Slashdot Mirror
Domain: algore2000.com
Stories and comments across the archive that link to algore2000.com.
Comments · 29
-
Re:jeez
We tried to
-
Re:Don't forget the military vote.Let me remind you why the military will *not* be voting for gore
-
Re:Legislative vs. Executive branch
Okay, convince me. I know that Democrats are for more government (which I'm against) and Republicans general go for less (which I'm for), but at least in the case of the war on drugs Bush seems to place it as a very high priority. Gore hasn't seemed to mention it at all (I can't find anything about it on his website) but Bush seems to be making it a major part of his platform (see this).
-
Re:Jesus, Taco, just get it over with...Yes, it's kind of annoying that a link to "hundreds of rich people (.com ceo's) endorse Gore/Bush" is posted as a story, while my pointer to a really interesting debate on technology policy between Nader and Gore advisor Reed Hundt (former chairman of the FCC during the Clinton-Gore administration) was rejected several times.
I'm glad he finally posted something about Nader, but it wasn't Nader's best writing on the subject, and he had to qualify it with "self-promotional" as if the news stories on Bush and Gore are anything other than reprinted press releases from the campaigns!
JMC
-
Re:Bzzt.
When you vote for Browne you are rejecting the mainstream big-government parties, and if enough people do that they will eventually take notice.
Your assertion that people will eventually take notice is not necessarily true. In the presidential campaign of 1992, H. Ross Perot recieved 18.91% of the popular vote. People may have noticed, but did the system really change? In 1996 Perot only received 8.4% of the popular vote with Nader receiving a mere 0.7%. See uselectionatlas.org for more election stats.
The current system does need an overhaul. I am of the opinion that we should get rid of the electoral college and open the elections to more than just the two parties. But just because a third-party candidate gets a good sized chunk of votes does not mean that the system will change. It would be much more effective to elect third-party candidates to congress, both at the national and at the state level. As lawmakers they would have more power affect real change.
Gore 2000 -
Technology related questionsSome of you are asking Gore technology related questions... many of these were already answered in a Wired debate on technology policy between Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader and Al Gore advisor Reed Hundt, former chairman of the FCC during the Clinton-Gore administration.
Nader's latest article discusses a lot of issues close to our (dark) hearts, including privacy regulation for e-commerce business, and patents on 1-click shopping.
Here's a great (although long) quote:
In looking at the Internet, one might also ask what has the administration done to support the open-source movement, either through procurement policies (very little), funding for open-source software (not something the administration talks about) or protecting free software developers from software patents and anticompetitive practices targeted at the free-software movement?
In the area of corporate welfare, tax breaks and subsidies for big corporations, there is no end to what this administration will do for the e-commerce industry.
But when it comes to supporting an astonishing citizen movement that is protecting the Internet from Microsoft and other would-be monopolies and providing huge benefits to the economy, the administration is completely inarticulate.
JMC
-
Re:DARPAnet? bzzzzzzzzz wronga quote from Algore2000
"As a Senator, he introduced legislation which expanded investment in research networks, such as the NSFNET. "
a quote from hobbes internet timeline from 1986. "NSFNET created (backbone speed of 56Kbps) NSF establishes 5 super-computing centers to provide high-computing power for all (JVNC@Princeton, PSC@Pittsburgh, SDSC@UCSD, NCSA@UIUC, Theory Center@Cornell). This allows an explosion of connections, especially from universities."
As you'll notice from the timeline, DARPANET was brought on-line in 1979, well before Gore had a chance to vote on anything even remotly related to it. Yes, he approved funding for a 56k backbone , but that's hardly pioneering work.
-
Re:I especially liked...You know, in the past, I used to have problems like this. I mean this year I'm presented with a group of candidates in the two major parties, none of whom I could possibly vote for. I mean, the two major parties offer a choice of Al "V-Chip" Gore and his wife Tipper "PMRC" Gore (not to mention that her comments on Dungeons and Dragons, well, I guess I just did
Yes, they seem a lovely pack of jackals and demagogues. Lot's of people are voting for one or the other. In fact, my sister was trying to convince me to become a Republican just the other day <Shudder> "Come on, George W. Bush needs your vote," she said to me, seriously!! <Shudder>. Bleah! And I thought I was convincing her to vote Libertarian... -_-
But there is a solution, and it doesn't involve sitting home on election day! That solution is Harry Browne, Libertarian, a man who is looking out for everyone's rights.
Remember, voting for a candidate who doesn't win may be depressing, but helping to elect a loser is far, far worse!
Vote Browne and send a message to the establishment!
(Incidentally, I've read articles in Forbes magazine that seemed OK, but not only is he out of the race, he was courting the Christian Coalition vote when he was in the race... I think that means, ultimately, filters and censorship under his administration, too.)
-
More Complete Listing of Party/Candidate WebsitesSince some party/candidate websites were left out of the HTML analysis, here's a more complete listing:
Official political party sites
Democratic Socialists of America
Green Parties of North America
Official candidate sites
Btw, not everyone's still running. Get involved in politics. Change the course of history. Can anyone get a candidates position of support or non-support concerning the DeCSS-DVD-MPAA issue? Interesting to see Gore running Linux, and Bradley and him using Apache. And though McCain may not be on MS, he does have some skeletons in the proverbial web-closet: McCain pay-chat a Microsoft affair -
think: he didn't use quotation marksalgore2000.com. The "search" feature is further down the page.
Search 1: internet 144 matches
Search 2: internet policy 326 matches
Search 3: "internet policy" 0 matches
The default behavior of their search engine is to use the boolean operator "or" unless there are quotation marks or the "exact phrase" button is clicked on.
-
Best resources for campaign websites?
I'm the webmaster for the campaign for Alexander Lipsey, who is a Democrat running for Michigan state representative (60th district).
There must be many people in my position--wanting to put up an excellent website to support an excellent candidate. But I've had trouble finding good resources for doing so--a kind of HOWTO for campaign websites.
Do you have any recommendations for good resources for creating campaign sites (in addition, of course, to viewing the source at algore2000.com).
-
Domain NameI note that AlGore.Com is owned by S YOUNG, while algore2000.com is owned by Ben Green.
Did a domain speculator get the name before Al Gore could assert his claim?
---
For Hire - but not cheap. I only do good work.
-
Re:Whose idea was it...From the source of the front page of algore2000.com:
The fact that you are peeking behind the scenes at our site means you can make an important difference to this Internet effort.
Since alt-v, (u|c) is about as hard as voting, and lots of the people who look at source code obsessively live in CA, does this statement mean he's desperate for votes in CA?
--
-
Lowest common denominatorI'm a 20 year old male; this will be the first time I can vote in a presidential election. I am one of your target demographics. I'm a student; so my time to research the candidates is limited. One of my major sources of information is the web - cnn.com and the various candidate sites in particular. At this point, my vote is up for grabs.
Algore2000 is a good site. I'm sure there was countless hours of thought put into each and every detail, especially the "agenda" page. That page in particular is a work of persuasive art, right down to the picture of Al with a pair of cops (tough on crime), and the (over)use of red, white and blue. The list of catch phrases is an especially nice touch; who could possibly NOT support "Saving Our Schools," "Fighting for America's Seniors" and "Improving Health Care," right?
My question for you, sir, has to be this: Why does algore2000.com seem to think I'm a fool? Am I supposed to be genuinely impressed by the load of press releases and speaches? I hate to break the news to you, but I want to see real content, NOT glazed over executive summaries. Take for instance something VERY relevant to me as a college student - the link from the front page about Al's Plan to Make College More Affordable. It leads here. The extent of the "details" stated is this:
"Gore announced new details of his National Tuition Savings Program, which is designed to help families save for college. The plan allows families to invest funds in an account where their money will be protected from inflation and can be withdrawn to pay for higher education expenses tax-free. The plan will also guarantee the cost of college tuition at any participating college or university in the country."
The rest of the press release is all fluff. No mention of whether this is limited to public or private universities, 2 or 4 year degrees, graduate school, part or full time study, etc. And this is the *basic* stuff. I'm also interested in why this would be a better option than, say, investing in short-term CD's.
That's just ONE example from the many I could have chosen. Nearly all the "content" of algore2000.com is fluff. And shots at Bill Bradley. The simple fact is this does not impress me. Actually, since this site represents Al Gore, I'm inclined to believe Al relatively clueless - if he wasn't, surely he'd tell us HOW he plans to fund his proposed programs, tax cuts, etc. Any politician can CLAIM to support any number of things. Algore2000 picks popular issues, and loads the wording of them such that ANYONE would be nearly forced to agree. Come on, who on earth DOESN'T support "A better educational system?"
What I could like to see from algore2000.com, as well as EVERY OTHER CANDIDATE is DETAILS. I want to know HOW you plan to provide a tax cut - will this come at the expense of the defense budget? Money always comes from somewhere; I want to know what has to be CUT to lower taxes. And don't tell me "unnecessary pork" or some trite answer. I want to see numbers.
And I want a big ass chart, with a column for every candidate, and a row for every issue. "Do you support abortion as it currently stands? y/n" "Do you support the abolition of legal abortion under all circumstances? y/n" "Do you support abortion under limited circumstances? If so, when?" Things like that. REAL questions. Some more: "Do you support the reverse engineering of software for porting and compatibility purposes?" "Do you support CDA in its current form?" And more of the like. I don't want to read "Al Gore supports technology and innovation" - I want to read HOW he supports them.
Simply put, algore2000.com seems to play to the lowest common denominator - the average american, who sadly enough has little interest in politics, and little technical knowledge. I think this is a mistake; this audience doesn't read political advocacy web sites on a wide basis. You'd do better to use the web site to provide details and elaborate on Al's statements and ideas rather than just rehash them.
One more side note: I followed Jesse Ventura's campaign slightly - I don't know his stance on most of the issues. I dont live in Minnesota, so I didn't take the time to research him. What I DO know is that I was very impressed when a reporter asked him if he supported some obscure bill I'd never heard of. Ventura replied something like "Well, to be honest, I'm not familiar with that at all. I'm not gonna lie to you; I don't know everything, or have all the answers you wanna hear. But I learn fast; I'll read up on it." When can we expect Al Gore to say something like THAT?
--
-
Quick TakesA few quick takes... (I suppose some of these questions could be considered hostile, but none are meant as trolls by any means.)
- Your privacy statement reads, in part: We do not knowingly collect personally identifiable information from children 13 and under.
Does this mean that you unknowingly collect it? How could you be unaware of whether you collect data on kids or not?
- What is your stance on domain squatting given the fact that someone else owns algore.com?
- The "source code" to your front page reads, in part: I plan to use this space to post special messages to those who are helping to improve our web site...
What does this mean? Why would candidate Gore use an HTML comment to post a message to your web site developers?
- As the Director of Internet Operations, how do you handle problems like Gore's infamous "Father of the Internet" gaffe, the problem last Fall with your web site collecting data from children, and other technical issues that (understandably) a politician isn't very familiar with?
- According to the text of this article, you're committed to "making the algore2000 Web site...as efficient as possible." How can you justify that with a whopping 155Kb front page?
- In Vice-President Gore's Technology and Science agenda, nowhere is mentioned things like encryption exports, software patents, so-called roving wiretaps and other pressing technical-human rights issues. Does your candiate have a stance on them?
Daniel P. McCarty - Your privacy statement reads, in part: We do not knowingly collect personally identifiable information from children 13 and under.
-
Re:Open Source web site?Was it your idea to claim that algore2000.com web site is "Open Source"? Do you even understand what Open Source means, or did you just decide to put yet another buzz word on the site, along with "information superhighway", which Al Gore likes to use so often?
This question certainly needs to be asked, but I think there is a need to be specific about the full issue. Here is my attempt to state the question as completely as possible, with links:
The algore2000 website claims to be an "open site". The is clearly an attempt to choose a term other than Open Source after the reaction of the Open Source community to the initial application of that label to the site. The statement, here begins with:
In the spirit of the Open Source movement, we have established the Gore 2000 Volunteer Source Code Project. www.algore2000.com is an "open site".
Invoking the name of the Open Source movement is clearly an attempt to either court it as a constituency or for help with the web site, or both. If you want that, you can't go with half measures. I read the legal notice. I realize that the limitations on who can contribute are an effort to be sure that all of the contributed source code is kept strictly on the legal side of election laws. That's fine. However, to be Open Source a project must meet certain criteria, including:
- The software must be freely redistributable.
- Source code must be included with the distribution.
- Derivative works, as long as they are clearly labelled as such, are allowed.
- The license must not discriminate against any field of endeavour.
- The license must not be specific to a product.
The first item would clearly allow an unmodified mirror of the algore2000 web site, but not under your direct control. The second, if the site is entirely HTML and images has been met simply by putting it on the web. The rest, take together, would allow an opponent to copy the look and feel while changing the content or anyone to create a parody.
There are other conditions on the Open Source web site (http://www.opensource.org/). Please, tell us specifically which ones you are honoring and which ones you are deviating from as an "open site" and why. -
Re:Open Source web site?Was it your idea to claim that algore2000.com web site is "Open Source"? Do you even understand what Open Source means, or did you just decide to put yet another buzz word on the site, along with "information superhighway", which Al Gore likes to use so often?
This question certainly needs to be asked, but I think there is a need to be specific about the full issue. Here is my attempt to state the question as completely as possible, with links:
The algore2000 website claims to be an "open site". The is clearly an attempt to choose a term other than Open Source after the reaction of the Open Source community to the initial application of that label to the site. The statement, here begins with:
In the spirit of the Open Source movement, we have established the Gore 2000 Volunteer Source Code Project. www.algore2000.com is an "open site".
Invoking the name of the Open Source movement is clearly an attempt to either court it as a constituency or for help with the web site, or both. If you want that, you can't go with half measures. I read the legal notice. I realize that the limitations on who can contribute are an effort to be sure that all of the contributed source code is kept strictly on the legal side of election laws. That's fine. However, to be Open Source a project must meet certain criteria, including:
- The software must be freely redistributable.
- Source code must be included with the distribution.
- Derivative works, as long as they are clearly labelled as such, are allowed.
- The license must not discriminate against any field of endeavour.
- The license must not be specific to a product.
The first item would clearly allow an unmodified mirror of the algore2000 web site, but not under your direct control. The second, if the site is entirely HTML and images has been met simply by putting it on the web. The rest, take together, would allow an opponent to copy the look and feel while changing the content or anyone to create a parody.
There are other conditions on the Open Source web site (http://www.opensource.org/). Please, tell us specifically which ones you are honoring and which ones you are deviating from as an "open site" and why. -
Websites of the candidates.According to Netcraft,
Al Gore's website at www.algore2000.com
is running Apache/1.3.9 (Unix) secured_by_Raven/1.4.2 PHP/4.0b3 on Linux.Bill Bradley's website at www.billbradley.com
is running Apache/1.3.9 (Unix) mod_perl/1.21 on Solaris.George W. Bush's website at www.georgewbush.com
is running Microsoft-IIS/4.0 on NT4 or Windows 98John McCain's website at www.mccain2000.com
is running Rapidsite/Apa-1.3.4 FrontPage on IRIX -
Re:Ralph Nader Pro gun?Of course I am speaking relative to other candidates. Nader supports the Brady Bill, which has a lot of good ideas in it (now that instant background checking exists, and not counting the 10-round limit on detatchable magazines), and wants to implement "carefully thought out gun control." (emphasis mine) Compare this to:
- Bradley's proposal to register all handguns
- Bradley's proposal to limit handgun sales to one a month, and his long-term plans to eliminate handgun sales entirely
- Gore's proposal to mandate federal photo licensing for gun owners
- Bush's support of an assault-weapons ban, and a ban on machine guns (which are legal in many states, although they require extensive background checks!)
It should be noted that Buchannan, Hatch, Keyes, Forbes and Bauer are similar to Browne in supporting gun rights. But all of these candidates (except Browne) are too fascist for me. Browne is Libertarian, which I have some issues with, although nowhere nearly as many as with the GOP in general.
-
Al Gore is a "Bad Faith Squatter"
As is fitting for the man who "invented" it, Al Gore has taken his campaign to the Internet. So has Bill Bradley. But if you accidentally mistype Bradley's URL, you are redirected to Gore's site. Clever, yes?
Al Gore - www.algore2000.com.
Bill Bradley - www.billbradley.com.
Pseudo-Bill - www.billbradly.com. -
Al Gore is a "Bad Faith Squatter"
As is fitting for the man who "invented" it, Al Gore has taken his campaign to the Internet. So has Bill Bradley. But if you accidentally mistype Bradley's URL, you are redirected to Gore's site. Clever, yes?
Al Gore - www.algore2000.com.
Bill Bradley - www.billbradley.com.
Pseudo-Bill - www.billbradly.com. -
Re:Sue Al Gore!from http://www.algore2000.com:
When we expand the site in the coming months, content from source code volunteers from around the nation will be posted according to its geographic origin. For instance, if you are from Iowa or New Hampshire or California and you want to volunteer by writing content (in the programming language or on the platform of your choice) for those parts of the site, we urge you to do so.
i am sending a disk-erasing utility written in 6502 machine code.
-krog -
Open source message gone from front page
I just visited the Gore2000 website and the Open Source message was gone from the front page. Although if you view the source the message from Al Gore is still there.
-
Open source message gone from front page
I just visited the Gore2000 website and the Open Source message was gone from the front page. Although if you view the source the message from Al Gore is still there.
-
P-M-R-C?Give it a rest.. at least ridicule him for something real, like Tipper's holier-than-thou views on music and art. Dont think that his are going to be too different
Pot kettle black, holmes. That PMRC stuff and related junk was just the maneuvering of a power couple with their eyes on the White House. I think even Uncle Frank (RIP) understands. Unfortunately that power couple still insists on mentioning it on their campaign homepage, in their continuing bid to grab a piece of the lucrative "family values" market. Their actual views are far more sane, I guarantee you.
Tipper has a bit of a rock'n'roll background, y'know -- she could have been a Mo Tucker. She shouldn't be ridiculed for the PMRC; that's just the business of politics and marketing. Set your fangs instead on the bastards the PMRC enabled, like Wal-Mart and the censors at MTV.
--
-
*Can* a political campaign be OpenSource?You omitted the clear violation of clause 5 -- AlGore2000 specifically prohibits " a company, business, labor union or other organization, or any federal, state or municipal agency" from contributing, and further states that "only individuals acting as volunteers may participate in the volunteer Multimedia Project. No individual may be paid for their efforts."
Although this isn't the kind of thing one normally associates with the charged word "discrimination," it does violate clause 5, the rationale for which states "we forbid any open-source license from locking anybody out of the process."
It's not clear to me that a political campaign can satisfy this clause and still stay within the laws governing political campaign contributions. It might be interesting for the OSI to list types of projects that are unable to satisfy the OSD due to conflicting legal obligations...
-
Jesus, Taco...didn't you release the source to /.?believe they are talking about the admin to the site, that maintains the database, etc. You should really check into things before you start laughing and flaming. They request that you write for info regarding the source. Maybe you should do that.
From The HTML for algore2000.com...
Thanks for checking out our source code! I plan to use this space to post special messages to those who are helping to improve our web site -- by making our source code the best it can be. The fact that you are peeking behind the scenes at our site means you can make an important difference to this Internet effort.
No, it actually sounds like they are talking about looking at the web pages, not the "administration" stuff. After all, the site is apparently run on MS IIS with a closed source e-commerce solution.
Bravery, Kindness, Clarity, Honesty, Compassion, Generosity
-
Look a little closer....Guess he invented spam tooAt the url : (http://www.algore2000.com
Couple spam, censorship and trademark violations and what do you get? Al Gore.
Chris DiBona
--
Grant Chair, Linux Int.
VP, SVLUG -
Legal issues aboud!
Did you check out the link (directly under the OPEN SOURCE paragraph) about the legal issues.
http://www.algore2000.com/g etinvolved/legal_notice.html
It seemed pretty strict with the requirements and there was a really interesting little quote that said, "If Gore 2000 selects your material for use on our website we will contact you with further legal requirements. "
It may be "Open Source", but I doubt it meets the requirements for " Free Software" (as mentioned earlier today.)
