Month: April 2019

Authored by US Army Major Danny Sjursen (ret.) via TomDispatch.com,

“Patriotism, in the trenches, was too remote a sentiment, and at once rejected as fit only for civilians, or prisoners.” — Robert Graves, Goodbye To All That(1929).

I’m one of the lucky ones. Leaving the madness of Army life with a modest pension and all of my limbs intact feels like a genuine escape. Both the Army and I knew it was time for me to go. I’d tired of carrying water for empire and they’d grown weary of dealing with my dissenting articles and footing the bill for my seemingly never-ending PTSD treatments. Now, I’m society’s problem, unleashed into a civilian world I’ve never gazed upon with adult eyes. 

I entered West Point in July 2001, a bygone era of (relative) peace, the moment, you might say, before the 9/11 storm broke. I leave an Army that remains remarkably engaged in global war, patrolling an increasingly militarized world.

In a sense, I snuck out of the military at age 35, my early retirement an ignominious end to a once-promising career. Make no mistake, I wanted out. I’d relocated 11 times in 18 years, often enough to war zones, and I simply didn’t have another deployment in me. Still, I wouldn’t be honest if I didn’t admit that I’ll mourn the loss of my career, of the identity inherent in soldiering, of the experience of adulation from a grateful (if ill-informed) society. 

Perhaps that’s only natural, no matter how much such a hokey admission embarrasses me. I recognize, at least, that there’s a paradox at work here: the Army and the Global War on Terror (GWOT) made me who I now am, brought a new version of me to life, and gifted me (if that’s the right phrase for something so grim) with the stories, the platform, and the pain that now make my writing possible. Those military deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan in particular turned a budding neocon into an unabashed progressive. My experiences there transformed an insecure, aspiring dealer-in-violence into someone who might be as near as a former military man can get to a pacifist. And what the U.S. Army helped me become is someone who, in the end, I don’t mind gazing at in the mirror each morning.

Should I thank the Army then? Maybe so, no matter the damage that institution did to my psyche and my conscience over the years. It’s hard, though, to thank a war machine that dealt so much death to so many civilians across significant parts of the planet for making me who I am. And no matter how much I told myself I was different, the truth is that I was complicit in so much of that for so long. 

In a way, I wonder whether something resembling an apology, rather than a statement of pride in who I’ve become, is the more appropriate way of saying goodbye to all that. Nonetheless, the story is all mine, the burdensome, the beautiful, the banal, and the horrific. War, violence, and bigotry — as I’ve written — are America’s original sins and, looking back, it seems to me that they may be mine as well. In that context, though I’m now officially retired, I think of this as my last piece authored as an active military dissenter — a clearing of the air — before moving on to a life of activism, as well as an unarmed life of words.

What I Won’t Be Missing

It’s time to wave goodbye to a litany of absurdity that I witnessed in the institution to which I dedicated my adult life. Some peers, even friends, may call this heresy — a disgruntled former major airing dirty laundry — and maybe in some way it is. Still, what I observed in various combat units, in conversation with senior officers, and as a horrified voyeur of, and actor in, two dirty wars matters. Of that, I remain convinced.

So here’s my official goodbye to all that, to a military and a nation engaged in an Orwellian set of forever wars and to the professional foot soldiers who made so much of it all possible, while the remainder of the country worked, tweeted, shopped, and slept (in every sense of the word). 

Goodbye to the majors who wanted to be colonels and the colonels who wanted to be generals — at any cost. To the sociopaths who rose in the ranks by trampling on the souls of their overburdened troopers, trading lives for minor bumps in statistics and pats on the shoulder from aggressive superiors.

Goodbye to the generals who led like so many lieutenants, the ones who knew the tactics but couldn’t for the life of them think strategically, eternally proving the Peter Principle right with every promotion past their respective levels of incompetence. 

So long to the flag officers convinced that what worked at the squad level — physical fitness, esprit de corps, and teamwork — would win victories at the brigade and division level in distant, alien lands.

Farewell to the generals I served under who then shamelessly spun through Washington’s revolving door, trading in their multi-starred uniforms for six- and seven-figure corporate gigs on the boards of weapons manufacturers, aka “the merchants of death” (as they were known once upon a distant time), and so helped feed the unquenchable appetite of the military-industrial beast.

Farewell to the senior generals, so stuck in what they called “their lane” that they were unwilling (or intellectually unable) to advise civilian policymakers about missions that could never be accomplished, so trapped in the GWOT box that they couldn’t say no to a single suggestion from chickenhawk militarists on the Hill or in the Oval Office.

Goodbye to the devotees of American exceptionalism who filled the Army’s ranks, stalwart evangelists of a civic religion that believed there was a secret American inside every Arab or Afghan, ready to burst forth with the slightest poke from Uncle Sam’s benevolent bayonet. 

Ciao to staff officers who mistook “measures of performance” (doing lots of stuff) for “measures of effectiveness” (doing the rightstuff). I won’t miss the gaggles of obtuse majors and colonels who demanded measurable “output” — numbers of patrols completed, numbers of houses searched, counts of PowerPoint slides published — from already overtasked captains and the soldiers they led and who will never learn the difference between doing lots and doing well.

Goodbye to battalion and brigade commanders who already had their hands full unsuccessfully “pacifying” entire districts and provinces in alien lands, yet seemed more concerned with the cleanliness of troopers’ uniforms and the two-mile-run times of their units, prioritizing physical fitness over tactical competence, empathy, or ethics.

Godspeed to the often-intolerant conservatism and evangelical Christianity infusing the ranks. 

See ya to the generals who lent their voices, while still in uniform, to religious organizations, one of whom even became the superintendent of West Point, and at worst got mere slaps on the wrist for that. (And while we’re at it, here’s a goodbye wave to all those chaplains, supposedly non-denominational supporters of every kind of soldier, who regularly ended their prayers with “in Jesus’s name, amen.” So much for church-state separation.)

Farewell to the still-prevalent cis-gender patriarchy and (strangely erotic) homophobia that infuses the ranks of the U.S. military. Sure, “don’t ask, don’t tell” is a thing of the past, but the Army remains a (straight) boys’ club and no easy place for the openly gay, while the president remains intent on banningtransgender enlistees. And even in 2019, one in four women still reports at least one sexual assault during her military tour of duty. How’s that for social progress?

So long to the adrenaline junkies and power-obsessed freaks atop so many combat units, folks who lived for the violence, the rush of nighttime raids without a thought for their often counterproductive and bloody consequences. It’s a relief to leave them behind as they continue — prisoners of counterinsurgency, or COIN, math — to feed the insurgencies the U.S. fights far faster than they kill “terrorists.”

Goodbye to officers, especially generals, who place “duty” above ethics. 

Sayonara to those who canonize “martyrs” like former commander James “Mad Dog” Mattis, a hero for resigning as defense secretary rather than implement (gasp!) modest troop withdrawals from our endless wars in Syria and Afghanistan. (As for a Pentagon-backed war in Yemen that starved to death at least 85,000 kids, he was apparently fine with that.)

Toodle-oo to the vacuous, “thanks-for-your-service” compliments from civilians who otherwise ignore soldiers’ issues, foreign policy, and our forever wars, who never give a thought to placing the country’s disastrous conflicts up there with healthcare on anyone’s election-year priorities list.

Parting is such sweet sorrow when it comes to the neo-Confederate backgrounds and cheerleading of far too many troopers and officers, to a military academy that still has a Robert E. Lee Road on which you drive from a Lee Housing Area to a Lee Barracks, part of an Army that has named at least 10 of its stateside bases after Confederate generals.

Farewell to rampant Islamophobia in the ranks and the leaders who do so little to counter it, to the ubiquitous slurs about Arabs and Afghans, including “hajis,” “rag-heads,” “camel jockies,” or simply “sand niggers.” What a way to win Muslim “hearts and minds!”

Ta-ta to the paradox of hyper-capitalism and Ayn Randian fiscal conservatism among the officers of the nation’s most socialist institution, the military. Count me in as sick of the faux intellectuals reading books by economists Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman in Iraq or their less sophisticated peers toting around Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, or Glenn Beck volumes, all the while enjoying their publicly-financed, co-pay-less government healthcare.

Adieu to a military justice system that boots out soldiers who commit “alcohol-related” offenses or “piss hot” for marijuana while rarely investigating the Army’s role as a catalyst for their addictions — and so long as well to a discipline-over-treatment model for dealing with substance abuse that’s only now beginning to change.

Goodbye to infighting among the Army, Navy, and Air Force over funds and equipment and to those “Pentagon Wars” that prioritize loyalty to your service branch over fealty to the nation or the Constitution.

See you later, when it comes to the predictable opinions of a legion of semi-retired generals on 24-hour cable news who count on their public stature to sell Americans yet more guns and militarism. 

So long to the faux-intellectualism of men like former “surge” general David Petraeus and his sycophantic army of “warrior monks” and COINdinistaswho have never seen a problem to which slightly improved counterinsurgency tactics wasn’t the answer and are incapable of questioning the efficacy of force, intervention, and occupation as ways to alter complex societies for the better.

Farewell to the pride and value military leaders place on superficial decorations — patches and badges and medals — rather than true mission-accomplished moments. (Don’t hold your breath waiting for even a single senior commander to ever admit that his forces wasted their time, or worse, during their year-long deployment in one of America’s distant war zones.)

Cheerio to the prevailing consensus among U.S. officers that our NATO allies are “worthless” or “weak” because they aren’t aggressive enough in taking on certain missions or types of patrols, while fighting and sometimes dying for Uncle Sam’s global priorities. (This is the nonsense that led to French fries being banned and “freedom fries” served in the congressional cafeteria after France had the gall to oppose Washington’s invasion of Iraq in 2003.)

Goodbye to the colonels and generals who speak at the funeral ceremonies of soldiers they hardly know in order to “rededicate” the mourning survivors to the never-ending mission at hand.

Farewell to the soldiers and officers who regularly complained that the Army’s Rules of Engagement were too strict — as if more brutality, bombing, and firepower (with less concern for civilians) would have brought victory — as well as to the assumption behind such complaints that Americans have some sort of inherent right to wage wars of choice overseas.

So long to the chauvinism in the senior ranks that asserts some sort of messianic American right and mission to police the globe, dot it with bases, and give its military men license to strut around the villages and alleyways of sovereign states as if they were their own.

America’s servicemen have taken to believing in their own myth: that they really do constitute a special caste above all you measly civilians — and now, of course, me, too. In this way, military men actually reflect a toxic society’s values. Few ask why there aren’t teachers, nurses, and social workers honoredlike U.S. military personnel in America’s vaunted sports stadiums. True servants — as we soldiers, in my years of service, were so fond of dubbing ourselves — should stick to humility and recognize that there are other, far nobler ways to spend one’s life. 

And here, finally, is what I can’t say goodbye to: a society that’s come to value its warriors above all others. 

A Farewell Coda

So what should this now-retired Army major make of it all? The inconvenient truth is perhaps very little. It’s unlikely that anything I’ll write will change many minds or affect policy in any way. In the decade following World War I, when Major General Smedley Butler, the most decorated Marine of his time, took up the pen to expose the ills of American-style corporate warfare, he (unlike me) made a true splash. As today, however, the American intervention machine just rolled on. So what chance does a former Army major have of moving the needle on U.S. militarism? 

I’m active now in what little there is of an antiwar movement in this country. That was part of the genius of President Richard Nixon’s cynical decision in 1973, following years of large-scale antiwar activity in this country and in the U.S. military itself during the Vietnam era, to end the draft. He replaced a citizen’s army with an all-volunteer force. By turning the military into a professional caste, a kind of homegrown foreign legion, rather than a responsibility of every citizen, by transforming its officers into an isolated, fawned-upon caste, he effectively ensured that the public would look elsewhere and that antiwar movements would largely become things of the past. 

Maybe it’s hopeless to fight such a beast. Still, as the child of a blue-collar, outer-borough New York City family, I was raised on the romance of lost causes. So I hope to play a small role in my version of a lost cause — as a (lonely) response to the pervasive stereotypes of modern American soldiers, of the officer corps, of West Point. I plan on being there whenever the militarists insist that Army types are all politically conservative, all model patriots, all devout “moral” Christians, all… you name it and I’ll be there as an inconvenient counterpoint to a system that demands compliance. 

And here’s the truth of it: no matter what you may think, I’m not alone. There are a precious few other public voices from the forever wars speaking out and — as various supportive texts and emails to me have made clear — more silent dissenters in the ranks than you might imagine. 

So count on this: I’ll be hoping that more serving officers as well as troops gather the courage to speak out and tell the American public the score when it comes to our brutal, hopeless, never-ending wars. Sure, it’s just a dream for now, but what would those at the top of that war system do if the troops, officers, and commanders they’ve so consciously placed on a pedestal begin doubting, then questioning, then dissenting? That would be a problem for a war machine that, even in the age of AI and drones, still needs its obedient foot soldiers to hump a ruck and patrol a block.

I was, until recently, one of them, the obsequious grunt at the pointy end of the spear fashioned by a warlike government ruling over an apathetic citizenry. But no longer. I’m only 35 and maybe it won’t make a difference, but I must admit that I’m looking forward to my second act. So think of this goodbye to all that as a hello to all that as well.

*  *  *

Danny Sjursen, a TomDispatch regular, is a retired U.S. Army major and former history instructor at West Point. He served tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has written a memoir of the Iraq War, Ghost Riders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge. He lives in Lawrence, Kansas. Follow him on Twitter at @SkepticalVet and check out his podcast “Fortress on a Hill,” co-hosted with fellow vet Chris ‘Henri’ Henriksen.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2TM0p95 Tyler Durden

U.S. Vice President Mike Pence has declared that the Trump administration wants to send humans back to the moon by 2024. That is four years earlier than NASA’s previous target of 2028. Apart from changing rockets and switching between contractors, Statista’s Niall McCarthy notes that Pence did not provide any information as to how NASA will achieve another moon landing by 2024.

For starters, the agency will need a much bigger budget. NASA’s budget for FY 2019 is $21.5 billion, representing 0.49 percent of the federal budget.

The following infographic provides a long term overview going back to the late 1950s.

You will find more infographics at Statista

Apollo 17 was the final mission of NASA’s Apollo program and it marks the last time humans walked on the moon. The budget for space exploration was much higher that year, accounting for 1.48 percent of the total federal budget. The share reached its highest point in 1966 at 4.41 percent.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2OzJvd1 Tyler Durden

Submitted by Eric Peters, CIO of One River Asset Management

“I have a better education than them, I’m smarter than them, I went to the best schools; they didn’t. Much more beautiful house, much more beautiful apartment. Much more beautiful everything. And I’m president and they’re not,” declared Trump at his Michigan MAGA rally, refusing to take profit on the trade.

You see, Mueller found him innocent of Russian collusion. And while the report stopped short of exonerating him for obstruction, Mueller’s overall ruling was an enormous windfall.

A typical trader would take at least some profit, selling into the euphoria, rising above it all, extending a hand to broaden his base.

“Trump is going to go full-animal on his political opponents now that he’s no longer in the shadow of Mueller’s investigation,” predicted Bannon, the President’s former Chief Strategist. Steve’s usually right.

And as Trump ordered OPEC to lower oil prices, his economic advisor Larry Kudlow and Federal Reserve nominee Stephen Moore called for an immediate 50bp interest rate cut from the Fed – desperate to fire up the economy heading into 2020.

“The Democrats have to now decide whether they will continue defrauding the public with ridiculous bullshit, partisan investigations or whether they will apologize to the American people and join us to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure and bring down the cost of health care and prescription drugs,” taunted Trump.

And as his MAGA crowd went wild, replacing “Lock Her Up” with “AOC Sucks”, Democrats entered the five stages of grief: denial comes first, followed by anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance. And naturally, it would be so much easier if the Dems could just take a loss.

But in today’s internecine conflict, with tribes fighting for absolute victory or utter defeat, no one seems willing to extend a hand, take a profit or a loss and move onward, upward, as The United States of America. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2Vb6yxk Tyler Durden

Dick’s Sporting Goods – once a major seller of firearms, has lost around $150 million in sales after CEO Ed Stack announced last February that he would begin restricting gun sales at the country’s largest sports retailer, according to Bloomberg. What’s more, guns drove the sale of many soft goods, including hats, jackets and boots. 

The dent in sales, around 1.7% of annual revenue, is worth it according to Stack – a billionaire who was born into wealth and probably hasn’t had to deal with too many home invaders in his sprawling Pennsylvania mansion, or his estate in Jupiter Island, FL, where the overall crime rate is 64% lower than the national average and there hasn’t been a murder in at least 14 years. 

“The system does not work,” says Stack, adding. “It’s important that when you know there’s something that’s not working, and it’s to the detriment of the public, you have to stand up,”

Stack – once a Republican donor who turned his father’s bait-and-tackle shop into the country’s largest sports retailer – decided to oppose the Second Amendment after the 2018 Parkland school shooting in which gunman Nikolas Cruz purchased a shotgun from Dick’s. The next day, Vermont police arrested a teenager with similar plans who had legally purchased a shotgun from Dick’s. 

Two weeks after those arrests, Stack announced he was pulling assault-style rifles and high-capacity magazines out of all Dick’s stores. He vowed he’d never sell another firearm to anyone under 21. –Bloomberg

Going even further, Stack announced during a March earnings call that the sporting goods retailer would no longer carry firearms at 125 locations – roughly 17% of US stores. The company will replace the firearms sections with other categories such as clothing and shoes. 

The company also hired three gun control lobbyists, and announced that it would destroy all of the weapons it had stopped selling. 

In response to the 2018 corporate decision, gunmakers Springfield Armory and O.F. Mossberg stopped doing business with Dick’s.

 

The response was predictable. The National Rifle Association criticized his “strange business model.” The National Shooting Sports Foundation expelled Dick’s from its membership. Gun manufacturers like Mossberg refused to do business with him at all, and some shoppers followed suit. 

Some people applauded the CEO’s decision and promised to show their appreciation with their business—a phenomenon called “buycotting”—but those people didn’t stick around. “Love is fleeting. Hate is forever,” Stack said. –Bloomberg

And while net income fell to $102.6 million vs. $116 million y/y according to Marketwatch, and adjusted same store sales fell 3.1% y/y for the 12 month period ending Feb 2, shares of Dick’s have remained resilient – climbing 14% in the 13 months since Stack announced the restrictions on firearms sales. 

Field & Stream, Dick’s top-selling private brand, has been hurt the most by the decision. As Bloomberg notes, “the company faces a potentially larger decision about its 35 Field & Stream stores, located mostly in the south and Northeast.”

“Can they shift it to play more towards active outdoors versus bloodsport,” asks Susquehanna Financial Group analyst Sam Poser. 

“They’re big spaces, and the majority of those leases are long-term. They’ll have some decisions to make, and I think they can figure it out.”

To be fair, guns were a shrinking part of Dick’s business before Stack changed the company policy. And annual firearm sales nationwide have dropped almost 17 percent since 2016, according to research firm Small Arms Analytics & Forecasting. Parts of Dick’s policy have been matched by others, including Walmart and Kroger-owned Fred Meyer, neither of which faced similar outcry or anger. –Bloomberg

Meanwhile, Stack isn’t stopping there. Last month Stack was one of four CEOs to sign a letter supporting a universal gun control bill that recently passed in the house. He also recently joined the business council for Everytown Gun Safety – a nonprofit founded by Michael Bloomberg.

We’re sure law-abiding citizens in high-crime areas who want to protect their families can relate. 

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2uDj5xW Tyler Durden

Authored by Ben Whittle via CoinTelegraph.com,

Analysts have been anticipating the implications of the Internet of Things (IoT) for several years. However, there have been two main impediments to its success: capacity and security.

But now, the introduction of a new technology could change that. This year, major carriers like AT&T and Verizon will be introducing 5G, the latest generation of cellular mobile communications. The 5G platform brings a high data rate, reduced latency, energy savings, cost reduction, higher system capacity and massive device connectivity, according to analysts.

image courtesy of CoinTelegraph

The combination of 5G and blockchain technology has the potential to unleash a surge of economic value. In order to understand this connection between 5G and blockchain, one must think of the relationship as multifold. The power of 5G coverage through its reduced latency, high speeds and capacity allows for IoT devices to become widely used. Simultaneously, these devices can leverage the security, decentralization, immutability and consensus arbitration of blockchains as foundational layers.

That means smart cities, driverless vehicles, smart homes and other sensor-driven enhancements will finally have a technology that can handle their needs.

As foundational layers, blockchains can provide consensus and security while the majority of IoT transactions and contracts occur on second-layer networks, with the opportunity to settle payment channels and transaction disputes on-chain. The network capacity of IoT, however, will be enabled by the power of 5G coverage.

Furthermore, 5G will directly assist blockchains by increasing node participation and decentralization, as well as allowing for shorter block times, driving forward on-chain scalability — all of which, in turn, further supports the IoT economy.

Here is a first look at how 5G is rolling out and when real usage might be seen.

The rollout of 5G

Network providers have started rolling out 5G within select United States cities, while global coverage is expected to come online in 2020.

Verizon will start delivering its coverage in Chicago and Minneapolis from April 11, with services moving to 30 cities throughout the remainder of 2019.

On the vendor side, Samsung is expected to release its 5G-compatible Galaxy S10 model next month. Other companies, such as Huawei and LG, have announced models of their own that are expected soon.

In terms of modems, we are still waiting to see one that supports both 5G and LTE. Qualcomm is expected to release such a product, the X55, in either Q3 or Q4 of this year.

Apple consumers will have to hold off until 2020 before seeing a 5G-compatible iPhone, though, with the company apparently still evaluating market conditions.

Waking up the Internet of Things

The benefits of 5G are its high speeds, capacity, low latency and ability to connect with vast numbers of devices. Latency refers to the time between when a signal is sent and received. In blockchain terms, latency is the time between a transaction being broadcast and it being received by nodes. However, for IoT, whether it be applied to smart homes or autonomous vehicles, achieving low latency is critical if devices are going to communicate with each other without experiencing long lag times.

This reduction could unlock another concept, the Internet of Skills (IoS). This is the process by which specialists conduct their work remotely through virtual reality headsets. For instance, a dentist would be able to perform procedures remotely. If latency cannot be minimized, then the specialist will not be responsive enough, endangering the patient and undermining the entire function.

It is these new applications that are driving the projections for the economic impact of 5G. A study from Qualcomm showed that 5G could lead to $12.3 trillion in additional global GDP by 2035.

Importantly, 5G — with speeds of up to 10 gigabits per second — is an improvement to current home broadband services, as well as cellular networks. To put this in perspective, the average global, nonmobile internet speed stands at just 7.2 megabits per second. As such, 5G could well become the de facto internet network worldwide.

The effects of 5G on IoT and related concepts are going to be further augmented by multi-access edge computing. This is a form of networking whereby service is disseminated from centralized nodes to peripheral ones, resulting in an even greater increase to speeds while also reducing latency.

IoT will rely on this capacity and ability for tremendous numbers of devices to connect with each other. It has been estimated that there could be as many as 100 billion IoT connections by 2025, according to research from Huawei, with growth likely turning exponential after that.  

Ramping up automation

When talking about automation, it is typical to think in terms of robots replacing paid jobs currently done by humans. However, in reality, the scope of automation may eventually be far broader than this, including the replacement of chores and unpaid mundane tasks.

This can already be seen in the advent of smart homes, with domestic appliances communicating with each other, keeping stock levels and managing inventory. Autonomous cars and trucks are already moving past testing, with legislation being the main impediment.

Within the next decade, traditional industries — such as agriculture, mining and drilling — all anticipate automation through high-speed IoT, powered by billions of sensors and devices communicating over 5G.

Bottlenecks

These applications are dependent on extensive 5G coverage to provide the capacity, speeds, and latency required for these systems to perform as intended at a global scale.

But two other potential roadblocks toward 5G could present themselves.

First, malicious devices could cause chaos within networks, empowered by their interconnectivity.

Second, the 5G rollout will encompass an explosion in transactions and payments between these devices. Such volumes will likely dwarf the current capacity of centralized and decentralized financial infrastructure.

The blockchain referee

Blockchain innovations could likely solve the first problem. Public, decentralized blockchains are proficient at ensuring immutability, tamper-resistance and establishing consensus among distrusting entities.

Thus, they can be used as a foundational layer for settling disputes between IoT devices that cannot settle transactions or smart contract conditions. Since these devices can transact with money and operate vehicles, establishing an underlying protocol layer with robust security is paramount. Blockchains can excel at this.

Decentralized blockchains offer further benefits over the current client-server model used in IoT. Their decentralized architecture means that identity can be protected and guaranteed. Currently, IoT devices identify themselves via cloud servers, with their identification data held in these databases. As such, the data can be compromised, stolen or imitated, presenting a major security threat to any application that runs atop such a network.

By using a decentralized blockchain, we can protect these identities through the use of asymmetric cryptography and secure hashing algorithms. Devices would be registered according to their own corresponding blockchain addresses, guaranteeing their identity. This blockchain layer can provide a level of security and frictionless identification unmatched by the existing centralized infrastructure.

Scaling up

Unfortunately, the second problem of scale cannot be directly solved by blockchains. The sheer extent of IoT means that decentralized blockchain architectures are not capable of handling the necessary throughput. This is at least true on layer one — i.e., blockchains themselves.

It is both possible and preferable to defer the majority of transactions to layer two protocols like the Lighting Network that operate on top of blockchains, through the use of payment channels or sidechains.  

However, given that every device will need to have its own address and on-chain transactions, there will need to be an on-chain capacity that reaches tens of thousands of transactions per second. In short, scalability must improve significantly on both layers.

Blockchains such as Bitcoin Cash ABC, with block size increases, and Ethereum, through sharding,are building out far greater on-chain capacity. Simultaneously, we are seeing the steady progress of the Lightning Network as it rolls out, along with sidechains such as Liquid from Blockstream, while Ethereum’s Plasma network continues to advance. The buildout of 5G and layer two blockchain infrastructure are fortuitously occurring simultaneously, providing the necessary scalability and coverage for an IoT-oriented economy.

One other route for system architects would be to add other structures, such as graphs between the base blockchain layer and IoT devices. Designs such as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) can be used to achieve far higher throughput. However, this typically results in undermined security and decentralization.

Navigating the trilemma of scalability, security and decentralization is a prerequisite to any blockchain-based IoT network, and deficiencies in any of these three areas could be cataclysmic for users and would undermine the purpose of using such a protocol in the first place. Until developers can produce alternative designs that achieve high throughput without sacrificing security or decentralization, IoT networks will have to use the more limited, yet secure blockchain structure.

Tamper-resistant data

5G empowered IoT devices are set to drive a massive increase in data transfer. Cisco projects that they will generate 847 zettabytes by 2021. Although blockchains at their core are distributed data storage systems, it is unfeasible to store significant amounts of data on-chain. If this IoT data is not stored on-chain, though, this still leaves it open to attacks.

However, it is quite possible to store hashes of data on-chain, with links pointing out to external data storage sites for the whole dataset. Indeed, such external storage could be run on other decentralized protocols, such as the InterPlanetary File System (IPFS) or OrbitDB. While this does not guarantee the same level of tamper-resistance, it does offer a stronger level of security than centralized alternatives. Importantly, by storing hashes on-chain, any tampering of the data will result in a change in the hash, thus drawing attention to such an attack, along with a time record via the timestamp.

Empowering smart contracts

Blockchains can also directly benefit from 5G in terms of functionality and performance.

One such example is smart contracting. Blockchain smart contracts often depend on oracles. These oracles relay external data to the contract. Of course, this information can only be transmitted with internet access. For applications such as supply chains, 5G can facilitate these oracles in remote areas where they otherwise would not be possible.

Network improvements

Blockchains can also derive network improvements from 5G.

The massive increases in range and bandwidth, in parallel with the reductions in latency aided by edge computing, could lead to a surge in additional nodes joining public blockchains. By extending coverage to remote areas as well as providing increased connectivity to nonstatic devices such as mobiles and tablets, there could be significant increases in network participation and, with that, improved security and decentralization.

In addition, due to latency reductions, developers would have more scope to experiment with reductions in block times, thus increasing on-chain throughput. In turn, this would offer far better support for IoT devices using blockchains for settlement, consensus and security.

A multi-fold relationship

To truly appreciate the values of 5G, IoT and blockchain, you have to consider them as synergistic rather than offering wholly separate value propositions. With the right architecture, this technology stack — along with second layer solutions, edge computing, virtual reality, augmented reality and IoS — is set to create an unprecedented amount of value while simultaneously radically altering working conditions, employment and recreation.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2OBDZq9 Tyler Durden

In a time when the public is especially sensitive about any airplane disasters, coupled with the now traditional interest in Russian oligarchs, a tragic story from Sunday afternoon combines both: the co-owner of Russia’s second biggest airline Siberia Airlines (aka S7), and Russia’s fourth richest woman, Natalia Fileva, was killed in a freak crash when her private jet crashed in Germany, taking the lives of a pilot and another passenger as well, the company said.

A six-seater private jet with Fileva on board took off from Cannes in France and was en route to the central German town of Egelsbach when it disappeared from radars at 13:22 GMT (15:22 local time), according to flight tracker Flightradar24.

#BREAKING: JUST IN: German police say a pilot and two Russian Businessmen died in a plane crash of a small airplane near Frankfurt, Germany, Two other individuals died in a crash with a police car responding to the scene. pic.twitter.com/IOGRTnIqHU

— News flash (@BRNewsFlash) March 31, 2019

The plane crashed in a field near the town of Erzhausen, some 10 kilometers (6 miles) south of Frankfurt, police said, adding that at least three people, including the pilot, were on board. The identity of the other person who accompanied Fileva is still unclear, with some reports suggesting her father was on the plane.

According to RT, the US-made Epic E1000 turboprop light aircraft crashed into the ground as it was preparing to make a landing at Egelsbach airport. The plane was destroyed and completely burnt out as it hit the ground, according to police. The debris is scattered around an area of a 20 meter-radius.

The cause of the crash has not yet been identified, S7 said.

Natalia was the wife of Vladislav Filev, the CEO and co-owner of S7 Airlines – Russia’s biggest private airline holding company. Her personal wealth amounted to $600 million according to Forbes magazine.  S7 is the main competitor in Russia to Aeroflot. It has 96 aircraft that fly to 181 cities and towns in 26 countries, the company’s website says.

“The S7 Group holding team expresses deepest condolences to the family and significant others,” the company said adding that Russian and international authorities would investigate the crash.

Aeroflot also paid tribute: “As head of the S7 Group of Companies, Natalia achieved outstanding success, helped strengthen domestic civil aviation and increase the authority of Russia as a great aviation power.

“The management and staff of Aeroflot express sincere condolences to the relatives and friends of Natalia and the entire staff of the S7 Group of Companies. We grieve with you, colleagues.”

Russian specialists will take part in the investigation of the tragedy. So far German media reported that the pilot had not notified aviation authorities of any malfunctions during the flight, although so far no speculation of foul play has emerged.

Meanwhile, adding to the freak nature of the event, two other people died when a police vehicle rushing to the scene of the crash collided with another car near the airport. The three police officers in the police car suffered serious injuries, DPA reported.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2OAyiJ2 Tyler Durden

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

It is amazing the power that politically correct kooks have acquired over language, art, and literature. It is a sign that the West is culturally dead.  

When high museums rename paintings because some emotional weakling declares the name to be offensive, it becomes obvious that the custodians of Western culture have lost their belief in Western culture. 

When universities cover up murals because of a claim they are offensive to people whose presence on the campus is miniscule if present at all, you know that learning is no longer the purpose of the university.  

When a people are afraid to use the words and terms of their forefathers, you know they have been intimidated to abandon even their own language and ways of speaking.  

Western culture today consists of pornography, sexual deviants, whinning whimps devestated by mere words, self-hatred, and craven cowards afraid to stand up for themselves against the onslaught of hate directed toward them by political correctness freaks.

The political correctness people are the most alienated and emotionally weak element in the society.  Yet they dominate in the media, entertainment, universities, and art world.  How is it possible that the Washingtonians are prepared to take us to war with real people—Russians, Chinese and North Koreans—two countries that have already whipped us once—and Persians, an ancient race that even the Romans had a hard time with?  Do the fools in Washington really think that our homosexualized, feminized, transgenderized military can take on Russians, Chinese, and Persians?  Hollywood can make all the movies it wants with female superheroes, but superheroes are the last thing whinning American feminists are.

The real questions for the politically correct crowd are:

(1) why isn’t war politically incorrect, and

(2) why isn’t it politically incorrect for the politically correct arbiters of language to call the rest of us names? The real racists in America are those who call white people racist.

What Your Sons and Daughters Will Learn at University

By Philip Carl Salzman

Universities in the 20th century were dedicated to the advancement of knowledge. Scholarship and research were pursued, and diverse opinions were exchanged and argued in the “marketplace of ideas.”

This is no longer the case. Particularly in the social sciences, humanities, education, social work, and law, a single political ideology has replaced scholarship and research, because the ideology presents fixed answers to all questions. And, although the most important thing in universities today is the diversity of race, gender, sexual practice, ethnicity, economic class, and physical and mental capability, there is no longer diversity of opinion. Only those committed to the ideology are admitted to academic staff or administration.

Universities have been transformed by the near-universal adoption of three interrelated theories: postmodernism, postcolonialism, and social justice. These theories and their implications will be explored here.

There Is No Truth; Nothing Is Good or Bad

Postmodernism: In the past, academics were trained to seek truth. Today, academics deny that there is such a thing as objective Truth. Instead, they argue that no one can be objective, that everyone is inevitably subjective, and consequently everyone has their own truth. The correct point of view, they urge, is relativism. This means not only that truth is relative to the subjectivity of each individual, but also that ethics and morality are relative to the individual and the culture, so there is no such thing as Good and Evil, or even Right and Wrong. So too with the ways of knowing; your children will learn that there is no objective basis for preferring chemistry over alchemy, astronomy over astrology, or medical doctors over witch doctors. They will learn that facts do not exist; only interpretations do.

All Cultures Are Equally Good; Diversity Is Our Strength

Our social understanding has also been transformed by postmodern relativism. Because moral and ethical principles are deemed to be no more than the collective subjectivity of our culture, it is now regarded as inappropriate to judge the principles and actions of other cultures. This doctrine is called “cultural relativism.” For example, while racism is held to be the highest sin in the West, and slavery the greatest of our historical sins, your children will learn that we are not allowed to criticize contemporary racism and slavery in Africa, the Middle East, and the equivalents in South Asia.

The political manifestation of cultural relativism is multiculturalism, an incoherent concept that projects the integration of multiple incompatible cultures. Diversity is lauded as a virtue in itself.  Imagine a country with fifty different languages, each derived from a different culture. That would not be a society, but a tower of babble. How would it work if there were multiple codes of law requiring and forbidding contrary behaviors: driving on the left and driving on the right; monogamy and polygamy; male dominance and gender equality; arranged marriage and individual choice? Your children will learn that our culture is nothing special and that other cultures are awesome.

The West Is Evil; The Rest Are Virtuous

Postcolonialism, the dominant theory in the social sciences today, is inspired by the Marxist-Leninist theory of imperialism, in which the conflict between the capitalist and proletariat classes is allegedly exported to the exploitation of colonized countries. By this means, the theory goes, oppression and poverty take place in colonies instead of in relation to the metropolitan working class. Postcolonialism posits that all of the problems in societies around the world today are the result of the relatively short Western imperial dominance and colonization. For example, British imperialism is blamed for what are in fact indigenous cultures, such as the South Asian caste system and the African tribal system. So too, problems of backwardness and corruption in countries once, decades ago, colonies continue to be blamed on past Western imperialism. The West is thus the continuing focus on anti-imperialist and anti-colonialist sentiment. Your children will learn that our society is evil, and the cause of all the evil in the wider world.

Only the West Was Imperialist and Colonialist

This ahistorical approach of postcolonialism ignores the hundreds of empires and their colonies throughout history, as well as ignoring contemporary empires, such as the Arab Muslim Empire that conquered all of the central Middle East, North Africa, southern Europe, Persia, Central Asia, and northern India, and occupied them minimally for hundreds of years, but 1400 years in the central Middle East and North Africa, and occupy them today. China, once the Communists took power, invaded Inner Mongolia to the north, Chinese Turkestan to the west, and Tibet to the south. Once in control, the government flooded these colonies with Han Chinese, in effect ethnically cleansing them. Postcolonialists have nothing to say about any of this; they wish to condemn exclusively the West. Your children will learn to reject history and comparisons with other societies, lest the claimed unique sins of the West be challenged.

Western Imperialism Was a Racist Project

Postcolonialists like to stress the racial dimension of Western imperialism: as an illustration of racism. But postmodernists are not interested in Arab slave raiding in “black” Africa, or Ottoman slaving among the whites in the Balkans, or the North Africans slave raiding of whites in Europe, from Ireland through Italy and beyond. Your children will learn that only whites are racist.

White Men Are Evil; Women of Color Are Virtuous

Social justice theory teaches that the world is divided between oppressors and victims. Some categories of people are oppressors and other are victims: males are oppressors, and females are victims; whites are oppressors, and people of color are victims; heterosexuals are oppressors, and gays, lesbians, bisexual, etc. are victims; Christians are oppressors, and Muslims are victims. Your sons will learn that they are stigmatized by their toxic masculinity.

Individuals Are Not Important; Only Category Membership Is

Social justice theory has taken university life by storm. It is the result of the relentless working of Marxist theory, adopted by youngsters during the American cultural revolution of the 1960s, then brought to universities as many of those youngsters became college professors. Marxism as an academic theory was explicitly followed by some in the 1970s and 1980s, but it did not sweep everything else away, because the idea economic class conflict was not popular in the prosperous general North American population. The cultural Marxist innovation that brought social justice theory to dominance was the extension of class conflict from economics to gender, race, sexual practice, ethnicity, religion, and other mass categories. We see this in sociology, which is no longer defined as the study of society but has for decades been defined as the study of inequality. For social justice theory, equality is not the equality of opportunity that is the partner of merit, but rather equality of result, which ensures the members of each category at equality of representation irrespective of merit. Your sons will learn that they should “step aside” to give more space and power to females. Your daughters, if white, will learn that they must defer to members of racial minorities.

Justice Is Equal Representation According to Percentages of the Population

As there is allegedly structural discrimination against all members of victim categories, in order for equality of result to prevail, representation according to percentages of populations must be mandated in all organizations, in all books assigned or references cited, in all awards and benefits. Ideas such as merit and excellence are dismissed as white-male supremacist dog whistles; they are to be replaced by “diversity” of gender, race, sexual preference, ethnicity, economic class, religion, and so on. (Note that “diversity” does not include “diversity of opinion”; for only social justice ideology is acceptable. Any criticism or opposition is regarded as “hate speech.”) Academic committees now twist themselves into pretzels trying to explain that “diversity is excellence.”

Members of Oppressor Categories Must Be Suppressed

Of course, the requirement of representation according to population applies only one way: to members of victim classes. If whites, men, heterosexuals, Christians, etc. are underrepresented, that is fine; the fewer the better. For example, females now make up 60% of university graduates, although in the general age cohort males are 51%. There is no social justice clamoring for males to be fully represented.  Members of disfavored oppressor categories are disparaged. The classics of Western civilization should be ignored because they are the work, almost exclusively, of “dead white men.” Only works of females, people of color and non-Western authors should be considered virtuous. So too in political history. The American Constitution should be discarded because its writers were slaveholders.

Victims of The World Unite!

“intersectionality” is an idea invented by a feminist law professor. It argues that some individuals fall into several victim categories, for example, black, female lesbians have three points in the victim stakes, as opposed to male members of the First Nations who receive only one point. Further, on the action front, members of each victim category are urged to unite and ally with members of other victim categories, because sharing the victim designation is the most important status in the world. This leads to some anomalies. Black victims of racism are urged to unite with Arab victims of colonialism, even though Arabs have been and still are holders of black slaves.

Being Educated Is About Being on The Right Side

As Karl Marx said, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.” The objective of a university education today is to ensure that students chose “the right side” in changing the world. The idea that it probably makes sense to try to understand the world before attempting to change it, is rejected as outmoded, modernist empiricism and realism, now superseded by postmodernism and social justice. If there is no Truth, and whatever one feels or believes is one’s truth, then trying to gain an objective understanding of the world is futile.

Things you are not allowed to say anymore.

JoyCamp says:

“This is a PSA (Progressive Service Announcement). JoyCamp has compiled a comprehensive list of words, phrases and “microaggressions” you’re NOT allowed to say anymore. Watch the video to ensure that you are able to protect yourself from saying the wrong thing! Then share it with your friends to keep them out of trouble as well.”

“Censorship helps to promote tolerance and thus, diversity, while simultaneously protecting us from hate speech and bigotry, therefore creating a safer, less offensive world for all.”

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2JTCzbV Tyler Durden

With Russia actively dumping US dollars and buying gold at the fastest paced in decades, the writing is on the wall when it comes to what the Kremlin thinks of any possibility for a detente in the painfully strained US-Russian relations.

And with Russia now clearly seeking to end monetary ties with a dollar-denominated “west”, there is just one alternative – China. Which is why it will probably not come as a surprise that several Russian banks joined the China International Payments System (CIPS) also known as China’s “SWIFT”, to ease operations between the two countries, according to a senior official at the Central Bank of Russia (CBR).

“As for the cooperation on payment systems, a range of banks are already connected to CIPS, allowing to facilitate payments routing procedure,” Vladimir Shapovalov, who heads a division dealing with foreign regulators at the CBR’s international cooperation department, said earlier this week during the international Russian-Chinese forum.

Meanwhile, as RT writes, the regulator hopes that in turn, Chinese counterparts will pay more attention to Russia’s own SWIFT alternative, the SPFS (System for Transfer of Financial Messages), as “it can further boost bilateral trade”, the official added.

As RT adds, Russia has been actively demonstrating the SPFS network, which was created in 2014 in response US threats of disconnecting Russia from SWIFT, to foreign partners, including China after its export version was finished late last year. The first system transaction involving a non-bank enterprise, was made by Russian oil major Rosneft in December 2017. Some 500 participants, with major Russian financial institutions and companies, have already joined. And with Europe contemplating alternatives to SWIFT in order to keep funding the Iran regime in light of its exclusion from the dollar-based monetary system following Trump’s reimposition of Iranian sanctions, it would land a major blow to the US Dollar’s reserve status if Brussels announced that it, too, would be joining either the Chinese or Russian alternative to dollar hegemony, a process which based on reserve managers’ declining allocations to US dollars…

… is already taking place.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2FPP0BD Tyler Durden

Jussie Smollett isn’t alone in trying to fake a hate crime for personal or selfish reasons. Hate crime hoaxes happen more often than many well-meaning Americans probably realize, and often they’re orchestrated as part of a trend intended to provoke hysteria and panic. Sometimes, innocent conservatives guilty of nothing more than living in the area where the “crimes” allegedly occurred are falsely accused of carrying out the attacks, and subjected to a storm of online threats and abuse. The political subtext of these false reports is easy to spot. Just like the Smollett case, they’re intended to portray Trump supporters and conservatives as violent bigots and homophobes willing to indiscriminately target members of the trans and gay communities.

And according to an investigation by New York Post columnist Andy Ngo, Smollett isn’t the only hate crime hoaxer to avoid punishment. In the Portland area alone, trans and LGBT activists have incited a panic with reports of attacks on LGBTQ individuals that, when investigated, were either never reported to police, or, in some cases, the details gathered by police differed dramatically from what was disclosed in viral social media posts, in such a way as to suggest that an attack never occurred.

Ngo’s piece begins with the Feb. 10 “attack” on Sophia Gabrielle Stanford, who launched a GoFundMe page that described her as the victim of a “brutal and aggressively blatant hate crime” that recounted how unidentified assailants had beaten her unconscious with a bat.” The page stated that Stanford had suffered a “serious concussion” and would need “intensive physical therapy, CT scans and counseling”.

A GoFundMe for activist Sophia Gabrielle Stanford went viral after it was alleged she was “violently attacked from behind with a baseball bat” by transphobes. That’s not at all what the police reports say. Read my story for the @nypost: https://t.co/UxkmKYxYEC pic.twitter.com/HeVI5eX6Ox

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) March 30, 2019

The post went viral and raised thousands of dollars. But when Ngo investigated, he discovered that the details from a police report of the incident varied dramatically from Stanford’s account. Per the report, Stanford even made an idle threat against the officers who were questioning her: “If you don’t treat me right, my people will get you.”

In the early hours of Sunday, Feb. 10, emergency services received a call about a woman, identified as Stanford, found on a sidewalk with scrapes on her face and knuckles, claiming that she may have been assaulted. The responding officer, Edgar Mitchell, noted that Stanford smelled of alcohol.

“I asked [Officer Zachary Roe] what happened,” the report states. “Roe said the individual admitted to being intoxicated, and Roe believed the person fell and hit her head.”

Stanford either could not or would not state her name to the police. The responding officer was unable to discover Stanford’s name and claims that she made a threat: “If you don’t treat me right, my people will get you,” she said, according to the report.

The report also states that Stanford lost a pistol and bag she was carrying at the time of the alleged attack. A local resident found both items and flagged down another officer, Cuong Nguyen. When Nguyen attempted to return the gun to Stanford at nearby Emanuel Hospital, where she had been transported, she was already discharged.

When Ngo tried to reach out to Stanford, she swiftly blocked him across social media. But in the weeks after Stanford’s story went viral, a number of “hate crimes” were reported across Portland, inspiring a panic in the city’s sizable LGBTQ community. As a result, some refused to travel alone at night. Workshops popped up where members of the community were taught “how to spot a fascist.” Yet, though no assailants were ever positively identified, members of the Proud Boys who were facing criminal charges over a street brawl with members of Antifa were targeted by social media pages, that encouraged readers to commit acts of “retaliatory” violence.

about a week after Stanford’s alleged assault, another “fat-queer activist” published a claim on social media about an attack on her and her partner, claiming that “two young white men” in a “maroon SUV” had lobbed a full beer can at her and called her a homophobic slur. A photo of Bruso’s partner was posted with a picture of a bruise on her cheek.

But though Bruso said the incident had been reported, when Ngo contacted police, he found no record of an incident at that location on that day.

On Feb. 17, Jenny Bruso, a self-described fat-queer activist, posted a claim on Facebook and Twitter that echoed Stanford’s harrowing story. She said that her partner, Brie Jones, was attacked by “two young white men” in a maroon SUV who pulled up beside her at a busy intersection, called her a homophobic slur and threw a full can of beer at her face. She was allegedly knocked to the ground from the impact. Bruso posted a photo of Jones with an abrasion on her cheek.

I spoke with staff at businesses along that intersection, but nobody I talked to had witnessed an attack. When Bruso’s post went viral on Facebook and commenters raised questions about the incident, she deleted the post.

“I, WE, owe you NOTHING,” Bruso wrote on Facebook. “The intention was to warn our communities and that’s precisely what I did.”

Bruso originally said the attack was “reported,” but Portland police stated in a report that there was no case number associated with the incident as of Feb. 27, 2019. I contacted Bruso several times by email asking where she reported the incident. She didn’t respond.

In response, activists sent out “attack alerts” and circulated the addresses of the alleged “attackers”, one of whom, a former member of conservative groups in the area, was accused of being involved in the attack against Bruso and her partner because, according to Doxxers, he owned a maroon SUV. However, Ngo found that the SUV in question had been repossessed months before the attack occurred, and that there was no reason to suspect his involvement in the attack.

Meanwhile, these and other hate crime reports have been uncritically shared by the Portland Mercury, a local news organization, and Portland Mayor Tom Wheeler, who amplified the rumors on Twitter. Yet all the Proud Boys members who have been blamed for the string of attacks denied their involvement – not that there is any actual evidence linking them to the incidents.

Claims that the LGBTQ community should fear and distrust the police in progressive Portland have been used to amplify the paranoia. But in a city where the mayor doubles as the police commissioner, the notion that police would simply ignore allegations of a hate crime, or refuse to take them seriously, simply beggars belief.

Yet, the fact that Smollett has gotten off without any repercussions (so far, at least) for blatantly faking a high-profile hate crime should only serve to embolden hoaxers looking to follow in his footsteps.

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2COVQoQ Tyler Durden

People become Tesla skeptics in many different ways. Some are investors that take a hard look at the company’s financials. Others witness Tesla accidents or wind up getting a glimpse into the company by working there. 

And some – like celebrity jeweler Ben Baller – wind up locked in their Tesla vehicles, trapped, with no way to get out.  

“I wish this was a fucking joke,” Baller says in his recent Instagram story video, mirrored on one Twitter user’s account.

“I’m locked inside my fucking Tesla. I know I’ve been the Tesla fan, I’ve said so many good things about Tesla. But I’ve been locked in the car now for 37 minutes fucking waiting for roadside assistance. “

He continued: “The electronic door – the door is handled by the push button or the key or opening the door handle – and nothing’s fucking working.”

@QTRResearch @markbspiegel @tslaqpodcast @TeslaCharts $TSLA $TSLAQ pic.twitter.com/q1DQvBtCaK

— Stock Sharks (@stocksharks_) March 31, 2019

Baller had made headlines back in December 2018 when he gifted Elon Musk a custom $40,000 Tesla ring. Three months later, the man who wrote to Musk on Instagram, calling him “an inspiration” and thanking Musk for “what [he’s] done for Americans”, found himself locked inside his Tesla with no way out. 

“This ring was designed and created here in America, just like your cars. We salute you for giving 50,000 jobs to Americans and putting USA back on the map as a serious contender in the auto industry,” Baller said in December, likely unaware that several rounds of crushing job cuts and layoffs were forthcoming at Tesla. 

According to NextShark, Baller used a trillion cut diamond to emphasize the “T” logo on the front of the ring, which he surrounded by round brilliant white diamonds and rubies which were pavé set by hand. On the back of the ring, custom cut diamond baguettes spell out “Tesla.”

“Please accept this 1 of 1 custom Diamond and Ruby #Tesla ring for being an inspiration to me and my best friend Paul,” the jeweler-to-the-stars wrote back in December. 

We guess the next time we’ll hear about this ring will be when it’s on an episode of Pawn Stars, or is a featured item at a Department of Justice auction. Meanwhile, if no one hears from Ben Baller over the next day or so, can someone go check on his Tesla?

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/2K4069Y Tyler Durden