The Morgan Doctrine: 2016 Prediction: Bill Gates and Warren Buffett Could Choose our Next President

Wednesday, June 25, 2014

2016 Prediction: Bill Gates and Warren Buffett Could Choose our Next President

On June 4th (read the article here), I shared the remarkable news that just two men could pretty well get together and name our next POTUS. No, neither of them is Rush Limbaugh nor Barak Obama. 68% of the random sample surveyed said they'd support a candidate endorsed by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. Gates I can understand, since his selfless generosity in giving away billions clearly marks him as one with the world's best interests at heart. I guess Mr. Buffett's challenge to the high rollers to give away lots of their net worth pays his dues into that club, too.

So what'll it be, Bill and Warren? Who has the brain power and the courage to step up and save our dysfunctional national family? If you guys agree on it, then it's a done deal.

I have a candidate you should look at, and I've been breaking my pick trying to find people to facilitate some kind of introduction. Alas, nobody who knows either of you two is willing to broker an introduction. I guess those are chips nobody wants to risk, and who can really blame them. I can't tell you how often somebody calls me out of the blue and asks for help setting up a meeting with Oracle's Larry Ellison or Salesforce's Marc Benioff. Half of me seriously doubts I could accomplish the intro, the the other half says out loud, "And you think I'll waste these chips for some stranger?" Yep, no wonder I haven't found a broker.

So directly to Mr. Gates and Mr. Buffett, I've got a candidate whose elevator pitch will blow your mind. Let me give you a one-paragraph elevator pitch, the goal of which is to set up a five-minute telephone call with my guy. Worst case, you'll be entertained. Best case, you'll want to nominate him for election in 2016 as well as for the Nobel Prize in Economics.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Implementation suggestions for THE MORGAN DOCTRINE are most welcome. What are the "Got'chas!"? What questions would some future Cyber Privateering Czar have to answer about this in a Senate confirmation hearing?

Background: Welcome black hats, white hats and cyber swashbucklers

The Revolutionary War was fought, financed, and pretty well WON by bonded privateers, legalized pirates who were given Letters of Marque and Reprisal by the Continental Congress and authorized to attack, capture and monetize British ships. The purpose of this site is to explore the possibility of a modern-day doctrine much like the Monroe Doctrine, by means of which the U.S. government could legally and, more importantly, effectively stop international hackers. Current cybercrime law is not only ineffective, but downright stupid. My Linux servers are attacked hundreds of times a day (mostly from China and former USSR domains), yet if I retaliate against those servers with some creative technology at my disposal (I know some VERY smart guys), then I am in violation of federal law and subject to some onerous penalties. We need more than a new law. We need a new international doctrine. I call it The Morgan Doctrine, named after Morgan Rapier, a fictional character I've created (hey, this is my way of establishing ownership of the concept, should it ever see the light of day).

Why a new international doctrine? Simply, nothing else will work. Introduced on December 2, 1823, the Monroe Doctrine told the world to keep their hands off the Americas. Combine this with current legal thinking on "hot pursuit" of fugitives. In 1917 the US Army went into Mexico after Pancho Villa. More recently, in 1960 Israeli Mossad agents abducted Adolf Eichmann from Argentina. Granted, much of the world regards the Eichmann adventure as a violation of international law. I don't share that opinion and therefore use it as the third leg of my Monroe-Pancho-Aldof platform for The Morgan Doctrine.

If someone comes into your home and attacks or attempts to rob you, you may shoot them dead. You may do so as long as they expire on your property. But what about cyber criminals? They attack you in your home from their homes. Retaliate in kind, and you go to jail. The Morgan Doctrine states simply that if you attack my computers (or my banking assets held in US-based computers), then under a certain set of well-defined conditions, a licensed and bonded "cyber privateer" may attack you in your home country and split the proceeds with the U.S. government. For the sake of argument, let's call it a 50-50 split (heh heh).

Right now, American law enforcement is completely unequipped to deal with the sheer number international cyber hackers. Sure, I could report each of the thousand daily attacks to the FBI, as could the millions of other attackees in the USA. But the volume of such reports would make any meaningful resolution laughable. Not to mention that the FBI has no jurisdiction outside the USA. Yet to make such "enforcement" profitable to recognized (ie, "bonded" "deputized") privateers, as Heath Ledger's Joker said in his last role, "Now you're talking!" You raid our bank accounts, we raid yours. You make money from off-shore child pornography, we're going to loot your bank accounts and, with some REALLY creative black hat operations, you will be taken off the grid worldwide to the extent that you'll not even complete a cell phone conversation for the remainder of your miserable depraved life. Okay, that last part probably won't fly, but you get my drift.

The purpose of this site is to explore the mechanics, legalities and practicality of The Morgan Doctrine.

And I will be the sole arbiter of whether or not your comments get posted. As Mel Brooks wrote, "It's good to be king."