Slashdot Mirror
Inside Kerry and Bush's Technology Agendas
wbren writes "PC Magazine has posted an interview on its website shedding some light on the two major candidates' policies regarding privacy, The Patriot Act, outsourcing, Internet sales taxes, broadband taxes and other important tech-related issues. PC Magazine calls it an interview, but John Kerry was the only candidate to actually respond directly to the questions asked. Bush's camp referred PC Magazine to George Bush's website to find the answers. The result: detailed and informative responses from Kerry, and many missing responses from the Bush campaign due to lack of information provided by Bush's website."
Bush supports Windoze 3.1
Who really cares what either think of technology. It's thier advisors that should be interviewed.
Of course, nobody would actually expect Dubya to answer the questions himself. Thinking's not his strong suit. Particularly when it comes to science.
This is standard operating procedure for Bush. Never answer a question directly, always refer the questioner to a previous statement that was made (which also doesn't answer the question)
posted via satellite
Who came to any conclusions? The poster merely points out that Kerry provided specific, detailed answers while PC Mag was left scrounging for answers on Bush's website. Nowhere does anybody tell me which answers are better. That's entirely left up to me.
I knew someone would eventually say and recognize the tremendous bias on /.
From anti-Microsoft to anti-Bush, sometimes it just upsets me. It makes me wonder, do the comments on /. have relevancy anymore? I mean, since I already know what they are going to say.....
Eat a Chicken, You know you want to.
Kerry was in favor of outlawing certain levels of encryption (and classifying encrpytion related stuff as munitions for export purposes (ironically enough, John Ashcroft was against limiting encryption at the same time, and squared off against kerry). Democrats are also notoriously pro-censorship (its for the children). I'm not saying the republicans are a bowl ofpeaches, but they get plenty of bad press here as it is (and have a terrible civil liberties record recentlly)
Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
...that thinks bush should be judged by what he HAS done in the last 4 years and not what he thinks he's going to do? HE'S HAD 4 YEARS to show me what kind of a president he's is/is going to be. I don't give one rat's ass as to what his promises are for the next 4 years, he's shown me everything i need already. since when is being a president of the USA a 4 year on the job training course, where you can then say, "umm, ok, i've been screwing up the last 4 years, NOW i'm gonna get serious" kiss my ass bush.
sigs suck
Questions about spyware, hackers... are these really things to burden the president with? Thats someone elses problem.
Easy guys, I put my pants on one leg at a time. The difference is after I put on my pants I make gold records!
Kerry: I was an original cosponsor of the Internet Tax Freedom Act. This legislation, which was passed in 1998, placed a moratorium on Internet access taxes and "multiple or discriminatory" taxes on electronic commerce. I support Senate legislation (the Internet Tax Non-Discrimination Act) that would extend this moratorium.
Bush: (I couldn't find a specific comment on Internet sales taxes.)
I have to assume Kerry did not really answer the question asked about sales taxes on internet sales, not his answer regarding the tax on the access itself. If you let Kerry get away with this answer, then you have to credit Bush's "interview" for the following answer only two questions prior...
Do Not Tax Broadband Access. The federal ban on Internet-access taxes has expired - and some states have started taxing broadband access. The president supports banning Internet-access taxes and applying that ban to all forms of broadband access. The Congress needs to pass the Internet-access tax ban.
You'd think PC Mag would be able to tell the difference between sales taxes on internet sales and taxes on internet access.
All that being said, there is no way I would ever vote for Bush's reelection. If someone wants to vote for Bush based on faith and/or moral issues, there is no chance of changing that voter's mind.
--
dman123 forever!
Filtering out the -1s and 0s since 1999.
Absolutely! From what I can see, none of the promises I voted for Bush on in 2000 (and yes, despite the name I did vote for Bush last time around) were accomplished. Abortion, Economics, Taxes, all of it was worse under Bush than under Clinton.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Of course Bush didn't respond, the entire context was biased!
.asp!
Civil rights, working class empathy, demonstration of critical thought; how could Cheap Labor Conservatives possibly answer in any manner that would perpetuate positive spin?
Even the taxation questions were pro-Kerry.
At least the article was
Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, George W. Bush is all those things that you claim are "Bias"? (much like M$ Windoze is guilty of being a crappy OS) /. is biased. It means that folks on /. are hard on the president.
Becuase folks tend to be hard on the president here doesn't mean that
And rightly so, imo. If we, those that log on and debate our opinions about what we think is right and wrong, don't voice those opinions then we are just sheep. If you don't like the way a certain thread is going... LEAVE.
The fact the Bush didn't feel the need to answer most of the questions (or be interviewed for that matter) tells me that he just doesn't give a sh1t.
At least Kerry took the time to give a response to questions that some people might care about. And he did it without throwing jabs or 'waffling'. You may not agree with his answers, but at least he took the time _TO_ answer.
Obviously W doesn't feel the need to.
I hate my sig.
If I were POTUS, magazine interviews would be my number one priority!
Now, I'm a huge Kerry supporter, and to be honest I'm not even sure how a decent person could vote Bush--the candidate of bigotry, plutocracy, and jingoism. I'm a conservative, therefore I oppose all those plan to vote Kerry. But I don't take these Kerry answers seriously for even a moment. Neither John Kerry nor George W. Bush need to know what the hell Grid computing is. In fact, I think I'd be better off not knowing what it is as well. "Buzzword compliant" is not a complement.
I'm sure you could just substitute Kerry's answers for Bush's anyway.
Whoever you elect (and it will be Bush or Kerry, so don't talk to me about "3rd party candidates") will guarantee you certain things:
* bigger, more invasive government
* more technology regulation
* more draconion copyrights, open source ignored
* policies friendly to big business in general
I've had enough of the constant Left/Right debate in this country, pretending there is actually some major difference between the two parties. They both moved to the center and then toward the corporations. If it wasn't for the Iraq war (which I don't agree with, reason enough to vote Kerry just to punish Bush [Kerry's Iraq policies will probably be identical]), I would flip a coin to vote.
Bush has no idea what's going on and can't answer our questions or uses "Your gonna die if you don't agree" answers.
Kerry has thoughful answers whether you agree with him or not, and you know he's intelligent enough to change his mind if confronted with appropriate facts.
--
This sig voted for daddy, but not jr
No questions in the article to Kerry about the Hubble Telescope? At least we know where Bush stands on that issue.
What is your position on unauthorized online file-sharing?
Kerry: I don't condone illegal sharing of copyrighted material. Widespread sharing and downloading of music, movies, and software undermines the incentives for individuals and companies to create new content. We need to continue to enforce our copyright laws and combat piracy both here and abroad.
Bush: (I couldn't find a specific comment on file sharing.)
If he's not against it, he's for it!
Democrats are also notoriously pro-censorship (its for the children).
Wait a minute! It's under Bush adminstration that the FCC just levied record fines for Janet Jackson flashing a nipple on the television. It's been the Bush administration's FCC that has gone after Howard Stern for the sake of "the children." It was the Reagan Administration's Meese Commission that pressured 7/11 convenience stores to stop carrying adult magazines. The Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA), which required filtering software in public libraries was introduced by Rep. Bob Franks, a Republican from New Jersey.
Democrats are much less likely to promote censorship than Republicans are.
I guess the good news is, Bush listened to his advisors.
... um, he listened to his advisors. :(
The bad news is,
I e-mailed Kerry the other day asking him about tort reform, and the bastard hasn't replied yet! I can't believe it, I'm even in a swing state!
Obviously Kerry Doesn't feel the need to take the time to answer.
Latewire
Meet me somewhere here in NYC to debate Dubya's dumbness over some facepunching. I'll be compassionate if you will.
--
make install -not war
Doubleplusgood example of rightwing "unbias": patch over the extreme difference between Bush's moronics and Kerry's thoughts, for parity. When invited by a major computer magazine to inform their readers about the policies specific to their subject, Bush blew it off completely, and Kerry answered straight. Only a severe rightwing bias could make Bush look even adequate in this telling scenario. Four more years of faithbased government might make Bush's disinterest in tech appropriate.
--
make install -not war
gosh... you really must be shaken up. Is there anything I can do to help you through this tragic event?
Maybe if you keep trying, someone will give you the attention you need.
In the mean time, why don't you go out to the garage, turn on the car and listen to some Counry or easy listening muzak, or even better... you should sing to yourself "where the eagles soar" by John Ashcorft. I am sure that in a short time all your problems will be solved.
And at the same time one of mine will be as well.
I hate my sig.
this sounds familiar.. mmm 'we report and you decide' This crowd makes fun of fox for doing these types of things, but you'll defend these actions when they aggree with your side. Interesting. Also, i would say, "The result: detailed and informative responses from Kerry, and many missing responses from the Bush campaign due to lack of information provided by Bush's website." qualifies(spelling?) as a conclusion more or less.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, George W. Bush is all those things that you claim are "Bias"? (much like M$ Windoze is guilty of being a crappy OS)
/. is biased. It means that folks on /. are hard on the president.
And maybe just maybe, if you took an ubiased look at the OSes you'd see windows isn't that bad. Yes it sucks in some areas, but guess what? so does every other os.
Becuase folks tend to be hard on the president here doesn't mean that
No, the blurb was biased.
Seriously.
When does he turn 35?
Search first, ask questions later.
Do you think the federal government should be doing more to prevent or restrict the outsourcing of technical jobs to foreign countries? If so, what?
Do you think the federal government should have a role in expanding broadband usage? If so, what sort of role? How do you feel about tax credits for companies investing in research and development? What is your position on taxing Internet sales and service? What is your position on unauthorized online file-sharing? What is your position on COPA (Child Online Protection Act)? Should the federal government be doing more to stop and prevent spam, viruses, and worms? If so, what? How do you feel about the SPY Act and other antispyware legislation introduced in Congress last month? Do you think the federal Wiretap Act should be updated in the wake of the recent federal ruling that e-mail stored on a provider's server is not protected by this act? That's it. Now I have to do a "lameness filter" workaround: asdf asdf asdf ajj;l asduiui sadfu asdfkhj werjh asd weruusda suds asdf asdf asdf ajj;l asduiui sadfu asdfkhj werjh asd weruusda suds asdfasdf asdfasdf asdfasd asdf wrth wrht ad sfty ag adrgerg rth zdfg adrg erg asdrgrdg xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx hggk drgrth dgjtyj nygbs tukuy sdsd tyj srtgser srthsrth arur u7hr wtgwe gewgr sdthsrh rsthsfg wergewrg wrtyerty zdfgwer g 76u356y5 dsfgdrger ergerg rthsrth rth fsth tj sfhf sdbbves ardt serg rdtyrty sdgerg errtuyertyrety sergwseg rtyertyr wegwg rtyertyerty tfyiyfuiyu stgwrtgwrgw dfuerterty tynteyn k8 b qevevr ergesvd rsrsrstgfgdgdhht shgshshsg srtiudfgergiuy erguysefjghw drgriufguy fghuihbfguf guyerguyegjk ergjkherghjkrkhjerg fsgkhjrtkhjrgejhef gfuhgfuherguyeruergjkhefvjhehjk fgjhegrjghwghjw efjhgfehgw"Orthodoxy is unconsciousness" - Orwell
According to this, Kerry believes that the best approach to stopping worms and viruses are better anti-spyware software and FBI legal squadrons.
Yet he believes that the solution to spyware is better anti-spyware software and more secure OSes and browsers.
The solution to both is the same. Kerry would already have my vote (if I was old enough to vote) because he's not Bush. It'd just be doubly cool if he came out and said "The best defense against spyware, viruses, and worms is to use the more secure software that already exists. The best defense against spam is to use a good statistical spam filter, combined with RBLs."
He seems to know his shit somewhat -- better than the "Hackers are evildoers, let's train marines to hack and go hack them" I'd expect from Bush.
Still, he (his campaign) could do a bit more research.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Basically, Bush has one goal, influence the world to his buddies, i.e. protect his interests. If that means using faith, money, oil, government or big industry, then so be it--just get reelected is his goal period. Where does tech fit in the republican agenda? Sorry fellas, but because of the tech boom, technology has been politically labeled as an empowering tool. People (those with simple minds) in power would obviously oppose technology influence as it's being played out today. Technology is currently a thing to exploit in the stock market--which is currently down; hence, it is not a republican agenda item As for the Kerry campaign, he supports empowering the people and tech, which is good, but again gets tied up in politic and law jargon. He's expresses too many details to his too many goals. Focusing on saying something like "Reduce technology operation costs and get people more access to technology" would say a lot instead of details.
The interview was telling, Bush doesn't care as the tech vote is like 0 to him, Kerry's cares causes he trying to get more exposure (i.e. nothing to do with tech).
Democrats vs. SuperDemocrats.
"we report, you decide"
people make fun of fox because fox does more in the way of telling us what to decide than it does in the way of reporting. Just because they've got a slogan doesn't make that slogan truthful.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
i know.. that's my point. that's what slashdot is doing.
Parent makes a good point, but I say don't leave. By all means, stay and debate if you have different views! Sure, you're going to get flamed now and then, but this IS the internet.
...
...we're in trouble
If we don't have dissenting voices, Slashdot would become nothing more than horrible jokes about ??? profiting from hot grits in Soviet Russia.
Your brain is not a computer.