Kerry and Bush Answer Questions on IT Industry

An anonymous reader writes "The questions were submitted by CompTIA (Computing Technology Industry Association) and each candidate's response follows. Read the responses at comptia.org."

Comments

screw both of them

[schnits0r]

The problem is that if everyone elects higher class, they will only look after the higher class anyways. It's clearly defined in this Mousland Speech here: The Story of Mouseland as told by Tommy Douglas, 1944 It's the story of a place called Mouseland. Mouseland was a place where all the little mice lived and played, were born and died. And they lived much the same as you and I do. They even had a Parliament. And every four years they had an election. Used to walk to the polls and cast their ballots. Some of them even got a ride to the polls. And got a ride for the next four years afterwards too. Just like you and me. And every time on election day all the little mice used to go to the ballot box and they used to elect a government. A government made up of big, fat, black cats. Now if you think it strange that mice should elect a government made up of cats, you just look at the history of Canada for last 90 years and maybe you'll see that they weren't any stupider than we are. Now I'm not saying anything against the cats. They were nice fellows. They conducted their government with dignity. They passed good laws that is, laws that were good for cats. But the laws that were good for cats weren't very good for mice. One of the laws said that mouseholes had to be big enough so a cat could get his paw in. Another law said that mice could only travel at certain speeds so that a cat could get his breakfast without too much effort. All the laws were good laws. For cats. But, oh, they were hard on the mice. And life was getting harder and harder. And when the mice couldn't put up with it any more, they decided something had to be done about it. So they went en masse to the polls. They voted the black cats out. They put in the white cats. Now the white cats had put up a terrific campaign. They said: "All that Mouseland needs is more vision." They said: "The trouble with Mouseland is those round mouseholes we got. If you put us in we'll establish square mouseholes." And they did. And the square mouseholes were twice as big as the round mouseholes, and now the cat could get both his paws in. And life was tougher than ever. And when they couldn't take that anymore, they voted the white cats out and put the black ones in again. Then they went back to the white cats. Then to the black cats. They even tried half black cats and half white cats. And they called that coalition. They even got one government made up of cats with spots on them: they were cats that tried to make a noise like a mouse but ate like a cat. You see, my friends, the trouble wasn't with the colour of the cat. The trouble was that they were cats. And because they were cats, they naturally looked after cats instead of mice. Presently there came along one little mouse who had an idea. My friends, watch out for the little fellow with an idea. And he said to the other mice, "Look fellows, why do we keep on electing a government made up of cats? Why don't we elect a government made up of mice?" "Oh," they said, "he's a Bolshevik. Lock him up!" So they put him in jail. But I want to remind you: that you can lock up a mouse or a man but you can't lock up an idea.

Re:screw both of them

[Profane MuthaFucka]

In Soviet Mouseland, the mice elected to the mouse government turn out to be cannibals. Sad, but true.

Re:screw both of them

[Country_hacker]

"The fundamental problem with representative government is that the people who would be best for the job least want it, and vice versa."

Re:screw both of them

[renehollan]

Write-in votes are not permitted in Canada.

A would-be candidate requires (at least this was the number around 1993) 100 nominating signatures from their chosen riding (rather like an electoral district) in order to appear on the ballot there. If a sufficient number of like-minded candidates from a common party meet this qualification in enough ridings, they can be listed under their party name as well, instead of as "Independent".

You'd think this would result in a very large number of candidates on the ballot, what with the low barrier to entry (well, the nominations, and the $1000 fee - almost entirely tax-refundable (you contribute it to your campaign for a $450 tax break, and at least half gets returned to the campaign after you file your paperwork -- all of it if you get 15% of the vote)).

Sadly, Canadians are so apathetic, that rarely do non-mainstream candidatates get enough nominations to appear on the ballot.

Of course, I'm quoting early 90's requirements -- they may have changed since.

Disappointing answers to a disappointing question

[Dachannien]

CompTIA asked both candidates about their stances on digital media and legitimate consumer use, and both candidates gave wishy-washy answers that indicated their favorableness to supporting the rights of consumers. But it's fairly obvious that they were both catering to their audience, having been tipped off by the nature of the question.

http://www.comptia.org/pressroom/election_2004.asp x#5

What should federal policy be toward protecting intellectual property on the Internet - recognizing the harmless role played by mere conduits - and facilitating the free flow of ideas based on those creations?

This just means that yet another opportunity to find out whether either candidate supports limitations on DRM/broadcast flag/DMCA is wasted. Why not ask a more pointed, but less coached, question? "Do you feel the DMCA has provided adequate, insufficient, or excessive protections to copyright holders?" "Do you support or oppose the mandatory compliance of electronic devices with the digital broadcast flag?" "Do you support or oppose the DMCRA?"

Kerry is a senator.

[DAldredge]

What bills has Kerry introduced to impliment his ideas?

Also, What bills has Bush asked the GOP leaders in congress to pass?

They say one thing and do another. Both major parties are full of people who would not know the truth if it hit them in the ass.

Did you notice the Bush war on Porn?

[DAldredge]

"My FY 2005 Budget would double funding for Justice Department programs that investigate and prosecute child exploitation and obscenity over the FY 2001 level. "

Notice how obscentiy doesn't have the world child in front of it? That is because the want to restart the 80's war on porn. Bush, like a lot of people on the right (and far left) have a major problem with porn and wish to use the goverment to get rid of it.

Google for "Protection from Pornograpy Week"

Re:Did you notice the Bush war on Porn?

[squiggleslash]

Could be read either way: "prosecute child exploitation and obscenity over the FY 2001 level" could be:

1. prosecute "child exploitation" and "obscenity" over the FY 2001 level.
2. prosecute child "exploitation and obscenity" over the FY 2001 level.

I don't think you can read too much into that. A better solution would be to look at what the Justice Department is doing now. By all accounts, the pornography industry - legitimate and illegitmate both - are extremely concerned about the rhetoric coming out of John Ashcroft's office.

Re:Did you notice the Bush war on Porn?

[DAldredge]

Protection From Pornography Week, 2003
By the President of the United States of America
A Proclamation

Pornography can have debilitating effects on communities, marriages, families, and children. During Protection From Pornography Week, we commit to take steps to confront the dangers of pornography.

The effects of pornography are particularly pernicious with respect to children. The recent enactment of the PROTECT Act of 2003 strengthens child pornography laws, establishes the Federal Government's role in the AMBER Alert System, increases punishment for Federal crimes against children, and authorizes judges to require extended supervision of sex offenders who are released from prison.

We have committed significant resources to the Department of Justice to intensify investigative and prosecutorial efforts to combat obscenity, child pornography, and child sexual exploi-ta-tion on the Internet. We are vigorously prosecuting and severely punishing those who would harm our children. Last July, the Department of Homeland Security launched Operation Predator, an initiative to help identify child predators, rescue children depicted in child pornography, and prosecute those responsible for making and distributing child pornography.

Last year, I signed legislation creating the Dot Kids domain, a child-friendly zone on the Internet. The sites on this domain are monitored for content and safety, offering parents assurances that their children are learning in a healthy environment. Working together with law enforcement officials, parents, and other caregivers, we are making progress in protecting our children from pornography.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim October 26 through November 1, 2003, as Protection From Pornography Week. I call upon public officials, law enforcement officers, parents, and all the people of the United States to observe this week with appropriate programs and activities.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-fourth day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-eighth.

GEORGE W. BUSH

Who makes this up

[cheeseSource]

The beginning of bush's second response:

"I support innovative communications technologies like Voice Over Internet Protocal (VoIP),"

Now, does anyone really think he knows what VOIP is, or even how to spell internet? His only evidence is that protocol is misspelled.

Seems like easy proof that someone else wrote the answers...

It would be more accurate to say staffers response

[dtolman]

Magazine interviews are commonly filled out by the candidate's staff. It would be more accurate to call this then the candidate's staff's response - probably based off the staffer's knowledge of the candidate's positions, the platform, or some other source. For all we know, the candidate's aren't even aware of this interview - do they even read these over before these things get published in their name?

Kerry got in trouble for this (common) practice a few months back, when a staffer wrote in (incorrectly) that he owned an automatic weapon he grabbed as a war trophy...

Re:Kerry will ban tech that violates the DMCA.

[Minna Kirai]

Judging from his gun record (banning tools because of how they are used) Kerry will go full force into banning things

What record? Kerry has never voted to ban any gun, except for the Brady Bill, which is something that President Bush claims to support also.

Kerry's got the NRA against him because he supported gun show background checks, and wanted to force manufacturers to include complimentary trigger locks.

Re:The replies...

[Edax Rarem]

Don't you think a more intelligent person could appoint a more intelligent staff?
W did nothing but drum up a bunch of good ol' boys that were his father's friends.
Those that are questionable:
Rice (playing the obsequious lapdog and ignoring her job so she can go on the campaign trail with W, and lying for him in front of the 9/11 commission ("there were no actionable items on that memo" Hey Condi, it is YOUR job to take those actions)) is obviously just along for the ride.
And I honestly can't figure out Powell. I used to think he would be POTUS some day, but I think W has ruined his career.

Let's face it.. W's staff have screwed up as much as, if not more that W has.

The world was better off when the worse thing the POTUS did was get a BJ in the OO.

Re:Kerry will ban tech that violates the DMCA.

[Minna Kirai]

1) If we wanted to read NRA.org websites, we could visit NRA.org. Link to them if you think it supports your position, but don't copy & paste. Sheer volune is no way to make a credible argument. Some of your copying is actually illegal infringement.

2) Some of those "FACTS" are lies, and none of them contradict my statement: The only guns Kerry voted to ban are guns that President Bush says should be banned as well.

That list is a standard dishonest tactic: Make a strong claim, followed by a huge volume of true facts with at least a peripheral relationship to the claim. Then state that you've proved your position, even though you've done nothing of the sort, and hope that people too lazy to read the whole thing assume you said something sensible.

3) One could make a fairly plausible slippery slope argument: "Kerry's positions are closer to a total gun ban than his opponent, so he will move us closer to an environment where a gun ban might pass". But instead of saying something reasonable like that, you just spit out a tremendous volume of unsubstantiable lies.

It's behavior like that which caused President Bush to publically resign from the NRA. Although he supports gun ownership rights, the NRA goes off on viciously false tangents and pretends they were actually part of the same thing.

They Left Out the Most Important Question

[clickster]

Where is the "vi or emacs?" question? What a waste of time.

Re:Kerry will ban tech that violates the DMCA.

[Minna Kirai]

The Most Sweeping Gun Ban Ever Introduced in Congress--Clinton Gun Ban "Reenactment" Bans Millions More Guns

For the last time, stop the plagiarism! If you think somebody else made your case better than you could, then link to it. Don't pollute slashdot with copies of NRA propaganda.

And one more time: Bush said he supported that bill! Either Bush was lying about that, or he is just as anti-gun as Kerry.

And one more time: Kerry never voted for that bill.

There is something funny about that bill, though. Of course it's obviously too vague to be effectively implemented. But it also reflects a special fear politicians have: the assasin's rifle. 5 years ago there was an uproar about the availiblity of the Barret 50, which reminded all the Washington people that they're never really safe.

One specific quote:Bans the three centerfire rifles most popular for marksmanship competitions: the Colt AR-15, the Springfield M1A and the M1 "Garand."

That's false. Yes, the AR-15 is banned, as is the M1 Carbine, which is a different, shorter weapon than the actual M1 Garand rifle. I also can't find anything in the text about Springfields. It would be pretty crazy if it actually banned those, because a Springfield is no different than any deer-hunting rifle.

Re:Disappointing answers to a disappointing questi

[Brandybuck]

While both did give wishy-washy answers, that's because they're politicians. But once you get past that, it's interesting to see that the candidate who gave the better answer was Bush.

Bush: "Blaming the technology does not address the issue. We must vigorously enforce intellectual property protections and prosecute the violations, not the technology."

In other words, fight copyright violations, not software. Isn't that what everyone has been saying here for the past half decade?

Kerry: "I am open to examining whether legislative action is necessary to ensure that a person who lawfully obtains or receives a transmission of a digital work may back up a copy of it for archival purposes or transfer it to a digital media device for the purpose of non public performance or display."

In other words, he's examining to see if it's okay for you to have a right that you already possess under Title 17!