of the system no longer effects operations.

Could you elaborate generally on why you feel the system is ineffective? One former officer is quoted as saying the system couldn't share data. What were some of the major hurdles that prevented this? Logistics and connectivity, security, systems integration?

On page 1, #2 of the memorandum Michael Flynn does in fact state that the ineffectiveness of the system leads to lost lives, however I feel he is blaming the reliance on a broken system as being the cause, as opposed to blaming the system itself. He is saying the system is not comprehensive enough to rely on operationally, but they are forced to rely on it anyway. If he were a mechanic informing a racing team of faulty equipment on their car, effectively rendering it unable to compete in a race, and the team owners decide to run it anyway, the continued reliance on the faulty equipment would be the factor for losing races. Switch out the car, and you've mitigated the problem, the ineffectiveness of the system no longer effects operations.