Slashdot Mirror
What the Candidates are Running
An anonymous reader writes "
Linux Journal has an article about what the presidential candidates are running their web sites on. It also has some reference to the Republican vs. Democrat uptimes.
"
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Not one of these candidates knows WTF Apache is, let alone IIS.
:) but that is beside the point.
Sys Admins and Webmasters make those decisions and I'm betting the ones running the Democrat candidate websites have to worry about where they spend money. Thus they us OSS software.
Of course they are also running the better webserver
There is nothing inherently safe about liberty. That's why so many people died protecting it.
now without the mess.. ;)
lynx --dump --head http://www.site.com
[alk]
Ask any of these guys this question:
What operating system does your web server run?
Do you think any of them could answer that question? I don't think this reflects the candidates, it reflects their IT staff.
What I find funny is when people try to point out that the republicans push security and lower TCOs.
The truth is that GWB is pushing MS everywhere possible inside of government, except for when the group states that security is the overriding consideration (NSA, CIA, etc).
The candidates hosting company may be running such and such, NOT the candidate! If you can point me to a candidate that set his/her site up on their own and did NOT use frontpage or office for it....I might vote for them.
If you can point me to a candidate that actually runs his/her website off of a homebrew box running linux or a bsd that he/she built themselves, I WILL vote for them.
Most likely they chose whatever they chose because it was the cheaper option offered by their "web host".
That being said what point would this have in choosing a candidate. They most likely have no clue anyhow.
:-( --- argh. Despair, I owe again.
Most likely they hired a company to create and update the content, that company contracted a co-lo or managed resource partner to actually host the site. Co-los and web site providers are running linux to keep costs down to stay in business (and maybe even profitable).
He actually grew up in Maine. It's a fake Texas accent.
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
(If you cruise over to Larry Lessig's blogJohn Edwards is guest blogging on a variety of tech topics this week.)
We use a handful of open-source tools here at Campaign HQ. Why? Cost and reliability. The same reason you guys choose this stuff.
Oh... And our entire Web Team runs on Mac OS X. Contrary to one of the comments posted earlier, Senator Edwards made it clear during Tuesday's debate that he prefers his Mac.
I hope you folks have a chance to learn more about John Edwards.
This is incorrect.
n s.html for more information.
The positive belief that there is no god is one type of atheism, called "strong atheism". The other type is the simple lack of belief in any gods (called "weak atheism").
Agnostiscm is the belief that it is not possible to know or understand the nature of a god or gods. Thus, you can have agnostic atheists (it is impossible to understand the nature of a god and I lack a belief in any such entity) as well as agnostic theists (I believe that the universe was created by a god but its nature is unknowable).
See http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/sn-definitio
It must be a southern accent thing.
Uhh, you do know that dubya is from Conneticut, right?
God forbid that the folks making 90k+ a year are already paying 65% of the current tax load should have to pay -MORE- of the tax load (and those making 55k+ are paying almost 83%).
Ignoring the fact that you fail to cite those numbers (since they appear accurate), it's a meaningless figure. What percentage of the total money made are made by the people? A more accurate figure is the percentage of income that is paid as taxes by this group.
Tax Foundation has a table with just such data (cited as from the IRS for 2001). Their numbers match yours (65% paid by the top 10% (92k+)). However, the top 10% also makes 43% of the total money. At 21.4%, they do have higher tax rates than the average (14.2%). However, this takes into account only federal income tax, not other federal taxes, such as payroll and estate taxes, and not any state or local taxes.
--------------------
% telnet www.lp.org 80
Trying 65.113.119.99...
Connected to www.lp.org.
Escape character is '^]'.
HEAD / HTTP/1.0
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 19:58:32 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) PHP/4.2.3
X-Powered-By: PHP/4.2.3
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html
Connection closed by foreign host.
--------------------
% telnet www.greenparty.org 80
Trying 209.120.182.113...
Connected to www.greenparty.org.
Escape character is '^]'.
HEAD / HTTP/1.0
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 19:58:42 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) (Red-Hat/Linux) mod_fastcgi/2.2.12 mod_perl/1.26 PHP/4.3.3 FrontPage/5.0.2 mod_ssl/2.8.12 OpenSSL/0.9.6b
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html
Connection closed by foreign host.
> You give yourself a lot of credit for knowing all the answers to the
> problems of homelessness, poverty and addiction.
Addiction is something I don't care to discuss at the moment, but as for
homelessness and poverty, they are not a problem in this country.
Poverty? We have more people in the US dying of obesity than malnutrition.
How many political candidates have you seen announce they want do deal with
*that* problem? Homelessnes? We have more than one home per immediate
family; that's so far above the world average it's astonishing. Are there
homeless? Yeah, a handful. But there are much bigger problems. There are
more violent crimes every year than the total number of homeless people.
Heck, there are more fatal motorcycle accidents every year than the total
number of homeless people. Homelessness has a big emotional pull, but it's
not one of our larger problems.
Poverty we just plain don't *have*, period. Not for any definition of
"poverty" that would make any sense in most of the world. Poverty is when
the wrong amount of rain means none of the children in a fifty mile radius
get enough rice to eat this week, or when entertaining a visitor uses up
your quota of meat for a month. Poverty is when a significant percentage
of women die in childbirth due to a complete and total lack of any health
care, because they live a day's journey from the nearest proper first aid kit,
much less hospital. Poverty is when you don't personally know anybody who
has electrical power or running water. Half the world lives in poverty --
exactly zero of them are in the US. The poorest of our "poor" can get three
meals a day, if they're willing to accept handouts and hungry enough to eat
whatever food is set before them. The poorest of our "poor" live within
reasonable walking distance of public drinking fountains with potable water
available 360+ days a year. The poorest of our poor can walk into the
emergency room and be treated any time they have a real medical problem.
The treatment may not always be top quality, but they can get some form of
treatment. If they have to wait in line for eight hours (which would be
quite a lot in most US hospitals), that's *nothing* compared to what happens
where there's poverty; it can take eight hours to *get* to a hospital, *if*
you can find anyone with a car to drive you, and *then* they may just turn
you away altogether.
Don't even think about replying and telling me I don't know what I'm talking
about if you haven't even *been* to the third world. And if you only went to
one of the three largest cities in the country, that doesn't count.
Addiction, now that's a real problem we actually have. It's also another
thread.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.