Is Bill Gates a Traitor?

In "CyberWar:  The Next Threat to National Security and What To Do About It", Richard A. Clarke, former advisor to several U.S. presidents on the issue of cybersecurity, mentions that Bill Gates and Microsoft gave the Chinese government the source code for Windows.  But, Mr. Gates refused to give the same source code for Windows when the Pentagon asked for it.  Windows, as everyone knows, is full of bugs and security holes.  The Chinese government was free to modify the security and encryption parts of the code; while the U.S. military can not.  And, Mr. Gates calls himself an upright U.S. citizen?

Mr. Clarke goes into many issues about cybersecurity.  Most of which I agree with from personal experience.  But, I have never been a national advisor of cybersecurity.  My experiences are with corporations.  Small manufacturers and ISPs.  But, I know the industry and the technology.  I know what logic bombs are.  Seen them programmed.  Unplugged modems to prevent access so that there would only be data communication when a scheduled data exchange was to take place.

I must agree that our national infrastructure and networks are not secure.  But, could be, without much effort.  Just some care and work.  And, as loath as I am to admit it, the large ISPs should be packet sniffing for viruses; shutting down botnets until users fix their systems.  In fact, ISPs block other ISPs that have spammers until the culprit is shut down.  We need to take some measures and have guidelines.

As for Operating Systems, certainly our military and even individuals or corporations could do with better security than we currently have with Windows.  The Open Source solution is technologically and militarily a good one.  Plus, plus, it would be cheaper on the U.S. taxpayer.  ...  So, now how do you feel when Mr. Gates told the U.S. military, that if they start using Open Source operating systems (like Unix or Linux) then; he will no longer support the Windows he sold the U.S. military?  (As Mr. Clarke stated.)

I do not support the current atmosphere of tax the rich.  Paying your fair share means a flat tax.  Not twice or 10 times what someone else pays.  Rich people work hard too.  I believe many people are just jealous and blinded by their jealousies.  Without belief in a God or a good attitude, how can one be happy with what one has?  Try to make as good a life as possible for themselves--by hard work, providence, prudence, saving, frugality and other admirable traits.  Stealing is wrong.  Making theft legal is still stealing. Need convincing?  Let them steal from you or the fruits of your hard work.  Let them tax you excessively.

All of that preaching is not to say, that there aren't rough industrialists, capitalists, entrepreneurs, free market sharks, who do not give a damn about the next guy or customer.  "Let the customers be damned!" was one railroad mogul's cry.  (Vanderbuilt)

Scalping customers is wrong.  Fraud is wrong.

Mr. Gates' fortune in a large part, has been made from U.S. tax dollars.  Mr. Gates is a U.S. citizen.  Our military's defenses are compromised.  He dares threaten the military with malicious breach of contract!  While I have no intention of comparing the Chinese to the Nazis, I do intend to compare Mr. Gates to Nelson Rockefeller, who sold fuel to the Nazis during World War II.  Do I really need to explain that was illegal and the crime of treason?  Secretary of the Treasury, Morgenthau wanted to arrest Mr. Rockefeller for treason.  That was within his jurisdiction.  Nelson Rockefeller threatened not to deliver fuel to the U.S. Army if Morganthau arrested him.  FDR told Morgenthau not to pursue the matter.  Because, it would put FDR in the position of having to seize Rockefeller's oil by public domain.  An action President Roosevelt did not want to do.

In my opinion, Mr. Gates may have gotten away with his treason.  But, we the citizens and consumers can protest.  We can use open source software as much as possible.  Or, buy an Apple, iPad, Mac.  Tell people why.  Let Mr. Gates know.  He's lost your sale because you feel he is a traitor and unAmerican.

What Does Breach Of The Marriage Contract Cost?

Marriage and divorce are complicated.  Many legal systems look at marriage as a contract.  A husband's obligations -- usually to support his wife.  A wife's obligations -- usually to have sex with her husband.  So, what happens when 2 people decide to break the contract?  Well, if it is 2 people agreeing this doesn't work any more, hopefully, they will be able to come to an agreement.  After all, they agreed it isn't working, right?  But, what if one is happy and the other is unhappy?  Well, in business, that would be simple.  You buy them out.  Usually, partnership agreements--good ones--have bailout clauses how to split up, who gets what, etc.  Who will handle the arbitration or law--which court will have jurisdiction.  But, how should a man and woman divorcing handle it?

Let's face it, prenuptial agreements can't cover everything.  There will always be unexpected issues arising.  But, what happens when one party changes a fundamental premise?  You were married in a certain religious setting and now...You're not into that religion any more?  You're not a communist or liberal or Republican or whatever any more?  What about the kids?  How are they to be brought up?

In contracts--a sale is a contract--if there was a fundamental misunderstanding, the contract--the sale--can be voided.  For example, selling land while being ignorant of the mineral rights and mineral richness of the land.

This could also apply to marriages based upon a false premise.  Usually, misinformation about a previous marriage or current financial situation.  However, I have found it hard to accept an annulment from a couple married for 30 years and having 5 children!  (True story!)

Yet, there is another scenario.  As children we are all socialized to be whatever.  What happens when we realize how we were manipulated and no longer want to live that way?  This is particularly obvious with religious upbringings and gender issues.  How does this all apply to divorce and the children?

There are no easy answers.  But, one thing is for sure, the one breaking the contract has to pay a premium.  And, if either side is too hard headed, the result will be unpleasant for all parties concerned.

NOTE:  See Fraidy Reiss'es article in the Huffington Post.   An example.

NOTE:  The current custody battle for Pearl Perry Reich is also very interesting.  Much to comment on.  But, I will not be misconstrued as publicly supporting either side without knowing the parties.  And, even if I knew the parties, I could never go back in time and know the historical facts.