How do you like it as far as you’ve got?
Jefferson D, Jefferson D,
Are you glad you began it, or do you wish you had not?
Jefferson, Jefferson D.
People say, though of course I don’t know that it’s so,
That your spirits are getting decidedly low,
That you’re sick and discouraged and don’t know what,
But say though — do you like it as far as you’ve got.
Ho! Ho! Jefferson D,
Things look rather shaky now
‘Twixt you and me.
You can’t think how sorry I was when I heard,
Jefferson D, Jefferson D,
That your visit to Washington had been deferred,
Jefferson, Jefferson D,
But I hope you will find it convenient to come
When Abe and the rest of the boys are at home
And I trust you won’t mind it, they’re such a lot,
If they ask you how you like it as far as you’ve got.
Ho! Ho! Jefferson D.
Also of note is the following advertisement poking fun at Confederates who both advertised for whereabouts of their escaped slaves, while also tending themselves to run away.
“Two Dollars Reward, Confederate Currency,” for the whereabouts of “Jube, answering to the name of Early,” [i.e., Confederate general Jubal A. Early] and One Cent Reward for General [Thomas L.] Rosser.
A nice history angle is provided by the US State Department “share” service in an official embassy post about Russian false flag operations.
Russia’s false flag operations date back decades and take many forms. In 1939, the Soviet Union shelled its own troops outside the Soviet village of Mainila near Finland. It then blamed Finland for the attack and invaded its neighbor in violation of the two countries’ nonaggression pact.
Then they jump ahead to five years ago.
More recently, Russian state hackers have disguised themselves as operatives of Iran’s regime or the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) to evade responsibility. In 2017, Russia’s military launched a ransomware attack against Ukrainian businesses. While the attack was disguised to look like the work of profiteers rather than state actors, a joint investigation by Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States found the Kremlin responsible, according to Wired magazine.
The link to the Wired article is very important because there you will find motive.
[James Lewis, the director of the Strategic Technologies Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies] argues that Russia’s ultimate goal with its false flag attacks, aside from creating confusion and deniability, is to make the case that attribution isn’t truly possible—that when a US intelligence agency or Department of Justice points the finger at the Kremlin after hacking incidents, they’re merely guessing. “They don’t like being indicted,” he adds. “They would like to create a counter-narrative: ‘You can’t trust the Americans. Look, they got this wrong.'”
Those who try saying that attribution of attack is not possible — sowing doubt about science and intelligence — are feeding into the Russian military intelligence narrative meant to enable their sloppy and inexpensive attacks.
Historians might be the first to disagree with Russia on this. I mean who really disputes today whether Russian relations with the Confederation of Targowica (noble league backed by Russian Empress Catherine II to oppose the Polish Constitution) is what led to Poland being invaded 16 May 1792 (without Russia even declaring war), which resulted in the Russo-Prussian Second Partition? And what about 28 June 1788 when Sweden’s King Gustavus III declared war on Russia by disguising his own soldiers in Puumala with Russian uniforms?
…groups involved in banning books are in fact linked, and backed by influential conservative donors.
Second, a racist motive is obvious:
In Pennsylvania, the Central York school board banned a long list of books, almost entirely titles by, or about, people of color, including books by Jacqueline Woodson, Ijeoma Oluo and Ibram X Kendi, and children’s titles about Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. “Let’s just call it what it is – every author on that list is a Black voice,” one teacher told the York Dispatch.
Third, the “influential conservative donors” are really more like (a blast from America’s past of shameless billionaire misconduct) radical extremists who advocate for a fascist surveillance state that will prohibit freedom of thought.
PDE’s president [a group that “tells parents they should spy on teachers”] …worked at the Cato Institute, a rightwing thinktank co-founded by Republican mega-donor Charles Koch. The Intercept reported that the IWF has received large donations from Republican donor Leonard Leo, a former vice-president of the Koch-funded Federalist Society who advised Donald Trump on judicial appointments.
Fourth, the opposition is naturally students themselves who would rather not have their thoughts controlled and education dictated by a tiny group of racist American billionaires.
The Pennsylvania ban was overturned in September 2021 after students protested outside their York County high school and outside school board meetings. In Virginia, high school students managed to overturn the Spotsylvania book ban in similar fashion…
Interesting reading, to say the least.
What would America’s first important philanthropistMargaret Olivia Sage say? Margaret Olivia Sage invented a new level of charity in 1907 by giving $10 million to create the first private family foundation in America. A former school teacher, she hoped to improve education and to alleviate causes of poverty. Source: Auburn University Digital Library
But seriously, I’ve just read a very bizarre article by an automotive automation expert (redundant, I know) about Tesla’s “self-driving” software.
This industry luminary (bringing oodles of experience and expertise) starts off with saccharin and effusive framing of a car manufacturer CEO before absolutely TRASHING the cars as garbage that nobody should buy and must be explicitly branded as inferior.
Does it make sense for this automotive expert to promote such an abject failure of leadership in deserving respect before rightfully calling the Tesla CEO’s predominant work an obvious pile of trash?
This is evidence of someone throwing a big juicy bone in order to disorient the obvious mindless attack dogs; much like we see in totalitarian governments where voices of reason have to account for a dictator’s insecurity police before saying anything honest.
I have great respect and admiration for Elon Musk, so sorry to say this but … it’s terrible. I mean really bad. After all those videos I didn’t expect a lot, but I expected more than this. My first drive home after activating it was frightening. […] So I’m giving Tesla FSD an “F” when it comes to self-driving. In fact it clearly shouldn’t have that name, as many have pointed out. It should have a driver-assist name, so I will call it “Street Autopilot”. The problem is I have to give it a “D” as a driver assist product.
Sorry?
He is being too kind. Where does such respect and admiration for fraud come from? I suspect the author is worried about his position in the industry and doesn’t want to ruffle feathers, but at this point he seems to be growing a spine — he no longer can deny water flooding into a purportedly unsinkable Titanic.
That’s why it’s so remarkable to see someone come out waving peace and love flags of apology, while also warning everyone to stay away from Tesla because it’s a total scam.
Really he should have used the warning that Tesla deserves: That T on the car means pile of Trash
If the grouchy Tesla owners insist on “going for a ride” that puts everyone at risk (including them), then should they be cited under existing public safety laws (e.g. littering)?
Proud new Trash owner details it, arguing “I can do whatever I want and avoid accountability because it’s called my Trash can, not a Trash can’t!”
I can’t take any credit for such obviously necessary rebranding as a means of safety awareness campaigns. Tesla rightfully has been called a pile of trash for a very long time by many other owners dealing with the fraud.
Perhaps no better example is a thread from three months ago, when an owner taking delivery of his new “top of the line” model groused how product management was awful and disappointing:
Tesla Model S Plaid build quality is trash
From there you will find comments about an absurdly priced “flagship” such as…
$13,000 car. $130,000 window sticker… same people who are fitting the panels are also fitting the suspension bits and important bolts… an old S’s subframe failed because the design had no margin of safety. It was really poorly designed.
And perhaps straight to the heart of the matter is this comment:
Unfortunately as Sesame Street might say “shit piles” doesn’t start with the letter T.
Will it ever stick or slow down ownership? It has been like going backwards in time and monitoring a fan club for the Titanic, as I’ve been saying here for many years.
My favorite comment from one of these pile of Trash owners is here:
Some manufacturers used to have a problem with so-called ‘Friday cars’. Tesla avoids that by making them all Friday quality.
Ha ha? It is funny except this is safety-related and thus actually criminal-level stuff. Think of all the people around in danger from neglect related to automotive safety quality failures.
It is an intentional race to the absolute bottom of quality and safety if I ever saw one. The CEO is to blame here, right?
Los Angeles County prosecutors have filed two counts of vehicular manslaughter against the driver of a Tesla on autopilot who ran a red light, slammed into another car and killed two people in Gardena in 2019. The defendant appears to be the first person to be charged with a felony in the United States for a fatal crash involving a motorist who was using a partially automated driving system. Los Angeles County prosecutors filed the charges in October, but they came to light only last week. […] Criminal charging documents do not mention Autopilot. But the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which sent investigators to the crash, confirmed last week that Autopilot was in use in the Tesla at the time of the crash.
Did you know when you buy a Tesla you may face criminal prosecution for operating false-autopilot exactly how the CEO has repeatedly and personally told you to do so?
In a related case a drunk driver in Norway was pulled by police from his car and he tried to escape blame by arguing Tesla’s CEO had instructed him it was ok to be unconscious at the wheel since he no longer believed he was the driver of the car he was driving.
For what it’s worth as a final thought the CEO, now known for mountains of Trash of his own making, has started a campaign in classic propagandist fashion to fling his mounting failures at his competitors.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk tweeted Sunday: “[Our competitor’s] software is a pile of trash.” [Full self driving (FSD) software by Tesla] is controversial and critics say the name is deceptive… because it doesn’t make cars fully autonomous.
And thus I offer my dear readers an easy to remember security haiku:
Full is not true full.
Self driving is not true self.
T means pile of Trash.
a blog about the poetry of information security, since 1995
