Slashdot Mirror
Political Issues of the Tech Community?
DonJefe68 asks: "I'm planning to create a website which lists the political positions that US House and Senate candidates here in North Carolina have on issues of concern to the tech community. There are obvious issues like the DMCA and Fritz Hollings' CBDTPA as well as issues such as the effect of the economy on the tech sector and the USA PATRIOT Act's privacy concerns. What national issues other than intellectual property, privacy and jobs are we interested in?" Are there other sites that track politician votes, on technical issues, for other US States or on a national level? For those readers who do not live in the US, please feel free to speak your mind on this topic or on political issues that affect you as well.
U.S. Government agencies must use open standards in all data transactions and data archives. Sincere Choice states this clearly.
I think it's great that you want to be more active. God knows that was my goal when I put together poliglut a couple years ago.
I started out with more of a tech angle, but decided that the problem with the country was a more general lack of education. The people who would seek out your site regarding DMCA and it's ilk are probably going to find out what's going on anyway. So you will be putting out a lot of effort for not so much return.
I would instead encourage you to find a way to put the word out about the importance of those issues in a mainstream web site. This effort is less likely to be wasted as there is an almost total vacuum outside of a few in the tech community concerning tech issues. (which makes sense of course or the legislation wouldn't be written in the first place).
And, of course, you are welcome to write stuff, or republish stuff at poliglut.
Thanks dubya, I didn't know you were a ./ reader.
If this is dubya, or even if not, you're an ass.
<OPINION>
Personally, I'd like to see the H1-B visa program eliminated, and anyone currently holding (or applying for) a H1-B upgraded to a full greencard. Anyone allowed to work in this country at all should not be restricted to just certain jobs under certain conditions. H1-B's allow an employer extra leverage over the employee; leaving a job for better pay/conditions elsewhere just isn't possible. I'd predict that once employers are deprived of this leverage, they'll start thinking twice about whether hiring a foreign worker is a financially sound thing to do.
</OPINION>
Am I off my rocker?
The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.
Upon further consideration, this can't be dubya because he can't read. Sorry for the confusion.
And a good thing you did.
Isn't it amazing how many people who would scream their lungs out if an American tried to tell them how to run their country think that they have a God-given right to object to domestic policy initiatives here?
NEWSFLASH: the US president is responsible to the Constitution and the People of the United States. He is not responsible to make the Europeans feel important, the UN feel relevant, or the assembled dictators of the third world feel appeased.
Rather than random invective, perhaps you can present a rational argument (any rational argument) why we would possibly consider the opinions of people in other countries in deciding what to do within the US?
Can you?
You should use a database (MySQL would be a good choice for this). Your data model could have issues, politicians, politican_issue_position, and issue_groups.
As for what issues, gosh there's a bunch:
1) Crazy software patents
2) Crazy business process patents
3) DMCA
4) DRM
5) Spam (mandatory "ADV:" for unsoliticted commercial email)
6) Government developed software using open source licencing
7) UCITA / non-enforcability of shrinkwraps
8) Reverse engineering of software
9) Privacy: opt-in vs opt-out
10) Governement use of open standards / file formats in software
11) Spyware
12) Government procurement policty encouraging/requiring open source
13) Legislation setting special penalties for violating open source licencing
14) Tolerating innovation in peer-to-peer tech
15) Privacy: strong encryption for citizens
16) Privacy: right to surf anonymously
17) Digital Television: fair use rights
18) Right to modify hardware you own
Taxes on internet commerce.
1. How they should and should not work.
2. Where and when to place them.
It is a necessary evil, one that the tech community has the opportunity to help evolve.
Rather than random invective, perhaps you can present a rational argument (any rational argument) why we would possibly consider the opinions of people in other countries in deciding what to do within the US?
How about: because this planet isn't all that large, because we have to live with the rest of the world and because our actions affect the rest of the world and theirs affect us?
Note that "considering the opinions" of someone is not the same as "taking orders" from them.
Actively seeking to understand the world's view of us and our policies and trying to choose courses of action that will allow us to live harmoniously with the rest of the world, where possible, is good policy. And it doesn't preclude us deciding to do something no one else likes -- it just keeps us aware of the implications of those one-sided decisions.
After all, the best, and most rational approach to taking care of your own includes serious consideration of how others will react to your actions. My kids may think it would be really nice to have a swimming pool, and robbing a bank would be a quick and easy route to raising the money, but I'd be well-advised to consider the opinions of a few others before I go do it...
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
The original poster asked for insight on issues for a website.
He wasn't offering seats in the Senate for "foreigners".
He just wanted opinions and information.
This anti-everybody-but-the-US mindset will be our downfall.
You know, many of us have spouses or sons and daughters living abroad.
It's not the closed world you want it to be. We all interact and influence each
other on a global level. The US seems to want this influence to work in one
direction only, by force if needed.
I would certainly hope that you do not rob the bank because you believe that robbery is wrong of itself, and not because you don't want to hurt the bank teller's feelings...
At any rate, this doesn't give any answer as to why you would ask the bank teller's opinion before putting up curtains within your home, now does it? That is what we're talking about here, after all, the hubris of those in other countries who feel that their opinion is reason enough to derail actions within the US which the American people want and the American Constitution provide for.
Because, again, at the end of the day, we are a democratic republic, and that means that the opinion of our own people will be the deciding factor in our decisions, not the opinions of European appeasers or third world kleptocrats.
Dubya can't read "priceless".
He can, if it's printed in really big letters.
Preferably in a pop-up book with pictures of fuzzy caterpillars.
If you make posts like this.
Grow a litlle. Expand your horizons. You will be a better person and the world might be a better place.
Redneck Reference: Jeff Foxworthy, comedian. Redneck Jokes
not the opinions of European appeasers or third world kleptocrats
Indeed. Who needs 'em when we've got our own First world kleptocrats running things?
Do we really care what Germans think? They did invade and attempt to subjugate Europe twice
Well, the US is just now getting serious in the "invade and subjugate" business. Nothing like the voice of experience to show you the ropes I always say.
I would certainly hope that you do not rob the bank because you believe that robbery is wrong of itself, and not because you don't want to hurt the bank teller's feelings...
Morality-based decisions are much less obvious in the world of international politics, so that's a poor extension of my analogy.
At any rate, this doesn't give any answer as to why you would ask the bank teller's opinion before putting up curtains within your home, now does it?
And another poor extension (maybe it wasn't such a great analogy). Anyway, you're implying here that the decision in question has absolutely no impact on the teller. If that's the case, then fine.
In fact, decisions made by the U.S. about how we choose to regulate technology *do* have impacts upon the rest of the world, and it does, therefore make sense to ask their opinions.
Further, there is the fact that the U.S. does not have any kind of a monopoly on smart people -- it would be truly amazing if we did, given the tiny percentage of the human race we comprise -- and there is every possibility that someone outside the U.S. might just come up with a really Good Idea, which we missed.
For that matter, is there any *harm* in asking the bank teller what her opinion is of your curtain ideas? She just might have some suggestions that are worthwhile. Then again, her opinion might be stupid and could be discarded. But what's wrong with asking (assuming the question isn't going to annoy her)?
That is what we're talking about here, after all, the hubris of those in other countries who feel that their opinion is reason enough to derail actions within the US which the American people want and the American Constitution provide for.
"Derail"? That's an awfully strong word, carrying overtones of violence and a great amount of force. No one is suggesting that a foreigner's opinion should be taken as the final word. For that matter, I would hope no one is suggesting that a single American's opinion should be taken as the final word.
The ability to listen to and seriously consider dissenting opinions is part of what divides rational people from fanatics.
Read that last sentence again. And again, until you understand it.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
I miss the days when you didn't have to be a lawyer to be a nerd...
Nah, we were always like this: French & Indian War (7 Years War), expansion into west and eradication of natives, Spanish American War, and there are a probably a few others I just can't recall.
In a word, yes. It's called `democracy'.
...Hey, it wasn't flamebait.
The training you'll get will be so dumbed down and slow paced
that it'll take you 8 times as long to learn the same thing in the real world.
It's called `democracy'...
Indeed.
That's not what it is. But that's what it's called.
oops. I'm a paste-buffer moron.
the corruption of the food supply through genetic engineering (ok, some good might come of it, but terminator and roundup-ready technologies are not going to help feed the world, we already have enough food for that)... privatisation of the worlds water supply... corruption of the health of the world by the big pharma companies... George W's obsession with waging war on *sombody*... the widening divide between rich and poor...
Oh, you wanted tech issues? Sure, I have some concerns there too, but they are further down the list.
Ho! Haha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust!
Because if you are actually convinced by
the argument, does it matter if a US citizen
made it or not?
Considered harmful.
When your car is broken, you seek the advice of a mechanic. The advice of a baker may be good, but it doesn't have the same presumption of validity.
When you want advice on what America should do, go to an American -- that's why this is a democracy.
That said, I have no problem with consideration of opinions from any source; in this you are right on. This is different from the apparent belief of many Europeans and others that they have some sort of moral high ground, and should have veto power over actions of ours which they don't agree with.
I take issue with your example, though. An
American's opinion may be uninformed, and
a non-American's very educated. A mechanic is
someone that supposedly was trained and
practices car repair. An average American
may not even vote or know much about the Consitution or issues in depth.
Considered harmful.
What about Ex-Americans?
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
SHAMEFULLY STOLEN POST /SHAMEFULLY STOLEN POST
1) Crazy software patents
SPECIAL INTEREST: Companies that want to patent ones and zeros.
GENERAL INTEREST: Patents should be reasonable.
2) Crazy business process patents
SPECIAL INTEREST: Companies that want to patent air and water.
GENERAL INTEREST: See #1
3) DMCA
SPECIAL INTEREST: Companies that want to charge consumers *per viewing*, and have laws make up for an outdated business model and technical ineptitude.
GENERAL INTEREST: Consumers who want to buy a copy of a DVD, not the priviledge of watching it.
4) DRM
SPECIAL INTEREST: See #1 and #3.
GENERAL INTEREST: Citizens who realize that computers are not merely tools for the distribution of copyrighted material, and wish to exercise their "right to compute".
5) Spam (mandatory "ADV:" for unsoliticted
commercial email)
SPECIAL INTEREST: Companies who want to SPAM.
GENERAL INTEREST: No one wants to be SPAMmed.
6) Government developed software using open source
licencing
SPECIAL INTEREST: Companies who have been sucking at the teet that is the Federal Government for generations.
GENERAL INTEREST: Taxpayers who don't want to pay for it anymore.
7) UCITA / non-enforcability of shrinkwraps
SPECIAL INTEREST: Companies that want to *impose* contract terms, rather than negotiate them.
GENERAL INTEREST: Contracts must be mutual.
8) Reverse engineering of software
SPECIAL INTEREST: Companies that want to maintain monopoly dominance through closed protocols.
GENERAL INTEREST: Citizens who want to maintain a capitalistic society and students who want to learn by disassembly.
9) Privacy: opt-in vs opt-out
SPECIAL INTEREST: Companies who make money by selling personal information.
GENERAL INTEREST: People who don't realize their personal information is being sold.
10) Governement use of open standards / file
formats in software
SPECIAL INTEREST: See #6 and #8
GENERAL INTEREST: See #6 and #8
11) Spyware
SPECIAL INTEREST: See #9
GENERAL INTEREST: See #9
12) Government procurement policy
encouraging/requiring open source
SPECIAL INTEREST: See #6 and #8
GENERAL INTEREST: See #6 and #8
13) Legislation setting special penalties for
violating open source licensing
SPECIAL INTEREST: Companies that like to *borrow* open source software and pass it off as their own; or, optionally, open source companies that want special copyright protections.
GENERAL INTEREST: None that I can tell. This is already well-covered by existing laws.
14) Tolerating innovation in peer-to-peer tech
SPECIAL INTEREST: Industry trade associations whose oligopolistic practices and technical ineptitude are highlighted by emerging technologies.
GENERAL INTEREST: Computing researchers who are seeking better communications networks and consumers who are sick of paying $15 for a CD full of crap.
15) Privacy: strong encryption for citizens
SPECIAL INTEREST: Governments that would spy on their citizens.
GENERAL INTEREST: Citizens who would exercise their right to freedom of speech and association.
16) Privacy: right to surf anonymously
SPECIAL INTEREST: See #15
GENERAL INTEREST: See #15
17) Digital Television: fair use rights
SPECIAL INTEREST: See #1, #3 and #4
GENERAL INTEREST: See #1, #3 and #4
18) Right to modify hardware you own
SPECIAL INTEREST: Companies that want to sell a product, then control every aspect of their customer's use of that product.
GENERAL INTEREST: Ownership is a basic principle of a capitalistic society.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
When you want advice on Chicken Soup, do you ask a chicken?
If you want advice on what America should do, you should ask both those who are responsible for making it happen, and those who would be affected by the decisions.
A new kind of meat designed to appeal to vegetarians.
All of which misses the point, which is that this is a democracy, and at the end of the day, it is the American people who have to make up their mind who to elect, and by extension what the country will do.
That is why debates about what the country should do are inherently debates between Americans. Everyone else is welcome to their opinion, but as long as this is a democracy, they aren't the ones who will decide.
Well, as for "welcome to their opinion" -
:). What was the
many people don't even go that far, which,
I think, is a mistake.
But as for "they aren't the ones who decides" -
neither are most Americans
voter turnout last time?
Considered harmful.
- taxation (since we tend to make above-average salaries, and are highly mobile)
- immigration (since immigrants are a major part of our industry)
Depends on how peripheral you want to get.I am a little surprised by all the off-topic verbage by and about foreign readers, as most of these same issues affect people in most countries. Given the historically high and increasing share of trade in our economies, and how much the US exports software and depends on IP protection for those exports, what furreners think does matter. Also, when a country sets sensible policies, it can attract skilled workers from less sensible countries; thus does the US lure workers from much of the world, and Ireland lures companies from the US. I am an American expat living in (privacy-obsessed) Germany, and I cannot wait to return to working in Russia, under a 13% flat tax!!
I'll come home to the US when the Free State Project hits 20K.
It's been holding steady at zero for over two hundred years now -- so I guess that's not the standard you're looking for. :-)
>They have little to no influence in our internal
>affairs and their opinions don't have much use or >weight.
But an opinion + boxcutter + airline ticket...
Don't take offense to this, but you Libertarians are morons. In case you hadn't noticed the Federal government isn't about to entertain the thought of 20,000 people making their own "state". Your vaunted "freedoms" are just another word for "foolishly willfull anarchy."
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
The biggest issue is copyright and all of the subissues contained within it:
1. copyright term extension or limitation
2. fair use
3. drm
4. backup copies for personal use
5. ability to sell original media you bought given you don't own a backup copy (already exists for cd, vinyl, etc.)
6. ability to edit media you bought for private use
7. ability to edit movies and sell them given you have a purchased copy for every edited one (the book with crossed out 'bad' words example applies)
8. ability to use the media for as long as you can with no openership expiration or ongoing licensing
9. enforceability of eula
10. clear delination of when a copyright expires (suggest 50 years after creation with none of this 'authors life + 50 years' nonsense)
11. ability to modify without legal problems any hardware you purchase for your own personal use
No, more like "invade, subjugate, rebuild (at a tremendous sost to the American taxpayer), and send them our jobs." Get it right.