Daily Archives: November 17, 2016

Who Is a Libertarian? | Foundation for Economic Education

Posted: November 17, 2016 at 6:42 pm

Those of us who favor individual freedom with personal responsibility have been unable to agree upon a generally acceptable name for ourselves and our philosophy of liberty. This would be relatively unimportant except for the fact that the opposition will call us by some name, even though we might not desire to be identified by any name at all. Since this is so, we might better select a name with some logic instead of permitting the opposition to saddle us with an epithet.

Some of us call ourselves individualists, but others point out that the opposition often uses that word to describe a heartless person who doesnt care about the problems and aspirations of other people.

Some of us call ourselves conservatives, but that term describes many persons who base their approval of an institution more on its age than on its inherent worth.

Many of us call ourselves liberals. And it is true that the word liberal once described persons who respected the individual and feared the use of mass compulsions. But the leftists have now corrupted that once-proud term to identify themselves and their program of more government ownership of property and more controls over persons. As a result, those of us who believe in freedom must explain that when we call ourselves liberals, we mean liberals in the uncorrupted classical sense. At best, this is awkward and subject to misunderstanding.

Here is a suggestion: Let those of us who love liberty trade-mark and reserve for our own use the good and honorable word libertarian.

Websters New International Dictionary defines a libertarian as One who holds to the doctrine of free will; also, one who upholds the principles of liberty, esp. individual liberty of thought and action.

In popular terminology, a libertarian is the opposite of an authoritarian. Strictly speaking, a libertarian is one who rejects the idea of using violence or the threat of violencelegal or illegalto impose his will or viewpoint upon any peaceful person. Generally speaking, a libertarian is one who wants to be governed far less than he is today.

A libertarian believes that the government should protect all persons equally against external and internal aggression, but should otherwise generally leave people alone to work out their own problems and aspirations.

While a libertarian expects the government to render equal protection to all persons against outright fraud and misrepresentation, he doesnt expect the government to protect anyone from the consequences of his own free choices. A libertarian holds that persons who make wise choices are entitled to enjoy the fruits of their wisdom, and that persons who make unwise choices have no right to demand that the government reimburse them for their folly.

A libertarian expects his government to establish, support, and enforce the decisions of impartial courts of justicecourts which do not recognize or refer to a persons race, religion, or economic status. If justice is to be rendered, the decisions of these courts must be as binding upon government officials and their actions as upon other persons and their actions.

A libertarian respects the right of every person to use and enjoy his honestly acquired propertyto trade it, to sell it, or even to give it awayfor he knows that human liberty cannot long endure when that fundamental right is rejected or even seriously impaired.

A libertarian believes that the daily needs of the people can best be satisfied through the voluntary processes of a free and competitive market. And he holds the strong belief that free persons, using their own honestly acquired money, are in the best possible position to understand and aid their fellow men who are in need of help.

A libertarian favors a strictly limited form of government with many checks and balancesand divisions of authorityto foil the abuses of the fearful power of government. And generally speaking, he is one who sees less, rather than more, need to govern the actions of others.

A libertarian has much faith in himself and other free persons to find maximum happiness and prosperity in a society wherein no person has the authority to force any other peaceful person to conform to his viewpoints or desires in any manner. His way of life is based on respect for himself and for all others.

A libertarian doesnt advocate violent rebellion against prevailing governmentsexcept as a last resort before the concentration camps. But when a libertarian sees harm rather than good in certain acts of government, he is obligated to try his best to explain to others who advocate those measures why such compulsory means cannot bring the ends which even they desire.

The libertarians goal is friendship and peace with his neighbors at home and abroad.

It is not the difference in taste between individuals that Libertarians object to, but the forcing of ones tastes upon another.

Charles T. Sprading

The idea of governing by force another man, who I believe to be my equal in the sight of God, is repugnant to me. I do not want to do it. I do not want any one to govern me by any kind of force. I am a reasoning being, and I only need to be shown what is best for me, when I will take that course or do that thing simply because it is best, and so will you. I do not believe that a soul was ever forced toward anything except toward ruin.

Samuel Milton Jones

Liberty for the few is not liberty. Liberty for me and slavery for you means slavery for both.

Samuel Milton Jones

The institutions of civil liberty leave each man to run his career in life in his own way, only guaranteeing to him that whatever he does in the way of industry, economy, prudence, sound judgment, etc., shall redound to his welfare and shall not be diverted to someone elses benefit. Of course it is a necessary corollary that each man shall also bear the penalty of his own vices and his own mistakes.

We are told what fine things would happen if every one of us would go and do something for the welfare of somebody else; but why not contemplate also the immense gain which would ensue if everybody would do something for himself?

Wherever collective standards, codes, ideals, and motives take the place of individual responsibility, we know from ample experience that the spontaneity and independent responsibility which are essential to moral vigor are sure to be lost.

William Graham Sumner

View post:

Who Is a Libertarian? | Foundation for Economic Education

Posted in Libertarian | Comments Off on Who Is a Libertarian? | Foundation for Economic Education

Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies: Amazon.co …

Posted: at 6:40 pm

Review

I highly recommend this book (Bill Gates)

Nick Bostrom makes a persuasive case that the future impact of AI is perhaps the most important issue the human race has ever faced. Instead of passively drifting, we need to steer a course. Superintelligence charts the submerged rocks of the future with unprecedented detail. It marks the beginning of a new era (Stuart Russell, Professor of Computer Science, University of California, Berkley)

Those disposed to dismiss an 'AI takeover' as science fiction may think again after reading this original and well-argued book (Martin Rees, Past President, Royal Society)

This superb analysis by one of the worlds clearest thinkers tackles one of humanitys greatest challenges: if future superhuman artificial intelligence becomes the biggest event in human history, then how can we ensure that it doesnt become the last? (Max Tegmark, Professor of Physics, MIT)

Terribly important ... groundbreaking... extraordinary sagacity and clarity, enabling him to combine his wide-ranging knowledge over an impressively broad spectrum of disciplines - engineering, natural sciences, medicine, social sciences and philosophy - into a comprehensible whole... If this book gets the reception that it deserves, it may turn out the most important alarm bell since Rachel Carson's Silent Spring from 1962, or ever (Olle Haggstrom, Professor of Mathematical Statistics)

Valuable. The implications of introducing a second intelligent species onto Earth are far-reaching enough to deserve hard thinking (The Economist)

There is no doubting the force of [Bostroms] arguments the problem is a research challenge worthy of the next generations best mathematical talent. Human civilisation is at stake (Financial Times)

His book Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies became an improbable bestseller in 2014 (Alex Massie, Times (Scotland))

Ein Text so nchtern und cool, so angstfrei und dadurch umso erregender, dass danach das, was bisher vor allem Filme durchgespielt haben, auf einmal hchst plausibel erscheint. A text so sober and cool, so fearless and thus all the more exciting that what has until now mostly been acted through in films, all of a sudden appears most plausible afterwards. (translated from German) (Georg Diez, DER SPIEGEL)

Worth reading.... We need to be super careful with AI. Potentially more dangerous than nukes (Elon Musk, Founder of SpaceX and Tesla)

A damn hard read (Sunday Telegraph)

I recommend Superintelligence by Nick Bostrom as an excellent book on this topic (Jolyon Brown, Linux Format)

Every intelligent person should read it. (Nils Nilsson, Artificial Intelligence Pioneer, Stanford University)

Nick Bostrom is Professor in the Faculty of Philosophy at Oxford University and founding Director of the Future of Humanity Institute and of the Programme on the Impacts of Future Technology within the Oxford Martin School. He is the author of some 200 publications, including Anthropic Bias (Routledge, 2002), Global Catastrophic Risks (ed., OUP, 2008), and Human Enhancement (ed., OUP, 2009). He previously taught at Yale, and he was a Postdoctoral Fellow of the British Academy. Bostrom has a background in physics, computational neuroscience, and mathematical logic as well as philosophy.

Go here to see the original:

Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies: Amazon.co ...

Posted in Superintelligence | Comments Off on Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies: Amazon.co …

Adobe Illustrator Artwork – Wikipedia

Posted: at 6:38 pm

Adobe Illustrator Artwork (AI) is a proprietary file format developed by Adobe Systems for representing single-page vector-based drawings in either the EPS or PDF formats. The .ai filename extension is used by Adobe Illustrator.

The AI file format was originally a native format called PGF. PDF compatibility is achieved by embedding a complete copy of the PGF data within the saved PDF format file. This format is not related to .pgf using the same name Progressive Graphics Format.[5]

The same dual path approach as for PGF is used when saving EPS-compatible files in recent versions of Illustrator. Early versions of the AI file format are true EPS files with a restricted, compact syntax, with additional semantics represented by Illustrator-specific DSC comments that conform to DSC's Open Structuring Conventions. These files are identical to their corresponding Illustrator EPS counterparts, but with the EPS procsets (procedure sets) omitted from the file and instead externally referenced using%%Include directives.

Aside from Adobe Illustrator, the following applications can edit .ai files:

Viewers:

See the rest here:

Adobe Illustrator Artwork - Wikipedia

Posted in Ai | Comments Off on Adobe Illustrator Artwork – Wikipedia

NSA CHIEF: Nation-state made ‘conscious effort’ to sway …

Posted: at 6:34 pm

NSA Director Adm. Michael Rogers. REUTERS/Larry Downing

The leader of the National Security Agency says there shouldn't be "any doubt in anybody's mind" that there was "a conscious effort by a nation-state" to sway the result of the 2016 presidential election.

Adm. Michael Rogers, who leads both the NSA and US Cyber Command, made the comments during a conference presented by The Wall Street Journal in response to a question about WikiLeaks' release of nearly 20,000 internal emails from the Democratic National Committee.

"There shouldn't be any doubt in anybody's mind," Rogers said. "This was not something that was done casually. This was not something that was done by chance. This was not a target that was selected purely arbitrarily. This was a conscious effort by a nation-state to attempt to achieve a specific effect."

Rogers did not specify the nation-state or the specific effect, though US intelligence officials say they suspect Russia provided the emails to WikiLeaks after hackers stole them from DNC servers and the personal email account of Hillary Clinton's campaign manager, John Podesta.

At least two different hacker groups associated with the Russian government were found inside the networks of the DNC over the past year reading emails, chats, and downloading private documents. Many of those files were later released by WikiLeaks.

The hack, which was investigated by the FBI and the cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike, was linked to Russia through a lengthy technical analysis, which was detailed on the firm's blog. Former NSA research scientist Dave Aitel, who now leads another cybersecurity firm, has called the analysis "pretty dead on."

The hack of Podesta's private Gmail address was traced by cybersecurity researchers to hackers with Russia's foreign intelligence service, the GRU, because the group made an error during its campaign of "spear phishing" targets tricking them into clicking on malicious links or give up their passwords. The researchers found that the group had targeted more than 100 email addresses that were associated with the Clinton campaign, according to The New York Times.

The Obama administration in October publicly accused Russia of being behind the hacks.

"The US intelligence community is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of emails," reads a statement from the Department of Homeland Security. "These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process."

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said on Tuesday that he wants the Senate to open an investigation into whether the Russian government meddled in the US election. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly denied his country was behind the hacks.

The rest is here:
NSA CHIEF: Nation-state made 'conscious effort' to sway ...

Posted in NSA | Comments Off on NSA CHIEF: Nation-state made ‘conscious effort’ to sway …

Media worry about First Amendment rights under Trump but …

Posted: at 6:34 pm

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The mainstream media is freaking out over what it thinks are going to be restrictions on its First Amendment rights under President-Elect Donald Trump.

Everything we have everything that makes us unlike any other nation flows from those words and the protections they offer for free expression, Margaret Sullivan, the media columnist for The Washington Post wrote on Nov. 13. Donald Trumps presidency is very likely to threaten those First Amendment rights.

Last month, the Committee to Protect Journalists, a nonprofit organization that advocates for the rights of journalists, said in a statement: Trump has consistently demonstrated a contempt for the role of the press beyond offering publicity to him and advancing his interests.

This is not about picking sides in an election, the statement added. This is recognizing that a Trump presidency represents a threat to press freedom unknown in modern history.

The groups board consists of Associated Press executive editor Kathleen Carroll, New Yorker editor David Remnick, CBS New correspondent Lara Logan, Univision boss Isaac Lee and many other mainstream media journalists.

Yet, the left and especially President Obama have shown repeatedly their indifference to the First Amendment, a fact these journalists carelessly ignore in making their case against Mr. Trump.

Mr. Obamas administration set dangerous precedents, and the left, for years has been shutting down the opposition through their use of safe-spaces and trigger warnings.

For nearly eight years, President Obama massively expanded his authority on national security issues: on the prosecution of whistleblowers, secret surveillance courts, wars without congressional authorization, and drone campaigns without public oversight, wrote Tim Mak of the Daily Beast. During this time the left, with the exception of some civil liberties groups, remained largely silent.

The New York Times and the ACLU had to sue Mr. Obamas administration to get basic legal documents on the governments position on targeted killing through drone strikes as if some part of U.S. law should be secret.

And it was Mr. Obamas Department of Justice that subpoenaed the telephone records of AP journalists to track down a leak. It also investigated Fox News journalist James Rosen and named him as a co-conspirator in a leak about North Koreas nuclear program. The Justice Department charged Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, a State Department contractor who was Mr. Rosens source, with violating the Espionage Act.

The Justice Department used security badge access records to track the reporters comings and goings from the State Department, according to a newly obtained court affidavit, The Post reported at the time. They traced the timing of his calls with a State Department security adviser suspected of sharing the classified report. They obtained a search warrant for the reporters personal emails.

Mr. Obama used the Espionage Act against government whistle-blowers who shared secret information with reporters more than any other administration in history, the Daily Beasts Mr. Mak reported.

Now thats some scary stuff.

And as the Federalist noted, the lefts infringement on First Amendment rights isnt just through the expansion of executive powers, its also cultural.

When mainstream media outlets collectively applaud the boycott of a rural pizza parlor, or the ruination of Brendan Eich, or the persecution of florists and bakers and elderly nuns who hold disfavored political views, it sends a strong message that freedom of speech doesnt mean anything, the Federalists John Daniel Davidson wrote.

On college campuses across the country, liberal professors encourage their students to boycott and protest conservative speakers, shout down administrators who dare to challenge them, and segregate themselves from anyone who might have a different view. Couched in the language of safe spaces and trigger warnings, the Lefts enforcement of political correctness has created a climate of intolerance that goes beyond the campus, Mr. Davidson added.

Indeed.

So before the collective freakout of the mainstream media, speculating about Mr. Trumps presidency, perhaps they should take an inward look of whats happened in the last eight years.

Mr. Obamas presidency created some uncomfortable precedents when it came to secrecy. Transparent, it was not.

This is a good rule: Dont answer any questions when they start yelling at you, Mr. Obama advised Mr. Trump when reporters started shouting questions at the two after their first Oval Office meeting this month.

Mr. Trump is just inheriting Mr. Obamas legacy.

Read more:
Media worry about First Amendment rights under Trump but ...

Posted in First Amendment | Comments Off on Media worry about First Amendment rights under Trump but …