Slashdot Mirror
Elect Steve Jobs President of the United States
Will Foster writes "There is a groundswell of support for electing Steve Jobs President of the United States." I'll vote for him if I can write in my vote -- with a Newton stylus!
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
This is a stupid idea. Why not form some of your own political views and act on them?
Well, that would give you reasonable odds of voting in Albert Gore.
I wouldn't vote for Steve Jobs for president, but I would definately vote for the "Woz". Something tells me that Jobs would actually make a better figurehead president than Woz though.
A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
Elect Steve Jobs President of the United States
;)
well, the mac community is probably larger than the perot community.
<:
if that happens we are all doomed...dear god
-JeffMo
Thats one of the ugliest websites i've ever seen. I thought Apple-monkies were supposed to be kings of visual stuff.
Please tell me this is a joke. There's no way he'd win!
Why should I vote for him? Did he invented Internet?
Get him out of Microsoft!
:-)
Floating face-down in a river of regret...and thoughts of you...
He'll run the country without having any idea of how it actually works, fire anyone who doesn't follow his vision, steal ideas from other countries...
By God, he might be the best president yet!
Microsoft offers their market leading CEO Steve Balmer. When asked about the news, Balmer replied by leaping around screaming "Voters! Voters! Voters!".
Rumors that Bill Gates will be a Cheyney style puppetmas^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H vice-president have not been confirmed.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
The guy has an ego that would fill up the Superdome. And he seems to be a petty crook. His only saving grace is that he was not afraid to say aloud that Gil Amelio is a moron.
I can see it now. One of his advisors tells a few senators what Steve Case has planned for his new economic plan and he goes on a tirade and fires all of his staff and declares that no more meetings can take place in Washington D.C. Then he would go into a corner and cry for a few days.
"I hereby declare that The White House will no longer be boring "beige", it shall be painted "Lickable Blueberry".
The Apple hoardes debate among themselves whether the country is now just "insanely" better, or "miraculously" better.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Not to be confused with http://www.jobsforTHEpresident.org/, as I'd really like to see him get a new one.
/>
<rimshot
Money I owe, money-iy-ay
I think Americas perception of reality is distorted enough already..
What kind of moron would vote for Steve Jobs? He can barely run a company, do any really think he would do a good job running a super power? I think not. I agree more with the following quote... bill gates for dictator. that way we have an excuse to kill him.
Best wishes,
Mike.
"Think different"
"There is no teacher but the enemy."-Mazer Rackham
With Steve as president we might be some insanely great leadership, as opposed to the normal insane leadership we have now.
If he gets in, won't his first act be to demolish all the important buildings and replace them with curvy, translucent, pastel-coloured plastic contraptions?
Carrying handles would be useful though. Threat of Al-Qaeda? Just move Washington to the praries, they'll never find them there!
-Mark
Judging by the slashdotting, he could probably get enough votes to win.
Why not fork?
It's not like anyone will be able to beat Sharpton anyway.
An Apple a day keeps the IRS away.
Jobs for everyone.
iAmerica.
Lets all take acid.
"Smokey, this isn't Nam, there are rules." -Walter
Just think of the goverment would run like Apple, all of the goverment contracters would be pissed because they would start making better Tanks, Airplanes and Accounting systems than them.
I am not sure it would be possible for him to change out of that blank turtlneck and bluejeans... but I can already see the slogans.
When you vote for Steve, you vote for Jobs.
Steve Jobs, the iPresident!
Brennan Stehling - http://brennan.offwhite.net/blog/
That's the impression given by the Pirates of Silicon Valley movie. Not to mention the fact he's an all around asshole to his employees.
I don't know why people are so eager to jump in bed with one monopolist when they clearly hate another.. Is it because Apple somehow redeemed itself? Apple still sells software for its own systems that it refuses to port to other systems. They refuse to open their architecture.
//e manual. This will probably change soon, but it's too early to declare Jobs a savior yet.
/.ers getting their hopes up only to have them dashed when we can no longer buy computers that are beige.
I also see a lack of any real content on the page, or at least a lack of content I couldn't find in my apple
Not that I think this is a bad thing, I just don't want to see
The previous has been a secret message to my comrades.
After all, who could resist attacking another country to show off our nice Blueberry bombers, using our new Raspberry radar technology, and firing off our arsenal of iNuke X 10.2 ICBMs (with leopard print warheads). Military tech has been stuck in the same putrid earthy shades of green and brown for far too long!
Just gotta wonder how well those translucent plastic helmets will protect the heads of our soldiers....
NO CARRIER
That'll be nice to watch. Jobs going after everyone waving an Americal flag for copyright/trademark violation. Not that I would mind (being Canadian)
Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
Due to the seperation of church and state.
Steve cannot be both God and President without violating some part of the constitution.
Of course, given recent events, that 'problem' can probably be remiedied.
I'd vote for him and I'd have to move to the US and become a citizen to do it!
And I'm not even a MacAddict...
At least the Americans would have a leader with some brains for a change.
Two years after becoming President, Steve Jobs becomes fed up with the bueracracy and leaves suddenly to start up his own country in his Palo Alto Garage.
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
Here's the text. Pretty interesting :)
San Francisco, CA
In a stunning move, Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple Computer INC, announced his intention to run for presidency of the United States of America. The announcement was greeted with overwhelming support by the large macintosh community in the united states, and veiled reproach from Bill Gates, CEO of Microsoft Corp.
"We here at Microsoft are more concerned with somebody addressing the fact that the editors of slashdot are pulling shit over on moderators they don't like" said Gates. We question whether Jobs will be up for the diffiucult task of getting the editors to stop Taco-snorting for long enough to run a decent news blog, like Rusty over at kuro5hin.org"
Slashdot 's editors are dickheads
If he only has a $1 a year salary, think how much we can save!
..a government official who'll break down the tough choices so that the American public will vote on which color they like better.
*hoping that comment's poke at the iMac isn't too obscure.*
"Derp de derp."
For a change?
So will we have to refer to him as the iPresident who resides at the iWhitehouse in iWashington iDC who will hold i cabnet meetings regarding the pending inuclear strike aganst iiraq.
(yes it's lame - isorry)
Insert sig here (slashdot) Insert cig here (Lewinsky)
Steve's principal attribute... and one that GW's got a pretty good handle on too...
But you need more than 1 person to support you before you can call this campaign a "groundswell".
Then again, this news bit WAS posted with the "It's Funny. Laugh." tagline...... so I'm guessing it's not meant to be taken seriously anyway.
oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
Why? So we can be charged up "the chute" for EVERYTHING under the sun? I'd vote for a freakin' MONKEY before I'd vote for that load. The Mac heads are probably blowing loads over this topic! Oh yeah, STEEEEEEEEEVE Jobs PRESSSSIDENT>\....UMMMMMBWAHA!! Slow news day I guess......
It's mostly images, no wonder it went so fast. Here's the text on the front page:
...
Draft Committee to the 'Elect Steve Jobs President of the United States
We all want a world that is prosperous and sustainable. We have the technology and resources to create such a world. What is lacking are leaders with vision and will. I encourage you to be such a leader and welcome your participation in our campaign.
It is time that we base our decision-making on the time tested native American idea that all decisions should be made with our seventh generation of descendants in mind and in consultation with our elders. It is time to acknowledge that the earth is our mother and that we must take care of her. It is time to eliminate all weapons of mass destruction from the earth. It is time to insure that all people have access to affordable health care and education.
It is time for American leaders to work with the Moslem world, China, India, Africa, Russia, Latin America, the European Union and all people's around the world to create the world we want. It is our destiny to play a leadership role in creating a new world.
We believe Steve Jobs is the man to help us achieve these goals. If you agree, join us, and together we can get it done!
A Biography of Steve Jobs
Editorials: 01/19/03 at 17:59:27 PST by aztc
Editorials Steve Paul Jobs
Born 1955 Los Altos CA; Evangelic bad boy who, with Steve Wozniak, co-founded Apple Computer Corporation and became a multimillionaire before the age of
Printerfriendly version - A Biography of Steve Jobs Send an e-mail to (26 reads) [ More ] [ 0 comments ]
Newsletters are archived under News
News: 01/18/03 at 18:24:03 PST by Admin
News Newsletters can only be sent by the top level admin. Please submit your plain text newsletter to webmaster@jobsforpresident.org
Money I owe, money-iy-ay
Sporty new uniforms for our troops in Iraq, featuring graphite colored translucent plastics, and army jackets that all include a special pocket for an iPod, with buttons on the sleeves for when convenient control of your music is a matter of life and death!
I sense a spoof coming on.
-----
"Cogito Eggo Sum: I think, therefore, waffle."
I don't think anyone who's read Steven Levy's Insanely Great: The Life and Times of Macintosh, the Computer That Changed Everything
would consider Jobs presidential material.
IMHO... the dude's a prick.
What is music when you despise all sound?
Jobs probably is probably miles ahead of the other candidates when it comes to foreign policy, particularly the Iraq issue. The Jobs solution? Simple: Oust Saddam, set up a puppet government, rename the country "iRaq", and insist that cartographers color it "lickable raspberry" on all their maps. Not to mention replacing militant Islam with a hip, edgy new "switch" campaign.
The iRaqis would find themselves embraced by the developed world!
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
In what way is the account "frozen"? It's not even bitchslapped. Do you just mean the 72-hour "cool off, cowboy" period?
Anyway, just create another troll account using a synonym for "vomit" or perhaps "toddlers". That should keep you busy for weeks.
If your cause is just, you shall surely prevail.
What I mean is.. Suppose Bill Gates really did buy an election. Would he need to pay anyone back for the campaign expense? Or would he be free to act on his own will?
He could theoretically run on issues and voters could predict his behavior by what he says, rather than who is funding him.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
You know, he might not be a bad president...
a) he's someone who made something of himself, and wasn't just from a wealthy, powerful family
b) he's someone that has Vision and can seek it out (even if we might not agree with his Vision, he's definitely got it!)
c) he's arguably of above-average intelligence... try and say THAT of any of the other candidates!
If Nader wasn't running, I'd vote for Jobs just because I know that if Jobs won, he would make a decent go of it and maybe even get something real done.
-ZOD-
We've gotta shush this now before it's too late. If Bill Gates hears about it he'll spend billions to run just so he can keep up.
...there is a "groundswell of support" for Jobs as pres, doesn't make it a good idea. After all, Sharpton also has a groundswell of support.
This is a joke.
--
the strongest word is still the word "free"
...that's exactly what we need: another fanatical tyrant for a president.
moto411.com
If Jobs' Reality Distortion Field can't sell the idea of going to war with Iraq, no one can!
If another nation gave us any grief, he'd insult their collective mothers, and send in the troops. The rest of the world would dislike the US even more than now.
I guess the State of the Union Address would be a little more riveting than those that came before him in recent memory.
"...oh, and there's one more thing..."
this site does not seem to be official. I would be really cautious if I had to press the donate button...
"You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
"No", said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd", said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did", said Ford. "It is."
"So", said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them", said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes", said Ford with a shrug, "of course".
"But", said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"
"What?"
"I said", said Ford, with an increasing air of urgency creeping into his voice, "have you got any gin?"
"I'll look. Tell me about the lizards."
Ford shrugged again.
"Some people say that the lizards are the best thing that ever happened to them." he said. "They're completely wrong of course, completely and utterly wrong, but someone's got to say it." - Douglas Adams, So long, and thanks for all the fish, chapter 36, 1984
Kent: Senator Dole, why should people vote for you instead of President Clinton?
...
Kang: It makes no difference which one of us you vote for. Either way, your planet is doomed. DOOMED!
Kent: Well, a refreshingly frank response there from senator Bob Dole.
Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us. [murmurs]
Man1: He's right, this is a two-party system.
Man2: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.
Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away. [Kang and Kodos laugh out loud] - The Simpsons, 4F02
"It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it." - Eugene Debs
Vote Linus!
The phrase "Think Stupid" was a parody, not something to be taken literally. Let the man do what he does well -- make nice laptops, and workstations.
...is that it's getting harder and harder to tell what's a put-on. More and more things I thought were parody at first turn out to be real.
Anyway, say what you will about Jobs, but he certainly got a LOT more done in his 20's and 30's than our current President, and by all accounts wasn't that much more of a jerk.
And Jobs's rescue of Apple certainly shows that he has an extraordinary ability to balance short and long term needs. Given what they've had to work with, technically, from Motorola for the last few years, can you believe that Apple is not only extant, but profitable?
Anyway, I'd probably vote for him over a fair number of other politicians. While we know a lot of his youthful indiscretions, I think that's just because he's been famous for so long. I imagine our previous two presidents were just as wild in their youth. The real question is how good a job who he is now could do, and I'd say the evidence is promising, or at least intriguing.
For all the "Jobs is a visionary" rhetoric, running a company on a knifes-edge like Apple has been for the last half decade implies a good ability to roll with the punches, and be flexible when appropriate.
My video compression blog
I can't post from that account from multiple IP's, but I can post with other accounts or anonymously from the same IPs. Gay.
good. now every american will get a 52" ass instead of a 34" ass, and american males will get easier times since the mouse only will have one button to push instead of the usual two or even three plus wheels on a modern subject. but atleast the administration will be fully shine-thru and smell bad when running full. that be something.
I would say I probably agree with Jobs moral and political views more than our current leader's (he's liberal, and he's a vegetarian (which speaks highly of morality issues)). But let's think about this for one little second... he has absolutely NO EXPERIANCE in politics. None. Don't throw your votes away on this, find a real canidate and support he/she when they run.
He would probably tell other countries that they would have to wait until the next Presidential Expo to get all of his foreign policy regulations, and not disclose to the public any information until said expos. Bah!
I would vote for him if he would be willing to accept a yearly sallery of $1; infact, he'd have to demand it. It's not like he doesn't already have enough going on, with Apple and Pixar as it is.
Pete
That's it pudge, too many stupid fucking Mac stories from you. You've made my Exclude list.
WTF?!?! I wrote in "Steve Jobs For President".
You must be a homosexual.
left when the user count was around 205, and 997 pages..was responding a little slower but not bad
Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!
Finally, a chance for us to show off our satire skills. For the novice, here's how it goes:
1) Pick something representative of Steve Jobs.
2) Put it in the context of him as leader of the free world.
Hoo yeah! Biting political commentary at its best!
how inaccuracies get stated as truths! but, this is slashdot!
... the US is already run by big companies as it is, lets just go ahead & finish the job....
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
When you really think about it, what does our current president have on Steve Jobs? Steve-O is a product of the American system, a true capalist that used a brilliant and strategic mind to bring the world personal computing (well, a pioneer anyways). He's talented, creative, and tangible. Bush got a free ride through life and can hardly speak correctly. Now he's president.
The White House will remain white, but all the plaster will be replaced with translucent white plastic.
The capitol dome will be redone in anodized aluminum. It will also have firewire.
Your mind is squeezed by a blast of pain!
Jobs couldn't do worse than the war mongering thug presently in office. Wake up USA. This president has no brains and a one track mind. He will get you in big trouble if you don't slow him down.
.... I'm voting for Kodo!
Electing Jobs as president makes as much sense as electing Bill Gates. Why? It wasn't that long ago Jobs called Bill asking for money "Because you understand what it's like".
.gov is getting wiser to technologies impact on industry, and are stepping on YRO now more than ever. There's talk of banning crypto, allowing the RIAA to access logs of pirates, and tire companies installing RDIF tags.
Despite Jobs making the coolest home computers *EVER* he's not responsible for the design, coding, or the PCB of the hardware. He is a marketing man pure and simple, while this may be great for getting elected, it does nothing for running the country.
Neither Gates nor Jobs would be good for the computer industry as a whole. Gates would try to have apple and linux eliminated, Jobs would nuke windows and the PC platform as we know it. Consumer choice would go away and computers would go back into the hands of the very wealthy.
If you want to rebut that last statement with "Imac's cost $500" well go ahead. Sure there will be lots of surplus old hardware, but whatever new eye candy the wizards at Id or Adobe can dream up wont run on it, or it's performance will be shit. So if you're going to want to run Premiere 20 you will have to upgrade.
With the amount of Fab facilities closing down, and the economy in the shitter, i've been watching prices slowly creep up over the last 2 years. We enjoyed brand new $500 dollar systems for a while now, but it won't last unless we see an economic U turn.
On top of all the "tech" reasons why we wouldn't want either as president, there's one more i'd like to point out.
Right now our Goverment enjoys a sort of "naiveness" towards technology. Despite it having it's bads "Let the RIAA and MPAA tell us!" It does have it's goods in the sense that it keeps the goverment from meddling in our affairs. Unfortunately the
Here is what I really want in a president..
Someone who is such a nice person that he/she never pisses anyone off. Someone without an ulterior motive and just wants america to be a country we can be proud of again. Someone who wants to show the world that we can all exist and play nice together. Flex our technological muscle by inventing cheap alternatives to Oil.
Unfortunately this is politics we're talking and not fairy lala land. I can wish all I want but the chances of getting a good person into office are about as good as getting charles manson to be declared sane again.
I appreciate the assistance. Also, keep vomiting on those toddlers.
Apple. Hrm.
Pixar. Oh.
Apple? Uhh.. Geez.
Pixar. Well okay.
Apple! NNnnn... mmm.. NNn...mm. No.
Pixar! Dammit.
Okay I just don't know guys. Help me out!
"Derp de derp."
flamebait haha tobad what i said is true, silly mac people
>It's got slashdotted really quickly because its running on a mac.
:-)
Actually, netcraft shows that it's running Apache on Linux -- so get that through your anti-apple scull
They used to have a monopoly on essentially all non-business computers (particularly school and home educational markets). Like Microsoft, they achieved this partly through (at least initially) superior products -- their stuff was easy to use, while the IBMs of the day often didn't even have a mouse -- but also through some somewhat anti-competitive business practices -- donating Apple //e's to schools, signing up producers of popular educational software to exclusive agreements, etc.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
The current Perot community, of the one in 1992? In '92 he drew a whopping 19% of the popular vote, though an unknown fraction of these were protest or strategic votes. That was the best 3rd-party performance since 1912 (and Teddy Roosevelt wasn't *really* in a third party). Well, I was surprised, and so was (ex-)President Bush.
I only *wish* there were that many Mac nuts!
A vote for Steve Jobs is a vote for closed source, proprietary operating systems. Vote Linus Torvalds today!
I kept my silence when Mr. Steve P. Jobs announced he wanted to use lethal violence as a source of humor. I did nothing when he tried to encourage every sort of indiscipline and degeneracy in the name of freedom. But his latest notions are the straw that breaks the camel's back. One of my objectives is to advocate concrete action and specific quantifiable goals.
His conclusions express themselves in thousandfold manifestations, with one of Mr. Jobs' habitués in despair and hopelessness, with another in ill will, anger, and indignation, with these flighty pests in indifference, and with those in furious excesses. His accomplices argue that we're supposed to shut up and smile when he says gruesome things. These are the same selfish nutcases who make a mockery of the term "chromatographic". This is no coincidence; whenever there's an argument about Mr. Jobs' devotion to principles and to freedom, all one has to do is point out that I will not bow to coercion, intimidation, or the threat of violence. That should settle the argument pretty quickly. This is well illustrated in what remains one of the most divisive issues of our day: corporatism. Is anyone else out there as struck as I am by Mr. Jobs' utter disregard for morality and humanity? The reason I ask is that some people think it's a bit extreme of me to step back and consider the problem of Mr. Jobs' scare tactics in the larger picture of popular culture imagery -- a bit over the top, perhaps. Well, what I ought to remind such people is that Mr. Jobs likes to compare his pleas to those that shaped this nation. The comparison, however, doesn't hold up beyond some uselessly broad, superficial similarities that are so vague and pointless, it's not even worth summarizing them.
He should work with us, not step in at the eleventh hour and hog all the glory. If you observe some repetition in my statements, it is because such repetition is needed for clarity and emphasis as I disabuse Mr. Jobs of the notion that backwards doofuses are inherently good, sensitive, creative, and inoffensive. His disciples believe that he knows 100% of everything 100% of the time. Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to shoo him away like the annoying bug that he is.
To deny that his grandiose promises of plenty for each have yielded grinding poverty for all is laughable nonsense and political irresponsibility. It is nonsense because deplorable purveyors of malice and hatred are honestly the lowest form of human life. And it is irresponsible because his bedfellows internalize and adapt to the unwritten realities they must work under. And that's why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will, on how to call a spade a spade. There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I can do it without first stating that he thrives on the victimization of others. That's clear. But there is a simple answer to the question of what to do about his beliefs (as I would certainly not call them logically reasoned arguments). The difficult part is in implementing the answer. The answer is that we must defy him. Who else but Mr. Jobs would have the brass to render unspeakable and unthinkable whole categories of beliefs about power? No one. And where does that brass come from? It comes from a sure knowledge that he can retreat into his "victim" status if anyone calls him to account. Now that you've read the bulk of this letter, it should not come as a surprise that according to Mr. Steve P. Jobs, anyone who points this out is guilty of spreading lies, smears, and paternalism. However, this fact bears repeating again and again, until the words crack through the hardened exteriors of those who would panic irrationally and overreact completely. I am referring, of course, to the likes of Steve P. Jobs.
It would be a bit like going up to Bush and offering him $10 to push through some legislation.
.02
cLive ;-)
-- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
Coming soon to the US Army: iTanks in blueberry!
Karma: Excellent (Mainly due to Bill & Ted's Karma Adventure)
Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) ApacheJServ/1.1.2 FrontPage/5.0.2.2510
You would think this page would be served from a Mac... Atleast it is not running on IIS
Dead already! He'll have to upgrade to a real machine if he's going to have a chance.
Red Hat! Red Hat! Red Hat! Red Hat! Red Hat!
That's what his platform would be right? Homosexuals, due your duty support Steve Jobs and vote for him (or write in Richard Stallman on you ballot).
This is a good thing, Apple has always stood for getting the most for your computing dollar, now Steve can give you the most for your tax dollar.
Steve Jobs. Insanely Great.
Steve Jobs. Vote Different.
He's the best candidate I've heard of so far.
Of course, he's also the only one... but it seems likely that he would be better than either of the two winners we ostensibly got to choose between last time.
I think that's called "faint praise".
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
When hell freezes out... AMIGA people are the kings of visual stuff!!!
Would this mean the formation of the real "Men In Black", that wear nothing but euro-black outfits?
:)
How about going into government offices and seeing decorative iMacs with flowers and pastel colors as you are encouraged to "Think Different?".
Microsoft wouldn't be happy - I could just about guarantee they'd lose antitrust cases left and right
"Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
I think the jobsforpresident web site was slashdotted.. at least the site was removed.. temporarily?
Cthulhu For President!!!
http://www.cthulhu.org/
Come on this is funny. Give this guy a point.
---- Berlin Brown http://www.newspiritcompany.
At least know the painful truth.
My life in the land of the rising sun.
Just imagine the garbage that the rumor sites would come up with just before the State of the Union address each year..
Come to think of it, the wild speculation that passes for news in this country isn't any better than the rumor sites half the time.
I hate to say it, but he's probably an even bigger asshole than the current asshole, albeit 4000 times more intelligent -- but that may just make him more dangerous.
Don't blame me, I get all my opinions from my Ouija board.
Barbara Walters: So, Mr. Jobs, why do you want to be President?
Steve Jobs: I don't want to sell sugared computers for the rest of my life. I want to change the world!
I didn't think the house band in Hell would play this badly.
I would love a new silver or blue iMac, but it (and the eMac) are currently only available in iBookish white.
nationwide segway lanes! With wireless nodes!
Honest, could he do a WORSE job than the bent one or the nose picker?
Vote for the TRUE American with a bombastic personality...
Vote for Linux on the desktop!
VOTE FOR MICHEAL ROBERTSON.
You always see renditions of society in the future. No Gas/oil cars, advanced personal transportation (i.e. PRT), advanced community topologies, advanced technology etc.
Communities/Cities are totally un-organized. All we do is build over them or around them. They need to be trashed and start over, rebuilt from the ground up. Build using current technological advances; including an Internet layer, LANs etc.
We need a President who is willing to rebuild society for a new age. Is Steve Jobs right for that? I dunno, I doubt it. No doubt Steve has been thinking how to improve the US while designing his products. Though, I'm sure he'd be kind of bias and try to implament nation wide technology based off Apple INC.'s ideas and goals.
You have got to be joking. I know we computer people think we are GODS and rulers of super-power nations but come on. First off, I will only assume that Jobs will only invoke some kind of hippy agenda and as a first order of duty probably annex the southern states like Alabama and Mississipi or at least ignore their issues. I get it, people from California are cool and smart, but not everybody can hang with the California liberalism. And lastly, it seems to me that higher order politicians have to kiss ass to move up, from what I have read Jobs like to piss peole off, so while I would like to see a Geek in office, it wouldnt happen for another 1000 years.
---- Berlin Brown http://www.newspiritcompany.
Heck this has been going on longer than post-irony set in. I remember my amusement when I first heard ronald reagan was a presidential candidate. Well he'll never win I thought, what a joke. After he won I was in disbelief, and realized I was not the only one when I saw a bathroom grafitii "reagan...without a cause", an obvious riff on the james dean movie title.
Later after watching "back to the future" there is a scene where marty tries to prove he's fromt he future. The professor asks "okay future boy, whos president." MArty answeres "ronald reagan" thus assuring the professor he's a lunatic: "Oh and who's the treasury secratary 'jack benny?'.
Later in the same movie, the professor is amazed by the video camera "a portable movie production studio....Great scott! no wonder your politicians have to be actors!". A banal observation unless you think of in the context of it dawning on a person from the 1950's.
So will we all be thinkng "great scott, no wonder all your presidents have to be CEO's of consumer products" when a visitor from the future comes back and tells us about president Jobs?
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
It turns out that the best leaders are those who do not want it. Steve Jobs probably doesn't fall into this category, being the grab-asstic wannabe he is, but Linus Torvalds, for example, would probably be the best president we've had for half a century. This goes for any number of do-good low-key individuals not only in the Open Source movement, but in human rights movements, etc.
I think that at this point, our government is so corrupt and broken, that appointing government officials by lottery would yield something better.
fifth sigma, inc.
But unlike nadar he is a realist on some issues, nadar simply is not realistic. Who ever he is he can not be as bad as who we have now, hell bob dole looks swift compared to the dolts who are running in both parties. Any Bush apologists out there just realize I hold our president with less regard than I held his father. Don't get me wrong, bush Sr was an evil man but he still had good intentions for America, Jr. and his backers are like saddam they want power and support. Americans are like children who want to eat only candy and never sleep, Bush is the parent who doesn't care that his children will grow up to be overweight self indulgent strung out junkies.
I correspond with (normal) people in the free world.... and they love George W. Bush with every capitalist bone in their body.
I thought this was a troll at first, but it appears not to be.
Is it right to elect the CEO of a major corporation as president? Corporations have more than enough political power in America as it is. Something like this blatantly caters to vested interests. I suppose this isn't much worse wrt vested interests than electing Bush as president in light of his interests in the oil business, but that doesn't legitimize doing it again. I would regard a major industry leader running for president with deep suspicion. Even if he/she ostensibly broke off all ties with his/her company and the industry, I am doubtful they would be able to eliminate any and all bias.
Now, Stallman, on the other hand...;p
With his management style called "tyrannical" (US News or Newsweek, I forget which) I think Jobs as president would be a bad idea.
Steve wouldn't want the job unless he could be president number 0.
For those of you that don't know, when Apple got round to issuing employee numbers, Steve Jobs was pretty peeved that he couldn't be employee number 1 as Steve Wozniak had already nabbed that priviledge for himself. Unable to convince Wozniak to change, Jobs took employee number 0 rather than be stuck behind Wozniak with the employee number 2 tag.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Aha!!!
That damned foot! It means it's a joke. I've fallen for them too many times in the past.
That said, I think it is only out of a morbid sense of "I wonder what he'd do to the country" that I'd vote for him. "Career politics" isn't working very well.
Compared to the stiffs the the Dems will be running.
The bad traits we hear about him, mercurial etc. are no worse than
the spoiled boy occupying the big chair now. I think most of those
guys in that ran or won the presidency are prima donnas anyways.
Say what you will, there's few men that are better salesmen.
I'd prefer his reality distortion field to what been blowing in
from DC these days.
He'd sweep the youth and tech vote. He'd probably also have
the corporate world listening to him as well.
This used to be the Information Age. Bush and his boys hate
tech except when it comes to spying and revenge. If Jobs got
in, we'd get the tech sector going again.
Here's his platform:
2004 - It's all about Jobs!
Actually, John Scully was Clinton's first choice for VP. Scully, of course, turned Clinton down since it would have meant taking a 99% pay cut. However, Scully still got to sit next to Hillary at Clinton's first State of the Union Address while we got Al Gore.
Steves invades two of the G7 council's countries, there you go, G5!
Might be much easier than getting it from Motorola, too!
Steve Jobs is way too far left of center for my tastes. Given that Bush managed to beat (tie?) Gore coming from a successful incumbent administration, I figure someone more centrist could wipe the floor with someone like Jobs in a real race. Of course, Bush is far more rabidly right than I initially thought, so what do I know?
But as far as Jobs goes, give me a break, the guy actively supported Hillary Clinton's senate campaign. That alone is unforgiveable.
If the Iraqis think Rumsfeld is scary . . . .
It's only funny until someone gets hurt. Then, it's hilarious.
You Apple people are utterly retarded.
Your whole world consists of "OHHH LOOK IM USING A MAC BECAUSE IM EITHER A) Computer illiterate or B) Going against the norm to try to be cool"
It disgusts me to see all the people who worship their Macs, like it is the best thing since video pornography. Get real, its nothing more than an appliance. Its a box that executes instructions, just like your television, vcr, and stereo system.
You guys should jump off a bridge and put an end to your miserable lives.
That Mac people are just plain creepy...
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
um. tell that to my trusty powermac 7600, which just celebrated its 6th birthday. It has 3 Maxtor IDE hard drives, a no-name IDE DVD-ROM, 3 PCI cards from various companies, an XLR8 CPU, and 8 memory sticks that I've put in over the years. None of these parts came from Apple. The only original parts are the motherboard, the case, and the power supply.
Sounds pretty "transparent" to me...hell, I can even run my choice of non-Apple OS, including several flavors of Linux and BSD.
yes, for a change, instead of a plain ole maniac? :o)
My other OS is also FreeBSD
It's got stuff all over - SCSI updates, ACPI, ia64, sparc, USB, net, device mapper, AGP, ALSA, you name it. Meanwhile I worked mostly on the sysenter support, we'll have to wait for glibc releases to test that out more.
Oh, and I will raise income taxes and start war on alt.fan.saddam.
Linus
- El riesgo siempre vive - Private J. Vasquez
Wouldn't it make "In God We Trust" much more meaningful and truthful??
And Ellen Feiss as whitehouse spokeswoman ?
Guvf vf abg n EBG zrffntr
With Jobs as President, can you imagine the State of the Union? :)
Silent Bob!
42
Somehow I find it interesting that the site is running Linux! No offense, but I would think it'd be running OS X 10.2.4 on a 17 inch PB G4 :-)
>>Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) ApacheJServ/1.1.2 FrontPage/5.0.2.2510 on Linux.
I'd vote for an identical twin brother of his, but the last thing we need is for Apple to start fscking up again cuz Steve not running it any more.
As a conservative, it would be UNIMAGINABLE to have a liberal that would have worse socio economic philosophy as a President. Then again - I live in niche state (SC) ... lol .... maybe we get all the cool stuff like flying cars and free Pixar Movies.
As a note, I am Apple authorized technician, only use Apple, live / breathe Apple, think Steve Jobs is the best thing about Apple, but .... onay on the Residencypray!
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
This guy is a disaster. He'd be even worse than what we have now.
personally, i'm not looking forward to waiting around to see the new Liquid Titanium W-4's at 'GovWorld 2005'
"If you don't like slashdot [and it's editors], stop posting, and stop reading it!"
We can't seem to get rid of him any other way.
For a change?
-(())
I'll vote for him if I can write in my vote -- with a Newton stylus!
Use an elipse, not that elipses should be used very often but the em-dash here is just so wrong.
... Steve casually walks in in sneakers, jeans and a black turtleneck, with some bottled water.
One by one, he describes the new policies his administration will institute, with really classy Keynote displays to a huge back-projected screen.
Nobody asks any questions, as they are under the influence of his presidential "Reality Distortion Field".
At the end, he pauses and says "there's just one more thing..."
And the screen behind him changes to show a mushroom cloud over Baghdad (or Redmond -- take your pick).
The crowd goes wild.
Oh, hell...Slashdot has a monopoly on slashdot.org, The New York Times has a monopoly on newspapers called The New York Times, Moscow has a monopoly on capitals of the Russian Federation, and cows have a monopoly on beef.
Guess we better take up our keyboards to do battle against these evil meanies.
Calling Apple a monopoly because they're the only people to make Apple products is like saying McDonalds has a monopoly on hamburgers because they're they only company that makes Big Macs. Apple sells computers. Last I looked they did not control the computer market.
And, unfortunately, you don't have a monopoly on inane comments.
-- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
... does that automatically make Ellen Feiss the drug czar?
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
Jobs as President is a stupid idea. WTF is the parent offtopic?
Wozniak might be a good idea, but I guess form over substance is the American Way.
Don't believe the nonsense, unless you hear it from me directly.
I personally love it when the US _buy's_ a new president. It totally destroy's any idealistic karma within, and snaps me back to the reality's of life.. It's mostly ugly, dishonest & all about cash !! -P- - There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again." --George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002 - (sig)
...and Ellen Feiss for Drug Czar!
Had to be said.
-- Terry
Can you imagine? Only maybe 5% of the world will have anything to do with it, the rest will mock americans for being behind the times but boy will it look good.
Mind you Senators will now come in a wide range of cutting edge colours.
I'm off to Bermuda by summertime - otherwise I'd have to endure living in a country going the way of Next and ugh... apple...
There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
Jobs may be famous among tachies for his Reality Distortion Field, but when compared to the Republicans he's a rank amateur. Jobs' BS marketing attracts less than 5% of the market, but the GOP lie gets 50% or more, year after year. When it comes to fooling fools, Jobs is a tiny fish among sharks.
"America, the Insanely Great Country!"
(Which it actually is....)
It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
Elect John in 2004!
I begin to ponder what would happen to our country with a President who would not be afraid to spend money on R&D.
iFatigues
Product placement is everything :) Seriously though, if war is declared, I wonder how many soliders would take an iPod or other MP3 player with them? MP3 players seem ideal -- light, long battery life, rechargable, compact (dozens of hours of playback with no bulky jewel cases to lug, etc).
More importantly, what is allowable to take on a military operation according to regulations? Just curious...
-----
"Cogito Eggo Sum: I think, therefore, waffle."
Yes, he uses a good OS, Freebsd.
I guess he could have Bill Gates as VP.
I, along with everyone else who has ever thought Steve Jobs was cool, thought of this years ago. I just wonder how he would convince people to vote for him, given his patented Reality Distortion Field.
According to the West Legal Dictionary, in the US, US law generally views monopolies as harmful and points out that generally speaking - monopolies are illegal.
There are only a few times when monopolies are granted, two of those times are when Patents and Copyrights are granted (which is why the big fight in the Supreme Court was so important and why it was so very important for the Supreme Court judges to knock down the extensions Congress put into place). Other times are when someone owns the rights to a single thing (like an oil well), or holds the patent on a process (like making Apple Computers).
Abusing your monopolistic power is not only illegal, but it is sometimes very hard to prove. So there you are right. However, Apple has abused their monopoly in the past. It is just that they got burned several times in court battles and since then they have become more sensitive to acting in non-monopolistic ways. Not that this won't change in the future but at least for now they are acting quite decently for a monopolistic company.
I'd vote for Jobs. He's not my #1 pick, but I think he might be better than what we have already. Not that GWB is horrible or anything but his grim determination to invade Iraq no matter what just doesn't sit right with me. It is like he has lost focus of the fact the UN guys are not finding any kind of a smoking gun (and yeah I know - they hid them. But with all of the technology we have shouldn't we be able to track down where everything is located? I mean, look at how well satellites can see underground rivers. If we can see that why can't they just locate suspicious underground areas? They used satellites to locate cities also. So what's the deal?
(I know - off topic. Sorry - got into a rant.)
Someone put a black hole in my pocket and now I'm broke.
Once you have the rich "rightly" in place, they can start asking for "consessions" for your continued existance. Imagine what it would be like trying to pander to a multibillionaire. They are going to want you to do stuff. Possibly bad stuff. Probably REALLY bad stuff.
Loging for the days of the serf, are you?
There is no more of a groundswell to elect Jobs as president as there is to elect Bill Gates. He certainly would have no interest in consumer protection and privacy rights.
forbidden? Perhaps because I'm running MS Windows and IE? If it was slashdotted it'd be a 5nn error right?
Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
So if you figure about 75% of the people in the US own computers and something like 5% of all computers are macs, and you subtract the ones owned by schools, there should be about 50 people that will vote for him.
Who doesn't love Mr. Rogers? He just wants to be your neighbor. In his role as King Friday XIII, he's run an actual country, albeit inhabited almost entirely by puppets. He has had to deal with the repeated terrorist threats of Lady Elaine. He has had to deal with foreign policy, since Donkey Hoty lives in the foreign state of Some Place Else. He has a experience in operating a mass transit / trolly system.
Fred Rogers in 2004!
What platform will he run on?
*GROAN*
Should take a lesson from that Sanchez guy who ran for govenor of Texas. My point is Clint Eastwood could run for gov or prez because he has been a mayor - he was elected once already. If the Sanchez guy had had *ANY* previous election credentials we would be having quite a different innauguration (folks, I am sorry but I am spoilt by spell chek).
Anyway, if you want Jobs as pres get him elected Mayor first, then get defeated at something else, then go for the whole thing.
Frankly, I'd rather see him take the position of president.
Speaking as a respectibly left wing Democrat, I'd vote for Jobs over Nader in a heartbeat. Nader has simply shown zero ability for that kind of a job. When he says there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans, he's either lying, or an idiot. Who is president MATTERS, no matter what he says.
Leadership requires the right mix of idealism and pragmatism, and Nader badly fails that test. If he actually WON the presidency, he'd be disasterous at it. And since even he knows that he isn't going to win, running mainly makes him just the Perot-of-the-left, working as a spoiler to get Bush reelected.
My video compression blog
So, I was having these negotiations with North Korea over their Nukes, and then all of a sudden, they were like boom boom boom boom boom and then South Korea was gone. North Korea, ate South Korea.
It was kinda.....a bummer.
Karma: Not Particularly Funny.
Maybe we'll finally get those fururistic looking building's and architechture styles that the sci-fi media's been promosing us for decades. Or, gasp, a "HOVERCAR" tm. After all isn't the diff between an "iMac" tm, and a beige PC similar to the diff between our building styles, and the ones imagined in sci-fi.
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
They make really good computers, cant we just stop there? Isn't that good enough? Do we need to build a tranluscent plastic alter?
...he'll replace Michael Eisner at Disney. This rumor has been floated before but it seems less plausable since Eisner and Jobs have been feuding over the 5 picture Pixar deal. I think I would rather see him at the helm of Disney rather than the country but hey, it might be fun to see him in a suit.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Let's see... Bloomberg (mayor of NYC now) gets a yearly $.01 salary - but I will bet you a dollar to a donut that he makes it all back and more with the rules / regulations / whatever he gets to do while in office. All his friends would benefit from a city office that looks after their assets, and he would likewise be heftily compensated for his efforts.
On the other hand, I guess if Jobs was mad president, Microsoft would be royally fucked. Really, really fucked...
My life in the land of the rising sun.
There is a common tendency to think one's political opponents are motivated by evil. While a lot of Bush's actions are to me inexplicable, experience has forced me to assume he's merely wrong, not malicious.
This is good, because wrong we can work with.
My video compression blog
He has no talent at making everyone happy. In the U.S., the president doesn't have 100% control. He actually might make a semi-decent dictator, but he'd fail miserably as a president.
He'll have his plan. The republicans will want small changes and the democrats will propose their own, modified version. Jobs: "Screw you all".
As much as I disliked Clinton and his "all-promises no deliveries" politics, he was very good at getting opposing sides to compromise. Of course, the downside to this is both sides compromise so many issues that when they're done there's nothing important that's agreed on.
No, but I was around when the US Government convicted Microsoft of violating anti-trust laws but did nothing about it. Those laws were enacted to prevent companies from racketeering and using the profits from their dishonest practices to take over other markets.
Apple is not free, but they have yet to:
Dump product,
threaten vendors who dare sell competing products unless they cost more and are more trouble than M$ junk,
buy competitors simply to shut them down,
threaten ruin of a lifetime's work for non compliance,
activly discourage hardware makers from forming standards,
embrace planned obsolecence via software incompatibility,
and many other things that have retarded America's and the world's computing, economy and wellbeing.
By the way, bub, you must have missed the Big Guy's message. Quit messing around with issues of freedom, GPL and what not. It has not worked. You only make yourself look bad and waste your time. If you are going to defend M$, you have to do it in positive terms. One more mistake like this and your going to lose your PR contract.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
What's he going to do? Wait for the stock market to go back up and merge with Canada?
I'm not drunk, I just have a speech impediment. And a stomach virus. And an inner ear infection.
I bet someone running for president on the Linux platform would get quite a few votes. There's probably more people that would vote for someone running for president on the Linux/open software/anti DRM platform than have voted for other parties, such as the libertarians... it'd make for more public recognition of Linux, too. Mabye the EFF could organize the effort?
http://usgovinfo.about.com/blgorenet.htm
clumsy perhaps, but the man has certainly done more for the internet than those trashing misplaced comments!
and, what could you imagine W does on the web?
more news here.
I quote:
"Clearly, although Gore's phrasing was clumsy (and self-serving), he was not claiming that he "invented" the Internet (in the sense of having designed or implemented it), but that he was responsible for helping to create the environment (in an economic and legislative sense) that fostered the development of the Internet"
death is eternity
after death is eternity
there is no death there is only eternity.
There will be many interesting (and failed) experiments, a lot of noise in the media and juts a little of real results.
I wonder who will be those hippies trying to run linux/PPC?
Less is more !
to the employee number function... everybody look at your hand and say zero with your first digit extended...
is it april 1 already?
..Lisa Jobs! She is more stable than her daddy by far..or better yet..
Wzo for Prez with Capt Crunch as Vice Prez
Don't Tread on OpenSource
Please educate me because this would be the happiest news for awhile and the final piece of info to fully convince a few friends to not buy Windows machines as their next computers.
Cheers. :)
"Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
Hovering around 50% for many years actually -- for the Presidential elections only -- and there are several factors in the way the statistic is calculated that tend to make it underestimate voter participation. The percentage is based on the number of votes cast for the principal office on the ballot divided by the VAP (Voting Age Population). The first number may be a bit low because, according to the FEC, about 2% of voters "fail" to vote for the highest office (I know of a couple of people who did this in the last election because they were disgusted with the choices, but did vote in other races), and the VAP is concededly larger than the number of people truly eligible to vote (millions of noncitizens, illegal aliens, ex-felons, and so on, are indeed "voting age"). Of that number, a somewhat smaller percentage is registered. So, if a 50% turnout is reported based on VAP, the turnout of registered voters may be more like 70%.
Turnout for primaries and local elections can fall *really* low.
I'm describing this because election theory is a personal interest, and because election stats are often misused to try to prove political arguments. The VAP problem shows how little the press knows what they're talking about. But I suppose Election 2000 cleared up the press's competence clearly enough. (Have you heard of VNS? Another wellspring of disaster. Groan.)
ANYWAY, the relevant point is that there's no obvious reason to assume that Mac users vary from the population at large. Many are too young or have other disabilities preventing voting. Some don't show up to vote. Also, I have no idea what Apple's 5% of computer sales translates into as a percentage of individuals. Nor are we users complete slaves: only some of us would vote for Jobs. It's thus a very long shot that Mac users would come anywhere near the 19% of turnout that went for Perot. Perhaps, joined by enough others, they could form the nucleus of a significant bloc. (I wonder what kind of candidate Jobs would make? I'm sure it would be interesting, but I'd rather he stay with Apple.)
"running mainly makes [Nader] just the Perot-of-the-left, working as a spoiler to get Bush reelected."
It pains me to even have to say this, but Nader voters are not (nor are any other non-Bush voters) responsible for Bush getting elected. The only people responsible for Bush being elected are the people that voted for Bush. That should be obvious to even to the simplest mind, but for some reason people just don't get it. That sort of illogic is really irritating.
Also unless I'm mistaken, your first argument amounts to a straw man, since Nader's position is not that there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans, but rather that there is little difference. I may be wrong, but I believe that is his view.
suddenly everything would cost a lot more, but damn would we have a sexy-lookin' country.
That polycarbonate translucent plastic would do a pretty damn good job serving as a helmet. The stuff's darned near impossible to break, and is used to make bulletproof glass.
A rolling stone is worth two in the bush!
"A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea, or thing and employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control (e.g., isolation from former friends and family, debilitation, use of special methods to heighten suggestibility and subservience, powerful group pressures, information management, suspension of individuality or critical judgment, promotion of total dependency on the group and fear of leaving it, etc.) designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders to the actual or possible detriment of members, their families, or the community." (West & Langone, 1986)
Perhaps Jobs can get David Miscavige to be his VP. Don't underestimate the cult vote!
I'm sorry, but "Stove Logs" isn't an appropriate choice for a president.
Thank you for that rousing silence! I'll be here all week.
"Freedom is kind of a hobby with me, and I have disposable income that I'll spend to find out how to get people more."
Having Jobs in the Whitehouse would be great for Slashdoters, he would outlaw Microsoft.
This sig has no nutritional value...
Yeah. Because taking your vote lightly led to such a GREAT president last election ...
It seems a lot of people want to see America become America(tm).
The notion that business-people (successful or otherwise) are assumed to be able to take their skills into the politial arena is ridiculous to me. Goverment and business have very little to do with one another; their goals are often at odds. Citizens are not shareholders. Government isn't about profit.
If you could be a tad less biased, you'd see he was making a point: only someone smoking a pipe would think that those things he listed had nothing to do with invading Iraq. Or maybe you did realize he was being sarcastic, and you were just suggesting that his sarcasm was inappropriate?
As for rhetoric, how would you feel if you were in a freshman ELPS class with a teacher who proudly stated that he was liberal, spent over half the class time reading articles by radical liberal authors, denounced the concept of a free market, and smiled and nodded whenever you tried to debate an anti-conservative claim he had made? Bear in mind that this teacher is teaching his viewpoint, as fact, to a group of 16-year-old students. That is what I consider rhetoric. In my case the teacher was conservative instead of liberal, and I've never had a liberal teacher announce their political orientation.
So, try to recognize instances of sarcasm, OK? Oh, and though it goes against human nature, try to fairly evaluate others' opinions. Though I am mostly liberal, I have conservative views and would almost certainly vote a mixed ticket.
Well it would cetainly make voting less confusing for the old geezers in florida. Forget punching holes and butterfly ballots and hanging chads, just put pick a piece of colored paper and put it in the box.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Geez.
Just think, Buzz Lightyear for Vice President. Sully would make a great speaker of the house (no one would dare disagree with him) and Hopper would be idea as foreign secretary (kick them stinking Iraqies.....er ants, in the ass). Plus Pixar would make way better political ads than we've ever seen in the past!
Rich people are eccentric. Poor people are strange. Me, I'd be happy with odd.
I'm voting for the Woz!
Well,... um..... That's because there liberal.
It's a life of solitude being a liberal.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
Okay, let's narrow it down a bit...
In short, we know nothing about the politics of Steve Jobs. No one in their right mind could vote for this guy without knowing more. Of course, he has opinions in these areas. But we just don't know them.
Is he Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Green, Reform or Independent? And out of those ridiculously broad parties, which one of several thousand factions, caucuses and movements does he stand with? Is he a New Deal Democrat or a Capitalist Green? A Country Club Republican or a Peronista Reformist? Civil Libertarian or Extreme Moderate Independent? Who the heck knows!
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
The economy is in the shitter and techies have spoken, what they said was "We want more *jobs*!"
four-oh-four
Rip. Mix. Burn.
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
Warning!!! Reality Distortion Field approaching!
I don't want a translucent-blue White House, and I still use my floppy drive!
Jobs and Clinton are quite friendly. One would expect Steve Jobs's policies to be similar. Except, of course, this time Microsoft gets broken up into three hundred pieces.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
this is exactly the kind of shit that gives slashdot such a stupid reputation. reporting on rumors of a techno-icon running for president is akin to reports of aliens in the new york post or the national enquirer.
but like the fucking morons that most of you are, you'll both continue to report it and continue to read about it.
glad i'm leaving this idiot industry.
Believe this if it helps you sleep, but anyone who can do simple arithmetic knows that Nader is responsible for Bush being in the White House.
Speaking as a respectibly left wing Democrat,
Feeling lonely these days?
Nader has simply shown zero ability for that kind of a job.
No worries there. Apparently, the Presidency has no requirements whatsoever these days. But seriously, Nader thinks deeply, speaks clearly, and acts decisively. He also happens to be brutally honest, a quality we haven't had in a President since... well, ever.
As a Green, I hope to see someone other Ralph nominated in 2004, and I even started a website to that effect. But I'll always remeber how good it felt to vote for Nader. I have no regrets.
When he says there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans, he's either lying, or an idiot.
Go back and check your facts. You never actually heard him say that. You only heard second-hand that he had said it. In fact, what he really said was that the difference wasn't enough to make a difference. Close, but not the same statement.
What we have today is a far-right party up against a center-right party. There's your difference.
Leadership requires the right mix of idealism and pragmatism, and Nader badly fails that test.
Are you kidding? Nader has saved more lives than Gore and Bush added together, or for that matter, multiplied. You have to be an idealist to take on corporate power, and you have to be a pragmatist to win, not just once, but over and over.
There's not an idealist among the Democratic would-bes, and W wouldn't know an idea if it bit him on the nose.
If he actually WON the presidency, he'd be disasterous at it.
Right, he'd probably do disastrous things like see that poor people have health care and education, that wilderness areas are protected, that corporate monopolies are controlled, that foreign conflicts are handled with civility and diplomacy. Not like the enlightened path we're currently on.
And since even he knows that he isn't going to win,
Wrong. The Green Party didn't take the White House in 2000, but we did grow explosively. We became a household word. And in 2002, we ran more candidates (and had more wins) than we did with Nader. That's a win.
running mainly makes him just the Perot-of-the-left, working as a spoiler to get Bush reelected.
Hey, is it Nader's fault the sitting VP of a very popular President couldn't beat an ex-cokehead who's dumber than Dan Quayle put together? Is it Nader's fault Gore couldn't win his own freaking home state? Or Clinton's?
People knew the risks of not voting for Gore. Yet 2.7 million of us took the risk (and probably twice as many again thought seriously about it). The overwhelming majority would do so again, and many who voted for Gore will vote Green next time. You call it spoiling, I call it standing up for what you believe in.
If you want our votes in 2004, here's what to do: steal our platform. Go ahead. We arrived at it in an unusually democratic fashion, but we'd be happy to see you adopt it in any way. Our ideas are what draw people to us, and if you want to draw them back, you now know how.
One last thing... ask a local Green what IRV is.
What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
We see steve jobs shamelessly promoting his business. Watching the government say Fuck you! when he orders them to throw out all of their computers and switch to fruity macs. This will never fan out, especially in the intelligence community. Since WW2 they have been operating on a need-to-know basis so that not even the president can know about an operation if he doesnt need to know. So that would imply that not even mister jobs can not know what their computer systems are running. Ahh, the pain it would be to realize that you threw away your vote... I'd rather reelect bush ANY day!
Ok, obviously, this whole issue is moot if Jobs isn't actually trying to run for President in the first place.... but just for the sake of argument:
1. This is the guy who believed America would buy the $10,000 Lisa computer in droves. When that failed miserably, he ended up having the remaining inventory bulldozed into a Utah landfill. (So much for his ex-hippie, eco-friendly image, eh?)
2. This is the guy who, after that major mishap, went on to create another of the world's largest computer failures with the NeXT systems. (Granted, these were cool machines - but he burnt through something like 50 million in investors' money, again making the mistakes that doomed the Lisa. Namely, charging far too much money for a system that didn't have the software/applications behind it to sell it. In fact, I believe he blew about 15 million of Ross Perot's own investment money on NeXT.)
3. This is now the guy who, despite putting on a good show and illustrating good public speaking skills, enjoys keeping secrets from the public (used the "Keynote" software for a year before telling anyone the product existed, for example). I don't think America really wants a leader who keeps things completely secret from the people.
4. This is also a guy who seems to have a constant problem with exaggeration. Most of his "insanely great!" new things are more what I'd just call "good ideas". His bragging about the new Safari web browser being 2x to 3x faster than IE on the Mac is another exaggeration. I've timed it on several different Mac systems, and it's *maybe* 1.4x as fast as IE on *some* pages. Other times, it's actually slower or right about equal speed.
I'd still have a hard time buying it...
May I ask you what reason would you vote for Steve Jobs? Alright, I agree, he probably would be a hell of a lot better than G.W. But not by much. I remember when Hulk Hoagan decided to run for president, and all these wrestling fans were like, "Whoo! Let's vote for him!" I asked them, for what reasons would you vote this man into office? What qualifications does he have? I got three reasons: 1) Because he's cool! 2) *silence* 3) *scoff and roll of eyes* Only one of these even comes close to a "reason", and not by much. Now, had Hulk Hoagan displayed fantastic talent and ability for being a president, then yes I would vote for him. But he didn't. The same applies to Steve Jobs. If, for some reason, he demonstrates outstanding ability as a government official, and you're sure his corporate motives won't effect his decision making, then yes, by all means, vote for him. I still haven't seen any good reason to believe he has this ability yet, however. I think it's about time that people grow up and take their vote seriously and realize a few things. This isn't a popularity contest. Who you vote for will effect the way the country is run in the future. And my last, but most lengthy comment, is this one. Voting for someone because they're republican and you're republican or because they're a democrat and because you're a democrat is foolish. Those are names. When you vote, don't just think about what "party" you belong to, or how much money this person is going to bring you. On that note, voting purely on your own perosnal greed is an undeniably selfish way to go about voting, and stupid too: your personal state of being is a product of the world. Okay, one more final bunch of comments (yes, I meant that as a joke). You shouldn't always support everything that whoever you voted for did just because you voted for him. If you feel that a decision is wrong, it shouldn't matter to you who made it, it's wrong. And last but not least, peaceful protest (and I don't mean just by physical assembly, but also by writing letters and speaking your opinion) is a PATRIOTIC thing to do. Why? Because if you think your government is doing something wrong and you really love your country, you should want it to do what's right. Or is that wrong somehow?
http://mediagoblin.org/
So what you are saying is that Gore supported a bill on the back end that gave the nod to what was completely obvious.
Another thing to consider is that the commercial appeal of the Internet was anything but obvious in '93. At that point the arpanet was wholly owned by the US government, it was developed as a fail-safe means of transmitting information in a de-centralized environment so that in the case of a nuclear war it could still funciton.
If at any point before the Boucher bill was signed there was the potential (though unlikely) scenario of some demagog deciding that the civillian use of the Arpanet was so out of control it posed a serious misuse of government resources and therefore should be shutdown! It was definitely not impossible for the government to just pull the plug on the then fledgeling internet. Again, this would be highly unlikely and very tough to actually do. But then did we ever expect anything as outrageous as the DMCA to infect the lives of average people in the connected social universe in which we now find ourselves? Just something to think about...
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Yeah, he sued the Pinto out of existance, but if you want to talk about life saving, then lets talk about doctors, who save more lives than mr nader ever will.
Bush and Gore et el arent going around claiming that they will save lives, just that their policies will make life better than their opponent's.
Do you really think Nader is pure as the wind driven snow, but Bush is either stupid or the root of evil? If you really think nader is doing all this because he has warm fuzzies in his heart, i have a bridge to sell you. He has an agenda just like everyone else. Whether he gets it through the legal system or by running through office, the goal is the same.
CAPS? Disney? Not hand-drawn and hasn't been since _The Rescuers Down Under_? Pixar?
Arrange the above fragments into a sentence that concludes with the phrase "Could Steve-o BE more in bed with the forces of intellectual property."
The man's a bigger idiot than Bush. :o(
Everybody vote for Steve Jobs.
Um...... Has the person who submitted this article ever read up on Jobs' political beliefs?
The guy is a full blown communist who still hangs onto his free-love hippy-days absurdities.
Furthermore, would you want someone to run the country who has the "Apple philosophy." I mean the guy is clueless. Apple makes gorgeous machines that are relatively stable and easy to use, and yet they are totally incapable of gaining ANY significant portion of the market.
Hasn't it been proven enough that a closed architecture is NEVER the way to long term success in a consumer market? The only time such a thing has even been successful in the short term is when you wield monopoly power (like the DVD consortium).
Really now. This is an absolutely horrendous idea.
-Michael
Threshold RPG
Would I vote for him? Quite possibly, if for no other reason than to wait 4 years for him to say "Oh, and one more thing" just before he steps down.
Any president can appoint Supreme Court justices. How many can do it with panache?
This is a very stupid thread. Steve Jobs nor Woz would make a great president, they arent even political figures. Woz is a good guy tho but I doubt seriously anyone would ever take him seriously, hes too much of a practical joker. Jobs would be too willing to bomb all countries unless they bought a Macintosh
I agree with you. Even though the Jews went through a bad time in WWII (ok an understatement ) I think it is well past time we stop supporting them monetarily. The Palestinians were there first; It was their land. I figure if the Jews can't stand on their own feet by now, too bad.
As a side note: If they had learned to co-exist instead of forcing the Palestinians out, this problem wouldn't exist today. But, it just seems you can't put 2 religious groups side by side and have peace.
I can just vision the Steve Jobs version of the White House
If anyone did simple arithmetic in the last election, Gore would be in the White House.
Yes, then we accuse him of making technology deals to line his own pockets and propping Apple up and waging war on China to take over their elctronics assembly industry...
Face it, you bitter people would always find SOMETHING to complain about...
You need a FREE iPod Nano
Wrong; though Nader's existence clearly affected citizens' votes, he is not *responsible* for the outcome. Rather, those who voted for Bush, and some not-so-simple voting arithmetic are responsible for Bush being in the White House.
Nader himself is not the most responsible for this outcome.
- Arnold Schwarzenegger was a President??!! (c) John Spartan
This is idiocy. Why anyone still wastes their breath blaming Nader for Bush, rather than focusing on Bush now, makes no sense to me. It is Gore's own fault that he lost the election. If Gore wanted to appeal to the people who voted for Nader he could have tried. Instead he courted Bush voters, who went ahead and voted for, guess who, Bush. Gore chose to appear at least as conservative as Bush on most issues, and more conservative than him on many others. Nader didn't force Gore to distance himself from Clinton or to run a terribly unenthusiastic campaign. Nader didn't force Gore to actually lose debates to his intellectual inferior. Nader didn't force Gore to neglect to mention to voters that the economy was better than it had been in a long time. Nader didn't force Gore to neglect to mention that his opponent was a complete moron who represents a criminal family dynasty. Liberals and democrats need to stop blaming other people for their problems if they want to win elections.
Jobs: Required no help building computers that nobody bought.
Bush: Who needs books!
Jobs: Who needs gigahertz!
Bush: Thinks that, somewhere up there, John Wayne is smiling down on him.
Jobs: Feels pretty sure that Einstein, Amelia Earhardt, Gandhi and Lennon all want to come back from the dead to buy Macs from him.
Bush: Proved that it's possible to be a drunken slacker, then marry Laura Ingalls Wilder, and suddenly be considered "presidential material."
Jobs: Proved that it's possible to make blueberry computers and not be considered gay.
Bush: Thanks his lucky stars every day that the "war on terrorism" saved his ass.
Jobs: Thanks his lucky stars every time Apple issues its quarterly report knowing that, somewhere out there, Steve Ballmer is working on a new dance routine.
Atleast unemployed people would greatly appreciate Jobs.
I'll vote for him if I can write in my vote -- with a Newton stylus!
Yeah, "Erect Hobs"
yes, www.dotcomforwardslash.com is my real URL.
Could someone fix the html for this news item. Inside the Steve... there is a mystery which does nothing and I think is meant to actually be the (which appears actually after the '."' This causes Opera at least to be very confused and make all the text below that which is not a link to be a link to jobsforpresident.com or whatever it was. Perhaps this is mostly Opera's fault but it's definitely not quite right!
At first I thought wtf? But he would have to be better than Bush the warmonger.
be vigilant, be pure, behave
. . . is to give the voting system a much-needed tweak. I think most people would agree that if Nader hadn't run, Gore would be president. There was a similar problematic election in France recently. The problem arises from the system of plurality voting, which can easily lead to the paradoxical result of a lesser desired candidate winning. While there are no perfect voting systems, there are much less imperfect ones, such as the Borda count, that would allow a candidate like Jobs to run without voters having to fear that their votes for him would have no chance of counting, or would only skew the election results insofar as they had any effect. Voting can be much more democratic than it currently is.
Here's a quote from an article I came across not too long ago on voting theory:
In some elections, any candidate can win, depending on which voting system is used, says Donald Saari of the University of California, Irvine. Consider 15 people deciding what beverage to serve at a party. Six prefer milk first, wine second, and beer third; five prefer beer first, wine second, and milk third; and four prefer wine first, beer second, and milk third. In a plurality vote, milk is the clear winner. But if the group decides instead to hold a runoff election between the two top contenders--milk and beer--then beer wins, since nine people prefer it over milk. And if the group awards two points to a drink each time a voter ranks it first and one point each time a voter ranks it second, suddenly wine is the winner. Although this is a concocted example, it's not an anomaly, Saari insists.
You can get the whole article, which gives a fair overview of various voting systems, at Science News, or if you prefer: http://www.sciencenews.org/20021102/bob8.asp
Vote as an individual; lemmings end up falling off cliffs. Camaraderie is no substitute for common sense, and being your own man will make you sleep better.
--Pierre S. du Pont
I'm not serious but maybe some people are. Bill Gates for President
A few questions I have:
Does anyone outside of the US actually respect Dubya?
Has any other president of any other country had an email circulated soon after coming to power comparing him to a monkey?
What other leader has had a word coined after him/her for stupid things they have said? (And not just one or two stupid things but a whole books published of them.)
Has any other countries leader come to power in an undemocratic way and then gone on to proclaim he/she is defending democracy?
Rick Hohensee anounced his campaign on the
linux-kernel mailinglist
Peder
Which Jobs sold to Apple, I'm sure Perot got his money back on that deal.
Next was cool, excellent systems and pleasure to install. He flogged it back to Apple when the begged him to return
"Steve we need you back"
"I won't ask for a salary"
"Thats great"
"All you have to do is buy my current company for miles more than its really worth"
"Sure no worry Steve, whatever you say"
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
...then maybe Joe Lieberman should run Apple?
Taking Apple from almost 12 percent of the computer pie in 1997 to almost 4 percent of that same pie in 2003...what a leader! Gee, anyone would vote for that track record. That is exactly why we get such morons in public office. Examine the facts. Learn to think. Vote Libertarian. Fuck girls and cum. What is so hard about that?
Ohhhh wait, you are all linux fags...nevermind.
Jobs for president is in any case better than the so called president.
He saw some dirty arabs and fired. Too bad it was just some friendly kurds, BBC reporters and his fellow cowboys.
Look, I'll admit that I still might not vote for the guy if he were to run, but his qualifications are much, much better than Hulk Hoagan (or even Jessie Ventura... who did hold elective office)
Here are the qualifications:
1) Name recognition. OK, ok, The Hulkster has this same qualification in this category. So does Timothy McVeigh for that matter. I won't go further.
2) Entreprenurial Maverick. He litterally followed the "American Dream" of grabbing a couple of friends and made his own wildly successful company. Of course, this is why he is famous, but this is the kind of result that even conservative Republicans appreciate.
3) Turned around a dying company and restored it to good health. I know there are a lot of factors that have kept Apple from disappearing like almost all of the computer companies that were around when Apple first started (including DEC, Wang, Control Data, Commodore, Atari, and others). But the fact that Apple is still around and indeed very relevant force that is still influencing the computer industry (with an independent OS to boot!) Steve Job's role in the restoration of Apple is nothing short of a miracle.
4) Plugged into the entertainment industry. Particularly with his involvement in Pixar. The Hollywood entertainment industry has become increasingly active politically across the spectrum, from Charleton Heston and Ronald Reagan to Martin Sheen and Barbra Streisand. Like it or not, they are a major force with the anti-war effort to stop Bush from going into Iraq. They are also a source for the lifeblood of politics:
$$$$Money$$$$
Yes, Steve Jobs has some considerable wealth, but not enough to do a Ross Perot style election campaign... nor the drive to spend that much of his own money for his personal ego.
5) Politically Independent. This really is a big deal, because so many politicians need to follow "the party line" that they can't really go off on their own. Steve Jobs would be able to follow his own heart, and has demonstrated in the past that he doesn't really care what other people think.
*********
Honestly, I think it would be better for him to run for governor of California (Imagine a contest between Steve Jobs and Arnold Schwarzenager.... now that would be a real election. BTW, Arnie is thinking of running as a Republican candidate in the next gubinatorial election there)
If Jobs could turn around the California economy after Grey has trashed the state, he would be an instant candidate for President.
I have a degree in Financial Mgmt so perhaps I can clarify a bit...
Brief overview of what constitutes a monopoly:
-Barriers to entry
-Defined ability to set non-equilibrium price in the market (ie. fixing the price at whatever you want regardless of where supply meets demand)
-Disadvantage of previous condition falls on customer
-Ability to control other conditions in the market like supply. This really is a sub-piece of the ability to control price.
There are many more but you get the point.
Monopolies in the US...
Water
Gas
Electricity
Phone (not anymore yay!)
Monopolies are allowed by the government under specific conditions, typically to fill a void that a competitive market could not properly/logitically, etc. meet demand, example sewage treatment.
The US government may however deem that a Monopoly is illegal *if* they feel that power is being abused. That is why the Bells and AT&T were split. Typically, unless the service is something that is necessary for societal welfare (running water, etc), private companies are not allowed to hold monopolies. The debate usually stems over whether a company is a monopoly, not whether being a monopoly makes their practices illegal. Sometimes a monopoly is allowed if there are no parties that could enter a market, regardless of barriers to entry. This often happens in fleeting industries where many companies in a market would hurt the industry.
Actually, because of their position on political corruption and campaign finance, the libertarian party and candidates regularly refuse matching funds, even though libertarian candidates have qualified.
Sometimes I worry that I'll develop Alzheimer's disease, but no one will notice.
Doesn't matter, even if he blows his budget on slick marketing and pretty colors, he still won't be able to get above 8% of the votes. :)
Condorcet, Condorcet, Condorcet! I can't say this enough. IRV has so many pitfalls that I can't believe anyone seriously recommends it as an alternative. Its faults in the vote-counting method so overwhelm the improvements in its vote-casting method as to make any benefit in using IRV completely illusory. Condorcet uses the same vote-casting method, but the vote-counting method actually does what IRV purports to do.
Constitutionally Correct
You mean the EU way? Like UK outlawing guns then crimes surges 35% last year? Or the french lecturing us about issues of WAR, ha!
I might agree in US politics things are bass ackwards (if the politicians were smart they would be making $ in the private sector), but the US is top notch in most reguards.
Sorry if I burst any bubbles.
Ok Look I hate to remind people that steve Jobs brought Apple to the point of extinction, then Old Man Gates comes in to save his butt. I am sorry we might as well elect bill gates for prez. then the whole world can be his monopoly.
The only thing would be if Steve Jobs was president that would mean Bil Gates would have to be leader of the opposition.
How about Gary Gygax being Leader of the House (or whatever it is called, being from UK not too sure).
How can you say that civilisation's do not advance... in every war we invent new ways to kill you.
Who's your president?
Whale
Well, here we go - time to lose my karma and be branded a troll. But this article posted here is pretty much crap.
Some folks get together begging for money to write in Steve Jobs.
BFD. WTF cares?
Would anyone care if the same was done for Bill Gates? Hillary Rosen? Vallenti?
The same thing would happen. The political insults fly back and forth as a site that's supposed to be dedicated to news for Geeks gets dragged into a political sh1tsl1nging fest that's really annoying to read.
There's so much more out there to discuss and enjoy instead of some lame ass "gimme money" site that will do nothing but split a vote anyway.
I found myself wishing I had Karma points to slap down some folks here but then realized what a waste of time it would be to read thru the scum that passes for responses in most of this thread.
I can't help thinking that this article was posted just to cause a politico discussion, and if we could rate articles I'da rated it a -5 troll.
Ah well, Rant's over. I'm going to go read wired, or science now.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
What I've learned today, as I log in and see the above post marked way up as insightful, is that there are fine lines between joking, deliberate trolling, unintended trolling, and karma whoring. I thought my post was somewhere between a joke and a lighthearted troll. But I guess that's not obvious to other people, because when I pull in my line, I'm finding a lot of fish on it: both moderators and posters.
So, dammit, I'm gonna start using smileys again, when appropriate. And nobody better bitch about it or tell me Slashdot doesn't need smileys.
And to the moderators who marked it as insightful instead of funny: WTF is wrong with you?
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
What's he gonna do, lock Chenny in a closet until he invents a plan to solve world hunger?
...a more User Friendly America
I'm sure that would be popular with the international community.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Legalize it maaaaannnn.
Marijuana that is.. You know Jobs will try..
Zoot!
...if you lived thru the Carter and Reagan eras: Replay history with a 2nd Carter administration.
Visualize whirled peas.
When VPNs are outlawed, only outlaws have VPNs.
I can't wait to hear the "Oh, and one more thing". What could it be? iVote? Cuba has been "aquired"? The justice department is suddenly a lot more interested in putting the screws to Microsoft? That last one is my guess.
Angleyne: You can't bend that girder - it's unbendable! Bender: Well I don't know anything about lifting, so that ju
he's someone that has Vision and can seek it out (even if we might not agree with his Vision, he's definitely got it!)
The most bloody and atrocious governers in the history were of that kind. Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao all had their Visions.
When it comes to electing a US president, I (as a foreigner) will prefer any greedy, lying, corporate-sponsored puppet over one with grand plans regarding the world.
Lisp is the Tengwar of programming languages.
Your vote for Stove Jabs has been registered. Thank you.
Yes I inhaled... and then I drank the bong water.
Next Question.
From someone who has actually met Steve Jobs and had a good friend that worked closely for him, trust me on this... you DON'T want to vote for him. He's a dick to say the least.
.faq ...van Pelt!
code
awards
journals
subscribe
older stuff
rob's page
preferences
submit story
advertising
supporters
past polls
topics
about
bugs
..van Pelt!
i deserve a big "5" for this post. everybody knows why a third party will never win, right?
let's all go to fairvote.org and read about proportional representation and instant runoff voting. It's the shit. Let me paste some for you - I swear it's worth reading.
pasting...
What is Instant Runoff Voting (IRV)
Instant runoff voting is a winner-take-all, constitutionally protected, voting system that ensures a winning candidate will receive an absolute majority of votes rather than a simple plurality. IRV eliminates the need for runoff elections by allowing voters to rank their candidates in order of preference. IRV is not a form of full representation or proportional representation, but the choice voting method of full representation relies on a similar method of casting and counting ballots.
Frequently Asked Questions About Instant Runoff Voting
What is instant runoff voting? Instant runoff voting is a method of electing a single winner. It provides an alternative to plurality and runoff elections. In a plurality election, the highest vote getter wins even if s/he receives less than 50% of the vote. In a runoff election, two candidates advance to a runoff if no candidate receives more than 50% in the first round.
How does it work? Voters rank candidates in order of choice: 1, 2, 3 and so on. It takes a majority to win. If anyone receives a majority of the first choice votes, that candidate is elected. If not, the last place candidate is defeated, just as in a runoff election, and all ballots are counted again, but this time each ballot cast for the defeated candidate counts for the next choice candidate listed on the ballot. The process of eliminating the last place candidate and recounting the ballots continues until one candidate receives a majority of the vote. With modern voting equipment, all of the counting and recounting takes place rapidly and automatically.
IRV acts like a series of runoff elections in which one candidate is eliminated each election. Each time a candidate is eliminated, all voters get to choose among the remaining candidates. This continues until one candidate receives a majority of the vote.
Isn't this too complex for the voter? No. All the voter has to do is rank one or more candidates. It's like renting a video or picking an ice cream: What video (or flavor) do you want? That's your first choice. If they don't have that video (or flavor), what would you like? That's your second choice. If they don't have that, what's your third pick? That's all there is to it. It's as easy as 1-2-3.
Doesn't this give extra votes to supporters of defeated candidates? No. In each round, every voter's ballot counts for exactly one candidate. In this respect, it's just like a two-round runoff election. You vote for your favorite candidate in the first round. If your candidate advances to the second round, you keep supporting that candidate. If not, you get to pick among the remaining candidates. In IRV candidates gets eliminated one at a time, and each time, all voters get to select among the remaining candidates. At each step of the ballot counting, every voter has exactly one vote for a continuing candidate. That's why the Courts have upheld the constitutionality of IRV.
Does IRV eliminate "spoilers" and vote-splitting? Yes. In multiple-candidate races, like-minded constituencies such as Latinos, liberals, conservatives, etc. can split their vote among their own competing candidates, allowing a candidate with less overall support to prevail. IRV allows those voters to rank all of their candidates and watch as votes transfer to their candidate with the most support. In partisan races, IRV prevents the possibility of a third party candidate "spoiling" the race by taking enough votes from one major candidate to elect the other.
Does IRV save money? Yes. IRV eliminates the cost of runoff elections since it determines a majority winner in a single election. In San Francisco, a citywide runoff election costs $1 million. Many states use runoffs in special elections to fill vacated seats. A runoff for a U.S. house seat costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. IRV also saves money for candidates, since they only have to campaign once and raise money once.
Does IRV affect voter turnout? Yes. Turnout generally increases. IRV gives every voter incentive to participate because your vote still counts even if your first choice candidate is defeated. Also, since IRV only requires one election, the decisive election takes place when turnout is highest, typically November.
Does IRV affect campaign debate? Yes. Because IRV may require second and third choice votes to win, candidates have incentive to focus on the issues, to attract voters to their positions and to form coalitions. Negative campaigning and personal attacks are much less effective in an IRV election.
Who uses IRV? Many places. Ireland to elects its president, Australia to elect its House of Representatives, and the American Political Science Association to elect its president. Cambridge MA uses a variant of IRV to elect its city council, and literally hundreds of jurisdictions, organizations and corporations use IRV around the world.
Whom does IRV advantage? IRV advantages the majority, since it ensures that a minority of voters can never defeat a candidate supported by a majority. It also gives the voter more power, since s/he can express a range of choices.
Can the voting equipment handle IRV? Modern voting equipment, such as optical scanners and computer touch screens, can handle IRV at no additional cost. Older technologies such as punch cards and lever machines cannot handle IRV, so it doesn't make sense to adopt IRV until new equipment is purchased. In these cases, we recommend legislation authorizing the use of IRV when the equipment is available. For reasons unrelated to IRV, the trend in voting equipment is away from the older technologies, so more and more jurisdictions are acquiring equipment that can handle IRV.
Why don't more places use IRV? Prior to the advent of modern vote counting equipment, IRV required a time-consuming and costly hand count. Some jurisdictions that used IRV in statewide primaries found that they rarely had plurality (less than majority) winners, so IRV seemed unnecessary. With today's diversity and proliferation of parties and candidates, low plurality winners are more common, and hand counts are unnecessary.
Who opposes IRV? Little organized opposition to IRV exists. Election officials are understandably cautious about a system that may increase their workload, and some incumbents fear any change to the system that elected them. If you can win an election under a plurality or runoff system, however, the odds are that you would also win under IRV. The exceptions are rare but can be important. Examples include several recent House races in New Mexico, where Green Party candidates threw races to Republicans, and state legislative races in Alaska in which Libertarians and Alaskan Independent Party candidates knocked off Republicans.
Some political minorities may believe that they can only win representation in a plurality election. Such groups may oppose IRV, but of course, in such situations, a larger groups stands to gain representation by IRV.
...are a political doofus. The "Christian version of the Taliban"? Believing the most extreme version of what you percieve to be the truth is helpful when ranting like this, but doesn't leave much room for a balanced view of reality.
...promise OS X for x86, that is.
In late 1997 (early '98?), Apple released a developer version of Rhapsody, which was the internal name for OS X. Both PPC and Intel versions were released. It was pitched as the future of macintosh, so it was most certainly a promise.
Apple also promised a Yellow Box (Cocoa) runtime for the 32 bit Win platforms, but that never saw the light of day.
Jobs can't even run a software company correctly. How's he going to make decisions concerning the entire nation. Just goes to show that Mac Addicts are 1d1075. That's why they use Macs.
The U.S govermnent is not interested in nation building (witness the total abdecation of responsibility for post-Taiban Afghanistan). The only conquered nations that produced democratic replacement governments did the work themselves.
I'd say it's already gone off. A few times.Just because stability in the region is in the best interests of the U.S and the world doesn't mean those in charge agree on how to accomplish it - and the current U.S administration seems to be particularly thick-headed about the value of militery intervention - ignoring things like a) terrorism was invented to get around military power - effectively, and b) large scale war hasn't been economically viable since after WW I (for example, the U.S could overwhelm China's military quickly, but the U.S economy would quickly collapse due to the dependence on imports - it would do more damage to the attacker than the victim).
I doubt Iraq will be any more democratic than Afghanistan is, or Iran or Chile or Cuba were after U.S intervention. Economic, social, political forces are far more powerful - remember, it was not U.S bombs that dismantled the Soviet Union, it was economic and political pressures from within that were responsible.
Like Israel? Wrong religion? How about Turkey?Nah, it needs more than that. If you want to know what I think it needs - a free trade region. That would be the best, fastest, and surest way to promote freedom, communication, political and economic reform, and reduce historical animosities (usually people hold grudges because they don't have anything better to do - if they have the opportunity to get rich by putting aside those differences, they'll do that instead - consider Quebec separatism in Canada has been highest during economic problems, but has lately all but disappeared).
Unfortunately, even that is a long term (decades) process. The popular American "But I want it now" mindset doesn't lend itself well to this sort of foreign policy.
I had an Apple //c, which was essentially a semi-portable version of the ][e AFAIK (the main unit had a handle and integrated disk drive and was approximately the right size to fit in a briefcase). It definitely had a mouse, and in fact some programs (such as Paint) were primarily mouse- and GUI-driven.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Actually, I think so. Sure, it may only be a side effect, but I think it will happen, and I think that it is actually in the West's long-term strategic interest to do so.
.01% of Americans (that is, the top 13,000 families) have seen their income increase from .7% to 3% of the total income taken in by the U.S. And over the past 30 years, the average salary (adjusted for inflation) rose from $32,522 to $35,864, while the average compensation for the top 100 C.E.O.'s went from $1.3 million to $37.5 million. I don't think they're hurting too much. As someone who's made $35,000/year for several years, I can tell you firsthand that I most certainly do pay Federal taxes. Almost 1/3rd of my paycheck.
When has democracy ever been in our strategic interests? In Nicaragua? With Mossadegh in Iran? With Allende in Chile? With Arbenz in Guatemala?
The whole Middle East is full of disenfranchised people held in line by a combination of propaganda blaming infidels (the carrot) and secret police (the stick). It's a powder keg waiting to go off.
The 3rd world in general could be described as such. Let's go invade all those countires filled with mean leaders. Hey, I know, we could start with North Korea. They have admitted to developing nuclear weapons.
A truly democratic regime in the region will bleed off a lot of the pressure.
A truly democratic regime in the region wouldn't last more than a week. When will we learn that you can't force democracy on people? They have to want it, and be willing to fight and die for it themselves in order for it to have any validity.
So, let's see what you're saying here, Dubya is bad because he's ignoring the economy, and Dubya is bad because he's trying to see off a far worse economic threat. Which is it to be?
The problem is that President Bush isn't creating the kinds of jobs that will be sustainable after the war is over. It would be more fiscally responsible of him if he took even half of what is being spent on the military occupation of other countries and put it towards his own.
Personally, I'd rather see the money spent on a way to make the West independent of the Middle East for energy (like fusion research)
No argument from me here.
I read in the Washington Post that the top 5% of earners pay 41% of the total Federal tax collected annually. That's an awful lot.
Ehem. The top 1% of earners receive as much income after taxes as the bottom 40% -- roughly 100 million people. (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities).
I think those folks have been carrying more than their fair share of the tax burden for a long time. BTW, those on $30k/year or less effectively pay no Federal tax at all.
Poor things. Just so you know, the top
I just gotta reply here to this.
The "American Dream" is that you can do any damn thing that you want to do, and it doesn't matter if you are from the most impoverished areas of America or are a member of one of the "American Nobility" families like the Kennedy, DuPont, Rockefeller families.
America was founded on the principle that you got a new start when you came here, and all the "nobility", "royalty", or "high born" bullshit that was found throughout Europe simply didn't apply in America. Instead, whatever it was that you wanted to do, as long as you put the effort into it and had some brains to get it to work, you can succeed.
I can count numerous examples. And for the most part Steve Jobs is able to do any damn thing that he cares to do.... and as I'm pointing out that this college dropout grabed a couple of friends and succeeded in doing something they loved to do, and got paid as well. This is the American Dream. I'll also admit that a certain amount of luck is required, but not nearly so much as winning the lottery, even the $100 pull lotto.
I know plenty of people who are completely free to do anything they want and live anywhere they want. Most of these people are not wealthy in the Ross Perot/Wm. Gates sense, but they have kids that they love and don't want anything else in their lives. I dare you to point out too many other places besides America where this was possible prior to 1776. And I would also challenge anybody to show that it was any other country besides America that pushed this ideology elsewhere in the world.
A big wad of cash is not a prerequisit to become President, but it certainly helps. It helps even more to know people who can give you additional cash to achieve this or any goal.
...has got to be all the vicious negative ads which start months before the election. It has gotten so bad, most people can list several reasons NOT to vote for a particular candidate, but very few reasons to support one. Why bother voting when all you know is this one could be a crook and that one can't run a business.
Give the public a reason to vote FOR a candidate instead of a reason to vote AGAINST someone, and watch the interest in the political process return.
BTW: I am one of the few who still actually vote. If you don't: It's OK. I will make all your decisions for you. No complaining allowed.
You sir are a wacko, or at least you sources are.
Hand guns have been outlawed in the UK for several years, and strictly controlled prior to that... (they had to be locked up under strict conditions and used only for sporting activities) and the vast majority of the UK population (I would say 90%+ easily) agrees with that.
The UK is currently in a panic over gun crime - because two (that's two out of 60 million population) teenage girls got shot a few weeks ago. By comparison, if only 2 people got shot in any major US city in a single morning, that would be a good day in that city.
UK criminals generally don't have guns. A few do of course, but most don't. Even the hard-core criminals often/usually use replicas or air guns. This is why our police force is generally unarmed, manages perfectly well "despite" this limitation.
UK violent crime is definitely falling for last few years.
UK overall crime is probably falling (politicians argue about numbers, but I think most agree it is)
UK's only real crime problem is against property: burglary of unoccupied properties, street crime (primarily theft of mobile phones or cash backed by intimidation), and to some extent cars... and it's never been legal to shoot somebody in the UK if you catch them doing this stuff to your property.
the whiHouse!
Ok that was lame. Mod me -1
Ah, found the quote: I had the wrong general, it was Sherman.
Yes, but fraud and error are common to *all* methods of registrations, not uniquely motor voter.
Anyone from Chicago (me) can tell you that multiple voting ("vote early, vote often") and dead people have gone on for a long time, and often that's not fixed because it benefits the politicians in power. Registration by mail has been available for some time in many states (also now required by motor voter, I didn't know that); at least at the DMV, you have the registrant face-to-face with ID in their hand. I'm intrigued by the critics who say the state can't verify identity (as opposed to eligibility to vote) at the DMV -- who the hell are the states passing out driver's licenses to? Terrorists, in the case of 9/11. Their uncertainty as to identity is a separate problem.
Voter eligibility must be verified, usually after the form is submitted, which is why most states require you to register, say, a month before the election. (ND doesn't require registration at all!) Whether they do their duty is up to them. That some complain about motor voter because they are now "overwhelmed" by applications from their own citizens is shameful. As for the ones who examined their rolls and found multiple registrations and dead peopl, well, good -- isn't examining their rolls what they're supposed to do anyway? Shouldn't they question their own procedures if such contamination continues? How is motor voter to blame for their carelessness, and how many of the bogus registrations predate motor voter? The critics drone on about how terrible registration fraud is -- and I agree -- while assuming rather than proving the act's causality.
Politicially, I can tell you that most of the (quiet) resistance in Congress to motor voter was from Congresspeople fully aware that greater registration would hurt their party (greater registration and turnout reliably favor Democrats -- quite reasonably, opponents of the law charged supporters with being politically motivated, and I'm sure they partially were). The fraud complaint was an insincere or inconsistent argument that goes more to altering some specifics of the law, not its fundamental thrust. Perhaps the best argument IMHO was that Congress shouldn't be telling the states how to handle its voting registration, though I think the law strikes an appropriate balance given historic federal intervention in voting practices to fix state tendencies to erect hurdles to maintain the status quo.
To give you an idea of the political nature of the resistance, some states read the NVRA as requiring them only to register people for federal elections, misleading some to half-register and be able to vote only a partial ballot!
More details. At a minimum the act makes life a lot easier for people like me who move from state to state and appreciate uniform requirements. I doubt the law is perfect, esp. as it is still quite young, but endorse of the basic premise that registration should be simple and convenient, as well as accurate. Increasing registration may or may not yet be producing more voters, but I can say from experience that the potential for get-out-the-vote drives is much greater when most people are eligible rather than being precluded by something they forgot to do a months earlier (and get-out-the-vote people can skip the extra get-people-registered drive). The only way to overcome voter apathy, the principal cause of low turnout, is to draw more and more citizens into the process so that voting becomes easy, familiar, and desired.
Steve Jobs voted in as US President?
It's not so important who you people vote in, as it is you organize and vote the current moron-demagogue out.
... People have been sending money to these clowns? (Only Apple fanatics would exhibit such poor judgement.) No one has considered that this was just a rip-off?
Nigerian enterprisers, take note: This could become your "420"!
The bad news is that Steve has communicated with us and declined our proposal. All donations will be refunded, thank you to all who sent e-mail & funds!
--HULK HOGAN (Terry Bolea[sp?]) for Prez!!
--Hey, if Jesse Ventura can do it... (And he did it WELL!)
.
== WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
Yes, quite true. Pixar was a great success. I never said Jobs wasn't a creative, intelligent man. Obviously, he is both, in droves.
I simply feel he exhibits many of the same qualities as our current crop of politicians, which we're largely disgusted with. (EG. Sneakiness, bad temper at times, a "my way or the highway" mentality that gets him in as much trouble as it gets him out of.)
Pixar was a perfect business for Jobs. It lets him sell pure creativitiy. If you can dream it, you can do it (at least virtually), and the expenses are pretty much the same no matter what virtual movie would you go about creating.
Jobs seemed to be making his biggest mistakes when he was spending millions and millons of dollars on designing physical products that were borne of his imagination, rather than from market research (and a discovery that there was a desire/need for the products).