Press "Enter" to skip to content

Weekend links

  • Well. Now we know why the “service economy” keeps growing even as everything else falls into the Dumpster. The whole story in one graph.
  • Here’s another big story in one graph. This one’s about gold.
  • Are MSM outlets Photoshopping pix of Hillary (or using Photoshopped pix provided by her campaign) to make her look as much as 30 years younger than she really is?
  • This is precisely why we should be using email encryption even for sharing our chocolate chip cookie recipes. Smack that snotty, crowing NSA right in its face. (Tip o’ hat to S.)
  • Will Switzerland end fractional reserve banking?
  • Down with the tyranny of the Fitbit.
  • I know some will object that this little “flash story” is too optimistic. Okay. Still a beautiful, hopeful piece, though. (H/T MJR)
  • And this, dropped into comments by TSO, really is too optimistic. Or swimming too hopelessly against the tide. It also uses technology (provided by industrialization) to decry industrialization. Nevertheless, some truth there.


  1. LibertyNews
    LibertyNews January 30, 2016 8:21 am

    Another aspect of the health tracker fad is that company healthcare programs are now offering monthly discounts if you feed all your data to them. Where does the data go? What is it used for? How long does it last? Who knows.

  2. MamaLiberty
    MamaLiberty January 30, 2016 9:42 am

    I don’t doubt for a moment that Hillary’s photos are touched up a little, or a lot, to make her look younger. Seems like a given for someone with her ego and wealth. Women all over the world use makeup and cosmetic surgery for the same purpose. Something else has bothered me about her photos and videos for a very long time… The incredibly phony attempts to look innocent and naive, with wide open eyes and open mouth “smile.” Almost expect to hear the band start playing, “Happy Days Are Here Again.”

    I’ve also seen some pictures where she was caught off guard, probably, and the expression on her face is truly malignant. I’ll bet she’s just a barrel of laughs to work for.

  3. jed
    jed January 30, 2016 10:04 am

    Weaver … said that all PGP traffic, including who sent it and to whom, is automatically stored and backed up onto tape. Tape? How … quaint.

    Film at 11!

    Anyways, I’ve been saying for years that until a big heaping pile of people start using encryption for e-mail, it’s largely pointless, and mainly serves to draw attention. It’s not quite a Catch-22. Sure, there are occasions where encrypting e-mail is very much not pointless. And, okay, it depends on your definition of “pointless”. But still, we’re a long ways from a significant adoption of encryption for message traffic. And the vast majority of people just aren’t going to get the point that using encryption is the point, all by itself.

    I saw that gold story yesterday. I don’t understand it. I mean, I comprehend the statements. But “paper” claims on physical reserves which don’t exist? I guess this must be some sort of “market” situation, similar to rehypothecation of collateral. So my main question would be whether this affects me, and how. I don’t own any gold, or any gold-based financial instruments. Due to the idiotic nested comment display at ZeroHedge I can’t get any enlightenment there, if such even exists. I assume this the Commodities Exchange, rather than the gold trust from iShares. Is this some sort of fractional reserve gold ownwership scheme? Is it a bunch of people trading contracts on the ownership of gold?

  4. Claire
    Claire January 30, 2016 10:41 am

    “I don’t doubt for a moment that Hillary’s photos are touched up a little, or a lot, to make her look younger. Seems like a given for someone with her ego and wealth.”

    I agree: If she herself is having it done for her own website, mailings, and PR stills, no problem — other than the fact that the world ought to be laughing at her for overdoing it.

    If the MSM is doing any of the touch-ups themselves or uncritically (and “helpfully”) using touched-up photos her campaign provides them … that’s a way different matter. They have photographers whose images tell the truth. They couldn’t possibly be using touched-up images without knowing it.

    Of course, the media’s been using “good” photos of their favorites and “bad” photos of their targets for a long time. Nothing new there. Both “right” and “left” outlets do it. But photoshopping a particular candidate to make her look more appealing would be beyond the pale.

    Not surprising. But still beyond the pale. IF they’re actually doing that.

  5. MamaLiberty
    MamaLiberty January 30, 2016 11:35 am

    “But still beyond the pale.”

    Beyond who’s pale? 🙂 And do you have any actual doubts that this is what the MSM is doing? And of course they all know exactly what they are doing… You were not expecting anything else, were you?

  6. Bill St. Clair
    Bill St. Clair January 31, 2016 5:00 am

    Is ANYTHING beyond the pale when it comes to Hillary? Was it Western Rifle Shooters or Vanderboegh who often said that he didn’t want to see any news about Hillary unless it included the words “died suddenly”?

    And then there’s

  7. R.L. Wurdack
    R.L. Wurdack January 31, 2016 5:38 am

    I just loved the MSM photos of “innocent” young Trevor.

Leave a Reply