There is no incentive (for businesses) with bailouts though. You can't buy out your competitor during a downturn because the government bailout to your competitor is already in the mail. We don't see the airlines that saved for a rainy day going out and buying out the ones that have no cash reserve, because the latter were bailed out. So then the industry as a whole decides not to save because they know the bailout will be there.
We need some kind of law where if you take a bailout you give the Fed a controlling interest, you have something like 60 or 90 days to buy that interest back by repaying the bailout. After that other entities have the right to purchase that controlling interest and then they now own you.
Both my spouse and I had COVID. I say probably because we both showed the expected moderate symptoms and we both did the Roche swab test for COVID. I came back positive. My spouse, with the same symptoms and who sleeps beside me every night, came back negative. Doctor just shrugged his shoulders and said "Yeah, it seems like if you have mild or moderate symptoms, the tests are only about 60% accurate." and just worked on the assumption we both had COVID for his suggested response.
Later on, we did a blood test at local university and we both came back with positive for the antibodies. So yeah Roche needs to address their own tire fire of a test at some point.
I wonder how this will play our on the OS X version of LoL. Apple straight killed that Zoom webserver awhile back with an OS update. I wonder if they make a similar move here against Kernel Level anti cheat? Assuming you even pull it off on OS X.
I did a security audit last week, which was mostly the managers writing a runbook for weaseling out way out of trouble if a data breach happened. Actually looking at overall system architecture, the specific encryption services, etc was not a popular topic.
It's a pro and con type of thing. For example you can go out and hire a former Soviet MIG driver and get him to drive the the Hornet just like he say taught the Iranians to drive their MIGs (limiting the performance of the Hornet to match that of the older aircraft, etc).
For the military to directly hire a foreign national who served in a different military is a ton of paperwork. It's much easier to have the contractor do it.
There obviously is a security risk, but as long as you compartmentalize the risk it's okay. It's also the issue of keeping said Soviet MIG driver busy, in that maybe you have 6 months of work for him a year. Other six months of the year he can't exactly hang around the Pentagon and help with reports since as you mention, it's a security risk. The contractor can keep him working by say doing 6 months a year of training with the American military, 3 months of training with the Canadians, 2 months with the Swedish, etc.
There are proven models for minimizing risk. The intel agencies often like to hire foreign nations because they have local expertise with regard to their home country, but the CIA can't exactly just make a Chinese national a W-2 employee and let them run around Langley.
We need some kind of law where if you take a bailout you give the Fed a controlling interest, you have something like 60 or 90 days to buy that interest back by repaying the bailout. After that other entities have the right to purchase that controlling interest and then they now own you.