Slashdot Mirror

At the recent All Things Digital conference, McCain stakes out his position against Net Neutrality: "When you control the pipe, you should be able to get profit from your investment." Not surprising, really, since the very companies who control the pipes, the big telecoms, are McCain's top contributors -- see http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp ?CID=N00006424&cycle=2002 Also interesting: in the same article, McCain says he would hire Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer to a cabinet position. After the big telecoms and Goldman Sachs, Microsoft was McCain's top contributor. So much for McCain's rep as a champion of campaign finance reform. -A

It's hard to believe that this list is complete at 50 office holders. Is 50 really enough to ensure success? Wouldn't they have tried to acquire closer to half of the federal office holders (536/2+1=269)? That money (269* ~$5000 = $1.4 million) is a drop in the bucket.

Did this list really backtrack all of RIAA's members and their proxies? The recorded music industry gave $3.1 million in the last presidential election cycle (2004) and $2.4 million in the off year (2006). Not every company in the recorded music industry is RIAA, but these recipients got a lot more money overall than TFA reports.

It's hard to believe that this list is complete at 50 office holders. Is 50 really enough to ensure success? Wouldn't they have tried to acquire closer to half of the federal office holders (536/2+1=269)? That money (269* ~$5000 = $1.4 million) is a drop in the bucket.

Did this list really backtrack all of RIAA's members and their proxies? The recorded music industry gave $3.1 million in the last presidential election cycle (2004) and $2.4 million in the off year (2006). Not every company in the recorded music industry is RIAA, but these recipients got a lot more money overall than TFA reports.

Lot of information to digest here, but you appear to want more info: additional info here 2006 pt1 2006 pt2 2006 cycle individual members of the pac FEC disclosure

Lot of information to digest here, but you appear to want more info: additional info here 2006 pt1 2006 pt2 2006 cycle individual members of the pac FEC disclosure

Lot of information to digest here, but you appear to want more info: additional info here 2006 pt1 2006 pt2 2006 cycle individual members of the pac FEC disclosure

Lot of information to digest here, but you appear to want more info: additional info here 2006 pt1 2006 pt2 2006 cycle individual members of the pac FEC disclosure

Lot of information to digest here, but you appear to want more info: additional info here 2006 pt1 2006 pt2 2006 cycle individual members of the pac FEC disclosure

Given that this is the same guy who doesn't seem to realize that condoms reduce the risk of contracting AIDS why would we expect him to understand the first thing about net neutrality? As lots of people point out, it's incredibly difficult to get someone to understand something when he's being paid by AT&T to not understand it?

It's not even 2008. You need to check out who donated to him last election if you want to talk about how small the totals are.

A comparison of telecom contributions to presidential candidates shows the same picture.

JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ)
Top Contributors

1 AT&T Inc $39,500

Pardon me for flaming your spelling, but you should know there's always a W in "Whore"

"Actually you'll find that "core" Republican voters REALLY REALLY hate trial attorneys."

Really?

Hint: #2 on the list of Bush donors is trial lawyers.

(Of course, the lawyers have their fingers in every pot: they're #1 on Kerry's list and #2 on Nader's list.)

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.asp?order=A

Note all the asses...

Here we go. Found some data on what parties get donations from the MPAA and RIAA. Turns out it's about 2 to 1 to the Dems (as sourced by the Center for Responsive Politics). $41 million in 2002 (the biggest year).

I don't care if it's democrats or republicans. My main point stands. Corporations vote by buying legislators. The only vote we have left is our own money. Choose to donate to these bastards at your peril. Be you democrat or republican, any amount of money spent with corporations in either of these trade organizations is treason. :)

Have a nice day.

Because the MAFIAA owns the Democrats.

Because the MAFIAA owns the Democrats.

How about someone do a web site showing who is a shill and who isn't.

• Cynically - they all are shills for somebody; vote third party and throw the whole lot out every election.
• Less cynically - http://opensecrets.org/. Find out who bought who in Washington.

Man! you really are bitter. Sounds like you need a vacation.

From your other post:
Three replies and not one person could do even the basic research to back up the statement.

Goes both ways my friend. You're the one making the denials. It's up to you to come up with any proof. Is water actually dry? Show us your research. The point is when absurd laws are passed, something smells cheesy in Denmark. These things don't just happen without a reason. Do you have a logical explanation, since you don't seem to believe the money angle has anything to do with it? You certainly haven't posted it yet. Nixon only got caught because he failed to burn the tapes. These guys are "burning the tapes". Or better yet, they're not dumb enough to record any to leave lying around. Mind telling us how to recover destroyed evidence? Much easier to simply complain, huh? I wonder if you are demonstrating the working definition of Troll, or just having a little fun yourself. Remarkable role you're playing here. To tell you the truth, I kinda dig it :-)

Oh! Deary me! Some mighty familiar names in there. Oooo, Here's some nice big, fancy, impressive numbers, with lots of zeros an' commas an' stuff. But this wouldn't have any influence on anybody now, would it? No siree Bob. We only elect innocent little angels to our congress. Maybe the reason you don't see much of your desired proof is because it's been discussed over six years ago?. And we see no need to repeat the obvious over and over...Well, aside from the dupes. So I would place the burden on you now since you made me wear my fingers to the bone.

Man! you really are bitter. Sounds like you need a vacation.

From your other post:
Three replies and not one person could do even the basic research to back up the statement.

Goes both ways my friend. You're the one making the denials. It's up to you to come up with any proof. Is water actually dry? Show us your research. The point is when absurd laws are passed, something smells cheesy in Denmark. These things don't just happen without a reason. Do you have a logical explanation, since you don't seem to believe the money angle has anything to do with it? You certainly haven't posted it yet. Nixon only got caught because he failed to burn the tapes. These guys are "burning the tapes". Or better yet, they're not dumb enough to record any to leave lying around. Mind telling us how to recover destroyed evidence? Much easier to simply complain, huh? I wonder if you are demonstrating the working definition of Troll, or just having a little fun yourself. Remarkable role you're playing here. To tell you the truth, I kinda dig it :-)

Oh! Deary me! Some mighty familiar names in there. Oooo, Here's some nice big, fancy, impressive numbers, with lots of zeros an' commas an' stuff. But this wouldn't have any influence on anybody now, would it? No siree Bob. We only elect innocent little angels to our congress. Maybe the reason you don't see much of your desired proof is because it's been discussed over six years ago?. And we see no need to repeat the obvious over and over...Well, aside from the dupes. So I would place the burden on you now since you made me wear my fingers to the bone.

Do you seriously think the Republicans have their lips more firmly planted on Hollywood's anus than the Democrats? Both parties are throughly sold out to the copyright lobby. The DMCA of 1998 was passed by a unanimous vote in the Senate and signed by a Democratic President. The TV, movie, and music industries give 68% of their campaign contributions to Democrats.

If anything, divided government makes it less likely that something like this will pass. If a Democrat wins the Presidency next year, I sure hope he has a Republican Congress.

-ccm

Given that several people are pointing fingers in this thread and other places, I thought a little bit of hard data was in order: campaign finance data for the movie and recording industries. More detailed information can be found here, here, here, and here.

Given that several people are pointing fingers in this thread and other places, I thought a little bit of hard data was in order: campaign finance data for the movie and recording industries. More detailed information can be found here, here, here, and here.

Given that several people are pointing fingers in this thread and other places, I thought a little bit of hard data was in order: campaign finance data for the movie and recording industries. More detailed information can be found here, here, here, and here.

Given that several people are pointing fingers in this thread and other places, I thought a little bit of hard data was in order: campaign finance data for the movie and recording industries. More detailed information can be found here, here, here, and here.

Given that several people are pointing fingers in this thread and other places, I thought a little bit of hard data was in order: campaign finance data for the movie and recording industries. More detailed information can be found here, here, here, and here.

Given that several people are pointing fingers in this thread and other places, I thought a little bit of hard data was in order: campaign finance data for the movie and recording industries. More detailed information can be found here, here, here, and here.

So, Obama has $19 million on hand from fund raising and donations and he can't drop a year's salary to this guy for the work he's done maintaining a MySpace site? And if the guy invested $10k of his own money on good faith that it would help the campaign ... I'm shocked that he's not asking for more. I mean, isn't that chump change to Obama? And doesn't Obama have to dispose of that money before the election otherwise it's gotta go to charity (I'm not a politician, I forget the rules of soft money).

I'm getting the feeling that I'm not hearing the whole story here. Nobody's doing anything wrong though, this is clear cut capitalism. The man has the only supply for the product ... Obama's campaign managers didn't like it so decided to make their own. Interesting drama but not really news.

You can't spell DMCA without the "D"....

Yep, the entertainment industry gives at least twice as much to Democrats as they do to Republicans. Since 1990, they've given $137,219,474 to Dems, and $63,574,385 to Repubs.

The recording industry is even more skewed, giving $13,635,639 to Dems and $3,727,147 to Repubs since 1990. That's 78% to Dems - with some election cycles having 85% of the recording industries political contributions going to Dems.

But that's nothing compared to the movie industry, which gave $47,800,285 to Dems and $7,192,062 to Repubs since 1990. Up to 93% of movie industry political contributions have gone to Dems in some election cycles, with that number never lower than 78%.

There's a reason why the DMCA was signed by a Democratic President. Hell, there are millions of reasons, all of them green...

The cognitive dissonance among sheltered /. basement-dwellers that this post is going to cause will be funny.

You can't spell DMCA without the "D"....

Yep, the entertainment industry gives at least twice as much to Democrats as they do to Republicans. Since 1990, they've given $137,219,474 to Dems, and $63,574,385 to Repubs.

The recording industry is even more skewed, giving $13,635,639 to Dems and $3,727,147 to Repubs since 1990. That's 78% to Dems - with some election cycles having 85% of the recording industries political contributions going to Dems.

But that's nothing compared to the movie industry, which gave $47,800,285 to Dems and $7,192,062 to Repubs since 1990. Up to 93% of movie industry political contributions have gone to Dems in some election cycles, with that number never lower than 78%.

There's a reason why the DMCA was signed by a Democratic President. Hell, there are millions of reasons, all of them green...

The cognitive dissonance among sheltered /. basement-dwellers that this post is going to cause will be funny.

You can't spell DMCA without the "D"....

Yep, the entertainment industry gives at least twice as much to Democrats as they do to Republicans. Since 1990, they've given $137,219,474 to Dems, and $63,574,385 to Repubs.

The recording industry is even more skewed, giving $13,635,639 to Dems and $3,727,147 to Repubs since 1990. That's 78% to Dems - with some election cycles having 85% of the recording industries political contributions going to Dems.

But that's nothing compared to the movie industry, which gave $47,800,285 to Dems and $7,192,062 to Repubs since 1990. Up to 93% of movie industry political contributions have gone to Dems in some election cycles, with that number never lower than 78%.

There's a reason why the DMCA was signed by a Democratic President. Hell, there are millions of reasons, all of them green...

The cognitive dissonance among sheltered /. basement-dwellers that this post is going to cause will be funny.

You have NO IDEA what the costs of running a broadband network are! You left out
-My $1.4 million salary
-$2 - $7 million/yr in campaign contributions
-Dozens of attorneys to sue Vonage out of existence
...and a bunch of things I'm not allowed to talk about
Mateo LeFou, CEO, Verizon/AT&T

Check out www.opensecrets.org http://www.opensecrets.org/ It's a pretty decent site for campaign money info...

... but politicians can. How much does a Senator or Representative go for, these days?

Oh man, that's the creepiest thing ever. Good Lord, how can they get away with that kind of crap?

Donations to their representatives, and the use of basic psychology that isnt far off from methods used by this group

Look up Lichfield and Kay for all terms in the state of Utah here. They'll show up quite clearly when you match up their already known residences there to names. (source:ISAC) It helps to have support in certain places to not worry about legal issues. Conducting semi-legal transfers of minors to uncertified camps that are just "private detention centers" more than a "boarding school by force" has attracted a good deal of attention, and they still survive.

In the case of those donations, one might have a chance - if to catch Mitt Romney in a "think of the children" moment. That is, the question to ask is: "what do you know about this group, and why are they allowed in your state to permanently harm a minor, despite the known evidence?". Follow up with the media(CBS may have done a segment on this in the 90's, so it'd not be a bad angle if you can get them to tie that to Romney) that could use it if he refuses, even if shown the donation record to his political party from this group. If done properly, it should stir up the nest for some interesting moments to have some publicly answered questions.

As for basic psychology, there is a basic (but flawed) presumption that children in these settings speak out of patient-sourced manipulation to get out, and that is well used by this organization. Turn the parents against the children, and make it near impossible to "not go with the program"(read:send them far enough away that nobody is near home), and you have a recipe for folks that don't know much more than how to comply with an order.

In this case, truth is quite stranger than some fiction, and it makes SCO's deeds look saintly by comparison.

• I can roll up a magazine and beat the dog
• I can fold a newpaper and whack flies
• If I sit on the train and scan through Penthouse, people will think I'm an crude, insensitive, misogynistic lout. If I do the same thing with the Penthouse hidden inside a copy of Roll Call, people know I'm a crude, insensitive, misogynistic and powerful lout, and they'll fear and respect me.
• Newspapers are good for concealing the bottle of booze
• Paper needs dead trees - lots of 'em. Extensive tree cutting decreases the ability of the ecosphere to scrub CO2. It employees unionized workers who use fossil-fuel powered tools, contributing to CO2 levels. Used paper either takes up landfill space or requires recycling, both of which employ more unionized workers using dead-dino juice. I could go on and on, but as you can see, there's nothing but upside as far as the eye can see.
• The petro-fuel and paper-based media organizations have got the "campaign contribution" process down to an art form. These "new-media" internet companies just do not understand how to grease the wheels of justice. ("justice". Ha! I love that one)
• Newspapers make good fans for the underprivileged women in church on a hot Sunday morning.
• Exactly which end of the mouse are you going to wipe your a** with?

• I can roll up a magazine and beat the dog
• I can fold a newpaper and whack flies
• If I sit on the train and scan through Penthouse, people will think I'm an crude, insensitive, misogynistic lout. If I do the same thing with the Penthouse hidden inside a copy of Roll Call, people know I'm a crude, insensitive, misogynistic and powerful lout, and they'll fear and respect me.
• Newspapers are good for concealing the bottle of booze
• Paper needs dead trees - lots of 'em. Extensive tree cutting decreases the ability of the ecosphere to scrub CO2. It employees unionized workers who use fossil-fuel powered tools, contributing to CO2 levels. Used paper either takes up landfill space or requires recycling, both of which employ more unionized workers using dead-dino juice. I could go on and on, but as you can see, there's nothing but upside as far as the eye can see.
• The petro-fuel and paper-based media organizations have got the "campaign contribution" process down to an art form. These "new-media" internet companies just do not understand how to grease the wheels of justice. ("justice". Ha! I love that one)
• Newspapers make good fans for the underprivileged women in church on a hot Sunday morning.
• Exactly which end of the mouse are you going to wipe your a** with?

• I can roll up a magazine and beat the dog
• I can fold a newpaper and whack flies
• If I sit on the train and scan through Penthouse, people will think I'm an crude, insensitive, misogynistic lout. If I do the same thing with the Penthouse hidden inside a copy of Roll Call, people know I'm a crude, insensitive, misogynistic and powerful lout, and they'll fear and respect me.
• Newspapers are good for concealing the bottle of booze
• Paper needs dead trees - lots of 'em. Extensive tree cutting decreases the ability of the ecosphere to scrub CO2. It employees unionized workers who use fossil-fuel powered tools, contributing to CO2 levels. Used paper either takes up landfill space or requires recycling, both of which employ more unionized workers using dead-dino juice. I could go on and on, but as you can see, there's nothing but upside as far as the eye can see.
• The petro-fuel and paper-based media organizations have got the "campaign contribution" process down to an art form. These "new-media" internet companies just do not understand how to grease the wheels of justice. ("justice". Ha! I love that one)
• Newspapers make good fans for the underprivileged women in church on a hot Sunday morning.
• Exactly which end of the mouse are you going to wipe your a** with?

Mod parent down, there is a difference between competition between peers and a monopoly doing the same thing. One is legal, the other is not (if government bothers to enforce anti-monopoly laws that is). If MS rolls out this Silverlight to Vista and XP in servicepacks / updates and provides a ton of incentives and free tools to use it on server side that isn't innovation at all, that's leveraging existing monopoly market share in one market to enter a new market. Even if Linux didn't exist, this is an unfair abuse against Adobe.

And Microsoft *is* a monopoly, convicted even, they just bought their way out of sanctions:
"The decision by the Bush administration to vacate the lawsuit that was first initiated in 1998 by the Clinton Justice Department is considered a major victory for Microsoft, which nearly tripled its campaign contributions and more than doubled its lobbying expenditures during its fight against the antitrust case."
http://www.opensecrets.org/alerts/v6/alertv6_26.as p
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobbyists/indusclient.a sp?code=B12&year=2006&sort=A

And don't tell me open source hasn't innovated - there exists public domain/BSD-style code to implement theora/vorbis ANYWHERE, but vested interests want to keep video locked up with patent encumbered mp3 or AAC audio (which vorbis defeats in listening tests) and patented video codecs (with which theora is competitive and if patents weren't a problem the x264 is one of the best h.264 encoders). The real anti-innovation scam is patent abuse, and monopoly abuse.

Mod parent down, there is a difference between competition between peers and a monopoly doing the same thing. One is legal, the other is not (if government bothers to enforce anti-monopoly laws that is). If MS rolls out this Silverlight to Vista and XP in servicepacks / updates and provides a ton of incentives and free tools to use it on server side that isn't innovation at all, that's leveraging existing monopoly market share in one market to enter a new market. Even if Linux didn't exist, this is an unfair abuse against Adobe.

And Microsoft *is* a monopoly, convicted even, they just bought their way out of sanctions:
"The decision by the Bush administration to vacate the lawsuit that was first initiated in 1998 by the Clinton Justice Department is considered a major victory for Microsoft, which nearly tripled its campaign contributions and more than doubled its lobbying expenditures during its fight against the antitrust case."
http://www.opensecrets.org/alerts/v6/alertv6_26.as p
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobbyists/indusclient.a sp?code=B12&year=2006&sort=A

And don't tell me open source hasn't innovated - there exists public domain/BSD-style code to implement theora/vorbis ANYWHERE, but vested interests want to keep video locked up with patent encumbered mp3 or AAC audio (which vorbis defeats in listening tests) and patented video codecs (with which theora is competitive and if patents weren't a problem the x264 is one of the best h.264 encoders). The real anti-innovation scam is patent abuse, and monopoly abuse.

That piece makes it sound like sugar springs from the Earth and ethanol just flows right out of it (with greater efficiency in the near future!). And the whole thing manages to not cost anything, but produce lots of high-wage jobs. Tell me what the energy input of sugar cane ethanol production is - where does it come from, what is its rate of emissions. Even if it drove itself to the refinery and fermented itself, you wouldn't get more than 15% ethanol and the specific heat of aqueous solutions doesn't care what crop you used. And the slide mentions using anhydrous ethanol, have you been using benzene or cyclohexane as your entrainer? Or have you been that good with zeolite for the last 30 years?

Even if sugar cane ethanol is the bed of roses UNICA wants me to think it is (Sugar waters itself! We told them to stop burning the cane fields so they did!) I just don't buy Brazil meeting all of the US's fuel needs in addition to the needs of its own 188 million citizens. And Brazil might be living in sugar Shangri-La but things have a way of working differently here.

Funny. Every time I do that, I end up with organized labor. They dominate the list of groups throwing around their weight in terms of political contributions. Unions hold the #1 (AFSCME/$38 million), #6 (IBEW/$26M), #7 (Laborers/$25M), #9 (SEIU/$25M), and #10 (Carpenters & Joiners Union/$24M).

It's a shame as 1) people often have no choice & are forced to join the union, and 2) that money could be spent on improving the lives of their members.

-Bill

Sorry bud but your claim hasn't been true since 2002, as far as can be seen on the site you so proudly mention to prove your point. Maybe you should read up on the finer details again sometime.

Our position is to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2016 http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/state-of-earth -report.html which seems to us to be prudent. There is certainly sufficient borrowing capacity to achieve this goal though it would take us up to the level of indeptedness experienced just after the second world war. It is worth noting in this thread that a pay out under the Price-Anderson Act for even a moderate scale disaster similar to Cherobyl at, say, the troubled Indian Point reactor could eat up most of this remaining borrowing capacity and we would have to go with more expensive secured credit. Others look for a similar level of emissions reduction by 2030 or 2050. However, we did not win any congressional seats in the last election, though you might be interested in our spending to votes ratio in my district: http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.asp?ID=MD 05&Cycle=2006 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steny_Hoyer#Election_ history.

The example of California does show that conservations efforts can work but achieving an 80% reduction in emissions will, I think, require converting to renewables. Relying on price competition alone may not be fast enough but it does show that the transition could boost our living standard which is a step that will help to be persuasive towards adopting our position as national policy.

Sorry to ruin your point with facts, but Microsoft donates to both parties. And as it happens, since 2002, MS has actually given quite a bit more to the Democrats than it has to the Republicans: http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.asp?ID=D00 0000115&Name=Microsoft+Corp

Why do you think the US is the only country in the world that uses corn sweetener instead of sugar (beet or cane) in Coca-Cola?

Results:

52 records found in 0.0469 seconds.

Total for this search: $1,892,584

Search Criteria:
Donor name: Microsoft
Donor State: WA
Cycle(s) selected: 2006, 2004, 2002

Then it goes on to list all the seperate donations -- majority of which appear to go to RNC but there are substantial amounts to DNC also.

http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?key=9 8JHH&txtName=Microsoft&txtState=WA&txt2006=Y&txt20 04=Y&txt2002=Y&Order=N

umm I don't know how you searched but I got substantially different results

If they're spending anything, it's remaining a secret:

http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search_hp.asp?tx tName=microsoft&NumOfThou=0&txt2006=Y&submit=Go!