Slashdot Mirror


Slashback: Electioneering, Blimps, Shuffling

Slashback is back after a long absence being devoured by gnomes. Read on below for updates on past Slashdot stories about the continuing Washington election brouhaha, the FBI's latest hunt for server logs, Photoshoppified GIMP, and more.

Let's get the politics out of the way.

The Washington state Republican Party has been working to prove that the election of November 2, between Democrat Christine Gregoire and Republican Dino Rossi, was too fraudulent to be trusted, given the small margin of victory by Gregoire (129 votes), and they want a new election. Hundreds of alleged fraudulent votes (mostly felons, but also out-of-state, duplicate, and deceased voters), uncounted ballots, unaccounted-for absentee ballots, and illegally counted provisional ballots comprise the bulk of the GOP's case. The trial begins May 23, and the judge expects it to last two weeks. The hearing to decide the burden of proof standard will be May 2.

Unctuous politicians relive their student-council glory days:

Jackson West writes "As it stands, two versions of the Electronic Engineering bill (discussed earlier on Slashdot) presented to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors have passed their 'first reading.' This means both the first, unamended piece of legislation, and an amended version that will "specifically exclude web logs, forums, opt-in email lists and postings on general web pages." The Rules Committee will consider the amended bill on Monday, with a final vote on both bills on Tuesday."

How to get attention, part IIVVIVIVM.

SanLouBlues writes "On March 30th, Slashdot reported on the FBI request for the logs of several radical-leaning sites. The Washington Post has an article about the man who was responsible for the posts which resulted in the FBI request. He claimed to have killed a cop in several forum posts."

Now on to the fun stuff!

Matt Omori writes to say that GimpShop, the recently mentioned version of The GIMP hacked to feel more familiar to users of Photoshop, isn't just for Linux and Mac OS X. "Yes, it's finally been coded for Windows XP. After lots of hard work, some people devoted to a website, plasticbugs.com, have coded GimpShop for Windows."

To use it, you'll need Windows XP, GTK+, and a reboot. However, I'd also like to point out a BigSven's comment about the themeability of The GIMP; it would be great to see GIMPersonalities of all sorts -- and it sounds like this can be accomplished with some XML editing.

Still looks actionable to me.

MrToast writes "The iPodLounge is reporting that LuxPro's Super Shuffle is back, but this time with slight alterations. The Super Tangent, as it is being called, has a slightly different button area and also has new headphones. Otherwise it appears to be identical to the iPod shuffle."

(The SuperShuffle disappeared from the Web site, and was reported as a hoax, shortly after it was mentioned in mid-March.)

Let's close on some uplifting news. Vaeske writes with more on my favorite futuristic means of broadband delivery, region-covering airships. "GlobeTel Communications Corp announced that they will be showing their prototype of the Sanswire One on April 12th. This "Stratalite" as they call it, will float in the stratosphere at 65,000 feet and provide line of sight communications to approximately 300,000 square miles, providing two-way high-sped communication. This project has attracted many high-profile NASA engineers to leave their posts for a position with GlobeTel. The military has also shown interest and was present at the GlobeTel Summit."

377 comments

  1. Let's get the politics out of the way by Bongo+Bill · · Score: 5, Funny

    Recounts: not just for Democrats anymore!

    --
    ...but is it art?
    1. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha ha! I think we can all agree that most politicans will do anything to get (re)elected, my friend. :D

      --Mr. Internet

    2. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Carnildo · · Score: 5, Informative

      And if you lived here, you'd be getting reports on the *exciting* hijinks:
      1) At least half of those "felon voters" who shouldn't have voted were juveniles when they were found guilty, and thus never had their voting rights stripped. Many of the others had their rights restored after serving their sentences.
      2) Someone is challenging the votes of around 15,000 voters on the grounds that they are illegal immigrants. The evidence? Their last names don't sound American enough.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    3. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's clear somebody can't take a joke.

    4. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by deserttrail · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Lets not forget that Gregoire didn't win that slim margin until after the third recount.

      --
      Be civil to all; sociable to many; familiar with few; friend to one; enemy to none. --Benjamin Franklin
    5. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by ahdeoz · · Score: 2

      Actually, it was a suspected fraudulent recount that gave the Democrat (Gregiore) the victory. An election official (you know, the ones who count the votes) was quoted as saying "third times the charm!" when his preferred candidate won after two other counts that had the Republican (Rossi) as winner.

    6. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by deanj · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      That's exactly what they were trying to do in Florida 2000. Recount, recount, and recount again until they get the result they want, and then declare victory. Oh, and act self-righteous if anyone questions what they did.

      Frankly, I hope it stays the way it is.... and that the Governor-select up there drives the whole state into the ground. It'd serve 'em right.

    7. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by pudge · · Score: 3, Interesting

      At least half of those "felon voters" who shouldn't have voted were juveniles when they were found guilty, and thus never had their voting rights stripped. Many of the others had their rights restored after serving their sentences.

      That's false. Some of them did turn out to be juveniles, yes, but it was not "at least half." Not even close.

      Someone is challenging the votes of around 15,000 voters on the grounds that they are illegal immigrants.

      I've never heard this, and if true, it has absolutely nothing to do with the GOP or Rossi. I met with the state GOP chairman last week, and we talked about the case, and it is in no way based on illegal aliens.

      Nice try, though.

    8. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by pudge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This has nothing to do with recounts. This is about challenging the result and having a new election, not recounting the past election.

    9. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, though, that Rossi, who was calling for Gregoire to just step down and concede the race on election day, when the race tally was appearing to be very close and Gregoire was behind by a relatively small number of votes...

    10. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Haha. Depends on what you're talking about. The totality of all the votes alledged to be improper, or the worst cases of certain small counties. In which case his allegation is close to what was recently printed in the Seattle Times.

      The fact is, the republicans list of improper voters isn't much, if any, more accurate than the various counties lists of proper voters. If they can't get it right at this late stage of the game, with all the heavy lifting done by the counties already, their expectation that the counties, which aren't as well funded as the Republican party, should have been able to do better is ludicrious on it's face. To say nothing of the relative sin of counting the vote that should be invalid versus the discounting of a valid vote.

      If Rossi by 49 is fit to be a duly elected governor, then that horrible bitch by 129 is at least as worthy. That said, they're both comtemptible douchebags. I can only assume both political parties are in silent agreement to make Washington so unlivable that all the transplants will be driven back home before they agree to resume sensible policies.

    11. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "The American electoral system is getting pretty lame. A whole lot of asses need to be soundly kicked and then tossed in jail forever."

      Uh, yeah, because the USA has an exclusive on this area of politics.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    12. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is the most amazing line of horseshit I have ever heard. +3 Interesting? C'mon, he or she is having a laugh at your expense. :)

      PS, thank you slashdot for hashing up some politics to get things fired. stories have kinda been suckin' lately, eh? Yeah... I've got your number.

    13. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by AstroDrabb · · Score: 1

      I am not a Rep. or Dem. so I am not showing bias here. However, do you have any valid links to _real_ evidence to your statments? No, Left leaning sites don't count.

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    14. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Miaowara_Tomokato · · Score: 1

      Are you a troll, misinformed, or just plain untruthful?

      Washington law forced the first recount because it was so close. There's a summary here.

      The initial count was performed by machine. The results of that count put Rossi ahead by 261. This was a small enough % of voters to force a second machine count.

      The results of this count (We're on Recount #1 now) placed Gregoire ahead by 42 votes. This of course prompted a recount demand from- guess who?

      Recount #2 - this one a hand recount - Gregoire defeats Rossi by 129 votes. Rossi then takes the case to the courts. Now go and draw conclusions.

      Disclaimer: I'm in Oregon, couldn't care less about who ends up winning, but I hate to see people misrepresenting information in such a way as the parent.

    15. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Mspangler · · Score: 1

      What annoys me is the assumption that the hand recount was somehow more accurate than the machine recount. I had to do a study of human-based QA for my employer a while back, and people just plane suck at that sort of thing.

      The correct answer was the margin of error (by people or by machine) was larger than the margin of victory. By a lot. Therefore, the election was a tie. The next step for a tie is to send it to the Legislature. Since that body is controlled by Democrats, they would have elected what's-her-name anyway. So, in the end she would have gotten the job anyway.

      (Besides, I really doubt the assorted felons would have voted for the ex-attorney-general.)

      Mike S.
      Soap Lake WA.

    16. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1
      Wow, I like the way you think. Why not wait until America's electoral fraud problems become the world's worst, and THEN fix them? Or why not wait until every other country fixes their electoral systems, and THEN deal with America's problems? That'll work. Right.

      There's nothing worse than people who try to ignore their nation's problems by pointing out that some other nation, somewhere, is worse. But hey, at least America isn't as bad as the Ukraine! Sure, every other western democracy has a superior system, but America is fine as long as at least one nation has a shittier democracy.

    17. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Darth+Muffin · · Score: 1

      Oh, come on. This election was recounted twice already (Republicans won the first two counts), at the request of the whining Democrats who put forth arguments very similar to the ones that are on the plate now.
      It's like dealing with my kid. He'll ask Dad, then Mom, then Grandpa, then Dad again until he gets an answer he likes at which point he'll stop whining.
      Basically what I'm saying is the Democrats are just as bad, if not worse...

      --
      Real programmers use "copy con program.exe"
    18. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by tardigrades · · Score: 1

      Its like when your adding a bunch of simple numbers then you do it again and get a totaly different answer. People make mistakes. So do computers but their mistakes are unbias. Rossi is one of three rep. i voted for. WA is majority dem so the fact that it was a tie tells you how well liked he is(for a conservative) around here.

      --
      really bored? My blog
    19. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by NanoGator · · Score: 0, Troll

      " Why not wait until America's electoral fraud problems become the world's worst, and THEN fix them?"

      Odd, I did't say anything like that.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    20. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by outZider · · Score: 1

      I wasn't aware that his post had anything to do with the GOP, just with the State of Washington.

      --
      - oZ
      // i am here.
    21. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      I've never heard this, and if true, it has absolutely nothing to do with the GOP or Rossi. I met with the state GOP chairman last week, and we talked about the case, and it is in no way based on illegal aliens.

      And you just took his word for it?

      Christ man, why don't you actually check some facts before posting?
      It's not like this guy doesn't have an interest in getting you to take his side....
      It's not like politicians have never lied before, especially republicans...

      That's false. Some of them did turn out to be juveniles, yes, but it was not "at least half." Not even close.

      Do you have a link or did a republican tell you this in another private, off the record conversation as well?

      Hey, if you turn out to be right that'll be an interesting suprise, but right now it seems pretty obvious that you don't have best BS filter around. Politicians seems to have enough trouble keeping their on the record lies straight, let alone being trustworthy in a face to face, 'I can deny it later', conversation. (This goes for both sides.)

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    22. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by pudge · · Score: 1

      And you just took his word for it?

      Why would he lie to his fellow Republicans about something that will be part of the public court record next month? Come on.

      As to the juvenile stuff, that was all in the news. They identified far less than half in their partial check, and I've not seen anything since that makes me think the problem is greater than identified here.

    23. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      That sounds good to me.

      I seem to think it is funny when a person doesn't agree with somethig or another group of people are making the wrong decisions and the purposed fix is to throw the baby out with the bath water and make a new one. While it might be fun to make a new baby, chances are you are still going to get fuck in the long run. I agree with the setement that somethign isn't working but i don't think we need a bunch of mechanics in there turning wrenches and making it work for them better. You know thats all the would happen.

      As for electorieal fraud, there are laws on the books already but are they being enforced? Why would they need changed? In most states if a person commits murder they have the pain of death as pounishment yet they still commit murders. What is passing another law or changing any laws goign to do to fix it? NOTHING.

      What we are doing right now is the only thing that will fix it. Making our voices known in a public/semi public way. As soon as politicians get the drift that we are not going to take it anymore, they will change a little. Then most likley someoen will come along with some extream wording and make us all look like loonies and it will be back to square one. Changing any law, proccedure, or requirement would do nothign because laws already exist that deals with it. I guess if you passed a law that would put a politicion to death if they were caught doing somethign illegal or maybe bar them from ever holding public office again somethign might change. I bet that it would only curve whats going on rather then end it though.

    24. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by FuegoFuerte · · Score: 1

      Umm... excuse me? Who's misrepresenting? The results of the 2nd count (first recount) places ROSSI ahead by 42 votes. Not GregoireTheBitch. And yes, GTB won the second recount by 129 votes. After King County dredged up enough ballots from who knows what house of fraud. What was it in all, 10,000 "misplaced" ballots that were found in King County after the first count, and then thrown into the lot? Ballots that could not be proven valid?

      The whole thing's a mess. Fucking revote already. And let's get it right this time, eh folks?

    25. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The whole thing's a mess.
      Hell yeah it is.
      Fucking revote already.
      Yes, please do. I think this would be by far the most entertaining option at this point.
      And let's get it right this time, eh folks?
      Not a chance in hell.
    26. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by damsa · · Score: 1

      No, that shows how hated Gregoire is.

    27. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by vistic · · Score: 1

      but right leaning sites do?

    28. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1
      I'm not saying you should make a bunch of changes just for sake of making changes. I think the laws against electoral tampering and electoral fraud just need to be more vigorously enforced. Hence my suggestion about kicking asses and putting lots of people in jail.

      If you ask me, Florida 2000, Ohio 2004, and Washington... whatever, are proof that the American Democratic and Republican parties both need to be disbanded and many of their members arrested. They're hideously corrupt, and neither side seems to see anything wrong with stealing as many votes as possible.

      In the long run though, maybe it would be wise for the government to have ZERO power over elections. It seems somehow... wrong for the state Republicans or Democrats to be able to run the elections in which their federal counterparts are running. Most non-shitty nations put an independent comission in charge of elections, and everyone watches them religiously for signs of bias. It's easy to enforce accountability on a feeble, powerless little comission, whereas it's very hard to enforce accountability on a nigh-omnipotent government beauracracy.

    29. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

      So what exactly were you saying? I suppose you were genuinely just pointing out that there are other nations with crappy electoral systems -- a fact which you KNOW everyone on Slashdot is already aware of? You were just looking for some commiseration about American citizens' lack of any real democratic representation?

    30. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by jabster42 · · Score: 1

      2) Someone is challenging the votes of around 15,000 voters on the grounds that they are illegal immigrants. The evidence? Their last names don't sound American enough.

      I have to reply to this.

      This is just not true. A fair number of registrations were accepted even tho the "I am an American citizen" box was not checked, and/or there was no SS-num given.

      For the record if you are not a citizen you can't vote. So if the registrant did not check that box, you CAN NOT register that person to vote! Simple as that.

      There's also several hundred people who listed their address as the state capital (or some similar state building). Which just screams fraud.

      Let us not forget that a lot of registration collectors were in fact being paid based on the number of registrations they brought in. Didn't matter if they were valid or not, just as long as you brought a lot in. I forget which state, but some one even received crack for registrations!

      -john

    31. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they've already tried to get a recount and have been denied. This is the backup plan.

    32. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I see.

      Challenging the result of an election and trying to overturn it with recounts is evil and should be stopped by the Supreme Court.

      Challenging the result of an election and trying to overturn it with recounts and then trying to have a new election is good and should be lauded.

      Clearly, it has nothing to do with whether the challenger is Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative. Thanks for clearing that up.

    33. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by hesiod · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > I am not showing bias here.
      > Left leaning sites don't count.

      I think you need to work on your bullshitting skills a bit more. There are only three sentences, but you still managed to contratict yourself completely.

    34. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > > A whole lot of asses need to be soundly kicked and then tossed in jail forever."
      > Uh, yeah, because the USA has an exclusive on this area of politics.

      These sentences imply that "a whole lot of asses" do NOT "need to be soundly kicked" "because the USA [does not have] an exclusive on this area of politics." (edited phrasing to remove sarcasm)

      So yes, you did say something like that, although not in quite so many words.

    35. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by pudge · · Score: 2, Informative

      I was making no value judgments of any kind about whether recounts or having a new election is good or evil. In fact, I never had a problem with having recounts, either in WA or in FL (in FL I merely had a problem with the uneven recounts, which seven of the nine Supreme Court justices also thought was wrong). I supported the right of the Democrats in WA to have their second recount, even though I thought the recount itself was poor.

      Further, I never said trying to nullify the election through a lawsuit is a good thing. I have since the beginning had mixed feelings about it. I think the case is very strong, but I am unconvinced it is the appropriate course of action. How to fix unreliable elections is a problem we don't have a good solution too, and this cure might be worse than the disease, even if it is justified.

      I made no value judgments, I merely corrected someone when they said it was about recounts, as I will do with you: the GOP never tried to change any result in this election with a recount, despite your implication to the contrary.

      I don't know why you and other people keep thinking and saying they did. The Democrats are the ones who did that, holding two recounts until they finally pulled ahead. There was never any recount when Rossi and the Republicans were behind.

      In other words, your entire post is a misrepresentation both of the facts and of what I've said and thought about them.

    36. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by pudge · · Score: 1

      No, they didn't. Plan A was to ask the legislature for a new vote, not a new count. Plan B is to go to the courts for the same thing.

    37. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Phillup · · Score: 2, Informative
      The evidence? Their last names don't sound American enough.

      You forgot the punchline. Dude's last name is: Ringhofer.
      Man says votes from illegal immigrants
      He culled list of voters for names that 'appear' foreign
      Jim Camden
      Staff writer
      March 31, 2005

      A Soap Lake man is challenging the voting credentials of hundreds of Washington voters, saying he thinks they're illegal immigrants who registered and cast ballots illegally.

      But Martin Ringhofer may have a hard time proving the challenges he has filed in Spokane and 10 other Washington counties.

      For one thing, there's the methodology of his research. Ringhofer said he obtained a list of people who registered to vote when they obtained or renewed a driver's license, then culled the list for names "that appear to be from outside the United States," particularly those that appeared to be Hispanic or Asian.

      "We eliminated names that clearly sounded American-born, like John Smith, or Powell," he said Wednesday.

      For another, there's the fact that many of the people on his list are citizens. In fact, The Spokesman-Review contacted a dozen of the 161 people on Ringhofer's Spokane County list, and all of them are citizens.

      ...

      "I was well aware of the fact that there would be errors," he said.

      But he doesn't see that as a problem because people on the list who are citizens can simply tell county officials that they are citizens and provide some proof. It's not his responsibility to correct those mistakes, he insisted, but the job of county elections officials.

      ...
      original article

      full text in this thread
      --

      --Phillip

      Can you say BIRTH TAX
    38. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "These sentences imply that "a whole lot of asses" do NOT "need to be soundly kicked" "because the USA [does not have] an exclusive on this area of politics.""

      Nope. Doesn't imply that at all.

      Try one more time. ;)

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    39. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      " I suppose you were genuinely just pointing out that there are other nations with crappy electoral systems -- a fact which you KNOW everyone on Slashdot is already aware of?"

      Close. I was pointing out that the USA isn't the only one that should be focused on when cleaning up politics. The way the original statement was phrased, it sounded like the USA was the sole problem.

      Piece of advice: Next time, ask question first, then go on rant.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    40. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Miaowara_Tomokato · · Score: 1
      You are right, I misread my source - the text is as follows:

      When she was 261 votes behind Rossi after the first count, Gregoire called the race a virtual tie. At 42 votes back after the first recount, she said it was, in fact, a tie.


      It is however an honest mistake and not misrepresentation. I take it from your tone that you're looking to start a flamewar rather than an insightful discussion, so I'll leave this thread to you from this point. Though I think it was around 561 ballots that King County found, which is remarkably dissimilar to 10,000. I could be wrong again though- I'd recommend checking a reputable news source, and not just what some random citizen (me) has to say.

      Though I do find it humorous that your argument nearly mirrors those from the Left about the 2000 presidential election. I have a feeling you weren't pulling for a "re-do" in that situation.
    41. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by hesiod · · Score: 1

      I tried again and came to the same conclusion. If that is NOT what you meant, what was your point?

    42. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "I tried again and came to the same conclusion. If that is NOT what you meant, what was your point?"

      That the USA shouldn't be the sole target of a political cleanup.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    43. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by hesiod · · Score: 1

      The person you replied to never said that it should. That is where the confusion arises.

    44. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      Fair enough.

      Good day.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    45. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by juan2074 · · Score: 1
      That said, they're both comtemptible douchebags.

      That could also be said about the two mainstream candidates for U.S. Senate (this past election). Both Patty Murray and George Nethercutt are not worthy to represent us, don't care what we need or want, and only want to bring glory to self.

      Why can't we have better choices for our elected officials in the upper house? Why are we scraping the bottom of the crap barrel?

    46. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by juan2074 · · Score: 1

      Gregoire was more of a bitch when she was the Attorney General. As a governor (for the time being, at least), she seems less bitchy than average. Or maybe she is a little wary after Carly Fiorina lost her cushy job. Remember: Tone down the bitchiness.

    47. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by juan2074 · · Score: 1

      The Seattle Weekly appears to agree.

    48. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by deserttrail · · Score: 1

      Let me start by saying that I don't really care which party wins the election. They're two sides of the same coin, IMHO.

      Also, third count, second recount, sorry, my mistake.

      Lets recap though:
      -261: Virtual tie.
      -42: Tie.
      +162: Gregoire is clearly the winner and Rossi should just drop it (not a direct quote, but Gregoire did say as much).

      I mean come on, WTF!?!

      --
      Be civil to all; sociable to many; familiar with few; friend to one; enemy to none. --Benjamin Franklin
    49. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't say I disagree. But with politics being what it is, I suppose it's understandable how it evolved from the blatant mudslinging we're enjoying anew, to smokey backroom deals out of sight.

      Historically speaking, I guess I can't even say it's as bad as it has ever been, but it's pretty fucking unacceptable none the less.

    50. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Prod_Deity · · Score: 1
      From juan2074's article http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0445/041110_ news_election.php

      During the budget debate, it was, "Don't raise taxes during a recession."

      During the gubernatorial campaign, it was, "Twenty years of Democratic control of Olympia has ruined the state's economy--it's time for

      a change."

      I tend to agree, the last Dem Governor really screwed things up, but I'm willing to see how Gregoire works out.

      /truly non-partisan

    51. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by grammar+fascist · · Score: 1

      > I am not showing bias here.
      > Left leaning sites don't count.

      I think you need to work on your bullshitting skills a bit more. There are only three sentences, but you still managed to contratict yourself completely.


      You might want to work on your logic. Not wanting information from "left-leaning" sites does not imply "right-leaning" bias. It's more likely he wants unslanted facts, and brought up "left-leaning" sites because they're the ones likely to support his parent poster's allegations.

      Think! This is Slashdot - news for nerds - is it not? Aren't nerds supposed to be logical?

      --
      I got my Linux laptop at System76.
    52. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > Aren't nerds supposed to be logical?

      Yes but to be truly logical you have to be fair to both sides of an argument and take them based on their merits of truth, regardless if the source happens to have said some extremely stupid shit in the past. Yes, you have to "consider the source," but even if it's a slightly questionable source, you can't just dismiss them out of hand. What if "the press" is all in on a big conspiracy with the gub'mint? Then these "left-leaning sites" may be the only place the info is available. The idea is laughable, but I don't know for sure that they are wrong, so I can't logically assert that they are wrong. How's that for an understanding of logic?
      (What do you mean "crap?")

    53. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 1

      Rosi was the GOP candidate for Washington State Governor. The GOP is very very very involved in this squabble, at the local, state, and national level. As are the Democrats.

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    54. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 1
      Let me explain: Dino Rossi, the "Olypia Outsider" who spent 19 1/2 years in the legislature, is upset that the laws regarding elections -- laws he help shape and which he could have tried to change if he didn't like them -- resulted in his losing the election. I'm taking the FACT that he never tried to change the election laws as PROOF that Dino was A-OK with the law as it stood before the election, and the FACT that he's sueing to change the rules after the game is over by trying to force a new game (new election) as PROOF that he's a hypocrit.

      "WTF?!?" I'll tell you WTF: the Washington election law assumes that a manual recount will be more accurate than a machine recount. Like it or not, that's what the law assumes. So Gregoire's 162 vote victory with a manual recount is, BY LAW, more accurate than Dino's previous 261 vote lead. THAT'S WTF, and if Dino doesn't like it he should have changed the election laws when he had a chance.

      Funny how the judges are "activist" and should be removed when they rule with the law and against the GOP, but they're just doing what the people want when they rule against the law and for the GOP. When the GOP loses this one, watch for the judges involved to suddenly become "activist."

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    55. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 1
      As near as I can tell, there are only two groups who consider Gregoire a "bitch": Smokers and Republicans.

      Well, I'm not a smoker, and I'm not a Republican, and I happen to like her. A lot. And I consider Dino a hypocrit, but he's a Republican so I repeat myself.

      BTW, I offer proof that Dino's a hypocrit: his campaign ads calling him an "Olypia outsider" after 19 1/2 years in the legislature are proof enough of that, let alone his suing for a new election because he suddenly does't like the election laws he had 19 1/2 years to change. Can you offer any evidence, let alone proof, that Gregoire's a bitch?

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    56. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 1
      What annoys me is the assumption that the hand recount was somehow more accurate than the machine recount.
      Yeah, and that really annoys Dino, too. Too bad you're both SOL. Washington State Law assumes the hand recount is more accurate. So, by law, it is. Sorry, but if you don't like that then the time to change the law is BEFORE the election (e.g., sometime in the 19 1/2 years "outsider" Dino was in the legislature) not in court AFTER the election.

      Rick D.

      Maple Valley, WA (for non-residents, about the most pro-Republican area in King County)

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    57. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by deserttrail · · Score: 1
      Just a couple of nits:
      1. I never once saw any material claiming Rossi was an "Olympia Outsider" (Where is this Olypia place you keep talking about?). This could be because neither canidate thinks it's important to compaign on the Eastern side.
      2. Rossi was first elected to the legislature in '96. Maybe my math's a little off, but that doesn't seem to come out to 19 years.
      And about election law, please see this statement by someone who knows more about this kind of stuff than I do.
      --
      Be civil to all; sociable to many; familiar with few; friend to one; enemy to none. --Benjamin Franklin
    58. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 1
      1) Just about all of Dinos TV ads and bulk mail flyers mentioned that he was a "businessman" not a politician.

      2) I could be wrong about the 19 1/2 years; that's a number I heard several times during the campaign, and I never heard another figure.

      Sam Reed is a Republican, although he's the most neutral Republican I've ever seen, and the link you point to says nothing about the manual recount, it only addresses the next (last?) step in the election, litigation. He says Dino has a right to sue. Big deal, this is America -- EVERYBODY has a right to sue. Well, everybody rich at least.

      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    59. Re:Let's get the politics out of the way by deserttrail · · Score: 1

      Actually, any registered voter has the right to contest an election on any one of several grounds. It sounded to me like you were saying the Rossi had no real right to contest the election (the "if he didn't like THE LAW he should have changed it" statements), forgive me if I misread.

      Again, since Eastern Washington pretty much always votes red, we don't see a lot of ads for state-wide campaigns. Even if it were up for grabs, King county has more people that ALL of E. WA, so they still only have to worry about the West. In short, I, for one, did not see all these ads claiming that Rossi was not a politician (maybe I just don't watch that much TV, or the right shows).

      This whole thread pretty much illistrates why I don't get into politics. Everyone's so emotional about it. No offense, but your first post sounded like you were practically foaming at the mouth. I'd have been much more accepting of your views if you had said something like:

      I see you aren't too familiar with WA state election law. You see, the law (notice the lack of capitals) states that if the initial count has a difference of less than 2000, a recount is required. Further, if that count has a difference of less than 150, then a manual recount is required. The manual count is considered the "final" count. I hope that clears up any questions you have.

      Then my reply would have probably been:

      Ah, I understand now. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

      See how the exchange was simple, quick, and pleasant? Instead, you had to go on your anti-Dino tirade, which really gets you nowhere (with me anyway; I have already said that I don't care which canidate wins). It actually (surprise, surpise) puts people off and puts them on the defensive. So I, under the impression that you were saying the Rossi shouldn't be able to contest the election, just found the first thing from a (percieved) authority saying that he did, in fact, have that right.

      --
      Be civil to all; sociable to many; familiar with few; friend to one; enemy to none. --Benjamin Franklin
  2. GimpShop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, maybe I can figure out the Gimp now. then I can do cool things with my images.

    1. Re:GimpShop? by Arcane_Rhino · · Score: 1

      Does anybody know who designed Wilbur? (I think that is his name.) Having generally no need for either Photoshop or Gimp, I made the investment of time - back when it was more than a simple package install - to install and use Gimp based entirely on that awesome dog.

    2. Re:GimpShop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who created wilbur?

      Probably Jimmac, if it wasn't him he is likely to know who it was. http://jimmac.musichall.cz/

      If you want to make an effort to find out for yourself you might check the gimp cvs logs

    3. Re:GimpShop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Wilber the GIMP was designed by TigerT.

  3. Mostly fellons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful


    that would be 10% of the US population

    1. Re:Mostly fellons by ACNiel · · Score: 1, Insightful

      That would be more like 100% of the US population.

      Everyone is a felon in the country. Convicted felons are a different story.

    2. Re:Mostly fellons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bye bye karma

    3. Re:Mostly fellons by CSMastermind · · Score: 1

      That graphic you linked is misleading. With the exception of Russia, the other countries listed are much smaller than the US and they all have a dissimaliar set of laws. What's no legal in the US may be legal in Europe and vice versa. Not to mention this may just show that the US is tougher on crime or that crime is more reported, as the page notes.

    4. Re:Mostly fellons by conway · · Score: 2, Insightful
      And 89.7% of all statistics are false

      The stats you link to show that 23 million crimes were commited, not that 23 million people were involved! Ever think about the fact that criminals tend to do a _few_ crimes before getting caught? It's only for "large" crimes (murder, rape, etc.) is it likely that the crime was commited only once. If a guy is caught stealing cars, he probably has done it quite a few times. Finally, criminals tend to get out of jail, and go back to doing more crime. Again, more than 1 per person.
      So, if each criminal does on average, lets suppose, 10 crimes, that's only 1% of the population!

    5. Re:Mostly fellons by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "Everyone is a felon in the country. Convicted felons are a different story."

      Stupid copyright law!

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    6. Re:Mostly fellons by Kell_pt · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's not really that misleading. According to this, the US total population is close to 295.823.632 individuals. According to the above study, 23.677.800 crimes. That's roughly 8% crime/person rate.

      Take Portugal, with its population of nearly 12.000.000 inhabitants, and 363,294 felons, which amounts to about 3%.

      Now, that's a pretty big difference. You'll find similar figures on other countries.

      Crime stems from your problems with poverty and lack of socialist structures. It's a dog eat dog world.

      --
      "I don't mind God, it's his fan club I can't stand!" E8
    7. Re:Mostly fellons by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1
      While that graph is pretty useless, I have seen the stats several times before that the US has the highest % of people in prison in the world.

      Not really sure what the orginal point was, just clearing things up; I think that might have been the point he was after.

    8. Re:Mostly fellons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      1% of the population is in jail !

      nearly double China's prisoners

      free at last, free at last !

    9. Re:Mostly fellons by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It also stems from a willingness to declare trivial acts "crimes" and villify and prosecute them far beyond anything sanity would deem reasonable. What is it, half of the USA's prison population is now there on drug charges? And probably half of remainder is there indirectly because of Prohibition II. The report is misleading because it does not define 'crime'.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
    10. Re:Mostly fellons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Crime stems from your problems with poverty and lack of socialist structures. It's a dog eat dog world.

      Unfortunately there is also crime inflation. Just like grade inflation makes the worth of higher grades questionable, the severity of the felony crimes is actually inflated. Many misdemenors were civil violations previously, and many felony crimes were misdemenors. This tendency to make the severity of the offense inflated to a felony seems to be a reaction to what the public concieved as a loose justice system that lets off too many people. Hence to get tough on crime, we make the offenses into a higher class of crime than previously, then bargain down to a lessor charge that is easier to get a conviction on. And we add a host of new crimes each year for behavior that was never previously criminal. Not to mention the cross jurisdictional crimes. For example car jacking is a federal crime. The justification for having a federal crime is because the car could be easily sold across state lines, and therefore the Interstate commerce class of the constitution is stretched to allow this to become a "federal case". RICO was originally meant to bust orgainzed crime, but is most often used on suspected petty drug related offenses, particularly if a large sum of money is seized. Our system is like an overripe piece of fruit. It may look good on the surface but the interior is rotted. Most of the crimminals in US jails are there because of what is in my opinion over zealeous law enforcement. And our convicted in error rate appears to be increasing. I say appears to be because many of the tests like DNA analysis didn't exist previously and are being used to good effect to help wrongfully convicted persons gain release from jail. We seem to have lost the public sentiment that used to be expressed by: Better to let 100 guilty men go free than jail one innocent man.

      But that is just my opinion. Posted anonomously so the FBI can request the slashdot weblogs!

    11. Re:Mostly fellons by fafalone · · Score: 1

      There are approximately 5.6 million Americans who have served time in State or Federal prison either presently or at some point in their life (2001), which is 2.7% of the general population. Based on these rates and the growth of the rate, ~6.6% of people will serve state or federal prison time in their life. Source.
      This incarceration rate is shamefully the worlds highest, exceeding even brutal dictatorships and communist states like China. This is largely do to incarceration of non-violent drug offenders.

    12. Re:Mostly fellons by zerblat · · Score: 1

      Yeah, here's a list of prisoners/100,000 people in different countries.

      --
      Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
    13. Re:Mostly fellons by squiggleslash · · Score: 1
      What's no legal in the US may be legal in Europe and vice versa
      But that's the rub, isn't it?

      I don't have much of an objection to stripping voting rights from murderers (not that I advocate it either.) But as the list of laws grows, the proportion I'm comfortable with the idea of vote stripping dwindles.

      I personally believe that Nixon's great achievement for the Republicans was to identify and concentrate on criminalizing a large section of society that generally voted Democratic and did something that a lot of people were uncomfortable with, even if it had nothing to with them - that is, recreational, consenting, drug users. When you make voting dependent on a lack of felonies, you give politicians a good reason to abuse their legislative and executive powers.

      I'm not sure what the solution is. A constitutional amendment is the usual way to deal with such things, but it's an obvious trampling on "States Rights", so I can see a large amount of opposition, especially today with the Democrats being won around to SR, and Republicans traditional, if fair-weather, supporters of it anyway.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    14. Re:Mostly fellons by man_ls · · Score: 1

      I'd argue that the definition of crime is implied and understood as anything that, according to the laws of the country you are residing in, would land you in jail.

      Granted some of the things that are defined to be criminal, might not necessarily be immoral. Take, for instance, recreational drug use. I am strongly opposed to this type of behavior, personally, but people can argue various different viewpoints. Bottom line, however, is that if there are laws on the books against it, and you do it anyway, you've committed a crime.

    15. Re:Mostly fellons by Dyolf+Knip · · Score: 1

      Except when the laws are too numerous to be known by anyone. Or too all-encompasing or poorly written to not be disobeyed. Or contradictory, such that it becomes impossible to obey one law without breaking another. All of these things and more have happened. Remember, premarital sex was illegal in half a dozen states until 2003. Do the millions of people who violated those laws count as criminals? Again, for a study like this to be at all meaningful in the sense we are looking for, you have to take a standard set of 'crimes' and then count up those. Otherwise you throw the variable of 'what is a crime?' into the mix, and that's just bad science.

      --
      Dyolf Knip
  4. Slashback is back! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But I got a -

    "Nothing to see here - Move along"

    Oh the irony!

  5. Rejected Slashback: Allume's JPEG compression by Kris_J · · Score: 2, Interesting
    That 20-30% JPEG compression system mentioned on Slashdot a while back is out. I'm getting an average of about 21% on all my JPEGs, except CMYK ones -- they don't pack.

    Implementations are currently limited to a simple (Windows?) archive package (which doesn't appear to do any other file types any better than the previous version). I'm hoping for a Firefox image plugin and a Pocket PC port myself.

    1. Re:Rejected Slashback: Allume's JPEG compression by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Funny

      SLASHBACK:
      That section of Slashdot.org that directly links Windows executables without warning.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
  6. Airships... by ImaLamer · · Score: 5, Funny

    On a completely un-related note; last night I had some kids convinced that the Statue of Liberty had those spikes on her head to protect NYC from Nazi airships during WWII!

    1. Re:Airships... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 3, Funny
      You are a dangerous man, Ima. Very funny!

      Kids these days... We knew the airships were a "Great War" item, that passed (gas) with the Hindenburg.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:Airships... by shadowbearer · · Score: 1

      Drinking in young people's bars can be quite a bit of fun, eh? ;-)

      SB (every web-enabled cellphone should have snopes.com as it's homepage, heh ;)

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    3. Re:Airships... by VAXcat · · Score: 1

      Heck, when saving Private Ryan came out, I had a bunch of 20 somethings convinced that I watched the Normandy Invasion live, on color TV, relayed by satellite, as our troops were landed by helicopters and the Nazi gun emplacements were attacked by our fleets of jet bombers launched from our nuclear aircraft carriers...and none of them even realized that Normandy was 8 years before I was born.

      --
      There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
    4. Re:Airships... by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > none of them even realized that Normandy was 8 years before I was born.

      Did you tell them how old you were?

    5. Re:Airships... by VAXcat · · Score: 1

      Well, not just then, but they'd been working with me long enough to know that I wasn't over 53 years old (heck, that was in 98, and I'm still not 53 years old).

      --
      There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
    6. Re:Airships... by hesiod · · Score: 1

      Fair enough :) The rest should have tipped them off anyway...

    7. Re:Airships... by feloneous+cat · · Score: 1

      Statue of Liberty had those spikes on her head to protect NYC from Nazi airships during WWII!

      I dunno... you might poke someone's eye out...

      --
      IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
    8. Re:Airships... by BranMan · · Score: 1

      Actually, several navys used airships for anti-submarine work and surveillance during WWII.

    9. Re:Airships... by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1
      Well, yeah. NON-rigid blimps!

      Don't forget Barrage Balloons - Strung up over london to tangle Stukas and HE-111's in the dark!

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
  7. Link to GimpShop developers site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant
  8. more geekdom? by kloidster · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Yet more levels of geekdom? How far does the rabbit hole go? I should have taken the blue pill...

  9. Eaten by gnomes? by winkydink · · Score: 1, Funny

    So we're reading gnome-vomit? Or did it return via the other end?

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    1. Re:Eaten by gnomes? by RidiculousPie · · Score: 1

      No, miguel refused the patch ....

      --
      ah, mod points ... now where is my crack?
  10. Fun stuff was best by QuantumG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    GimpShop is cool. General themability of GIMP is even better. Of course, now that we've started down the path of making GimpShop people are going to whinge (don't they always) that GIMP doesn't have all the features of Photoshop. For those people I have two suggestions: code them, or pay someone to code them.

    Stratalites are damn cool. You can use them like train stations to space. Get in your ground blimp, fly up to station 1. Get in your high altitude blimp, fly up to station 2. Get in your supermassive low pressure blimp and fly up to station 3. Get in your rocket and launch your ass into space.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
    1. Re:Fun stuff was best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "that GIMP doesn't have all the features of Photoshop. For those people I have two suggestions: code them, or pay someone to code them"

      I have a third alternative, quit being an OSS zealot and just buy a copy of photoshop if you really need it that badly.

    2. Re:Fun stuff was best by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And what if you need some feature that Photoshop doesn't have? You have to beg Adobe to code it for you or use a non-integrated third party tool. If all the Photoshop users would stop paying Adobe, pool their money and hire developers to make GimpShop do everything they want, it would be a better image manipulation program than Photoshop within a year. But people would rather be slaves to a proprietary software company than co-operate with each other. It's like unionisation. People would rather keep how much they earn secret in the hope that they're getting paid more than their neighbour than join together and demand better conditions for everyone.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:Fun stuff was best by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "For those people I have two suggestions: code them, or pay someone to code them."

      Or, if they need the features like I do, they can simply buy Photoshop. Somehow I doubt that $600 will hire enough programming time to address all of it. (Not to mention the time it'll take to code and test it.)

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    4. Re:Fun stuff was best by alizard · · Score: 1
      Stratalites are damn cool. You can use them like train stations to space. Get in your ground blimp, fly up to station 1. Get in your high altitude blimp, fly up to station 2. Get in your supermassive low pressure blimp and fly up to station 3. Get in your rocket and launch your ass into space.

      Why bother with a separate rocket or station 3? if your superblimp can get to space, why not just keep going using whatever ion drive rocket engine got it to space and orbital velocity in the first place?

    5. Re:Fun stuff was best by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "And what if you need some feature that Photoshop doesn't have? ... But people would rather be slaves to a proprietary software company than co-operate with each other."

      Oh right.

      a.) Photoshop has a hell of a lot of features. It's difficult to imagine that short of automation (Photoshop is scriptable) that a feature is that necessary.

      b.) If they really really needed one, they might as well look into making a PS plugin. Hopping from GIMP to PS for one feature is not desirable.

      Those peeps, in that rare circumstance, have options. The GIMP isn't necessarily the ideal means of doing it. You cannot use that to measure people's sheep-ti-tude.

    6. Re:Fun stuff was best by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      I know students who do tutoring for $20/hr cause it's the only work they can find. They'd much rather be doing programming. That's 30 hours of development. Now multiply that by all the people who would like to switch to GimpShop but want all the features of Photoshop. Get organised people!

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    7. Re:Fun stuff was best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shouldn't you be hooking into your space tether after the last blimp?

    8. Re:Fun stuff was best by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Well obviously because it can't. A blimp big enough to float in the upper atmosphere would be broken apart by the winds in the lower atmosphere. So you need to stop and change blimps.. and that means you need to have stations along the way to keep and maintain the blimps (not to mention the possibility of assembling or at least inflating them there in the first place). And yeah, an ion drive that is either powered by solar power or by beamed energy is definitely a good idea for getting a blimp up to orbital velocity.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    9. Re:Fun stuff was best by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      It's hard to write plugins for Photoshop (or any proprietary app) because often all the other plugins are proprietary (so you don't have anything to work from) and the interface that is actually exposed to plugin writers is not sufficient. You do make a good point though, thank you.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    10. Re:Fun stuff was best by NanoGator · · Score: 0, Troll

      "They'd much rather be doing programming. That's 30 hours of development. Now multiply that by all the people who would like to switch to GimpShop but want all the features of Photoshop."

      I appreciate the spirit, but I don't think it's all that practical. I mean, who's going to free up $600 and wait for days/weeks/months for a feature that might get developed?

      Alternatively, though, do you remember the bounty idea a few years back? Imagine if there was a list of features/goals for GIMP. Each of those features has a donation bin or something like that. Users can Paypal a few bucks towards the features they really want. When somebody completes that feature, they get whatever that feature collected. People vote for their dollars. Programmers have a strong incentive.

      Good?

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    11. Re:Fun stuff was best by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1
      GimpShop people are going to whinge (don't they always) that GIMP doesn't have all the features of Photoshop. For those people I have two suggestions: code them, or pay someone to code them.

      Many of the people doing the whining are people who already use Photoshop, and only whine because others keep trying to convert them to GIMP. So suggesting they pay, or even the more silly idea of coding it themselves, doesn't really fit.

      I support GIMP, but still use Photoshop, and get sick of people claiming that GIMP is an OK alternative for most Photoshop users. GIMP is like Photoshop Elements for the more techical-minded, at the moment. And I don't think that is going to change quickly, even if lots of money is throwen at it; it took Photoshop a long time to get where it is today, and they have a full-time, professional development team.

    12. Re:Fun stuff was best by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      100's of mostly novice programmers isn't going to be the same as several very good programmers. The idea here is to develop a good Photoshop alternative, not something the equiviland of a bad Lotus Notes clone.

    13. Re:Fun stuff was best by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I had this idea once. Basically you have a bugzilla which is for members only. You have to pay $10/month to be a member and for that you get 10 votes every month. You can file a feature request (or a bug) and that costs 1 vote. You can vote for feature requests that other people have filed (costs as many votes as you want). The money goes to a team of developers who work on whichever feature request has the most votes. You can also buy more votes for $1 each (so 10 votes a month is like the minimum).

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    14. Re:Fun stuff was best by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "It's hard to write plugins for Photoshop (or any proprietary app) because often all the other plugins are proprietary (so you don't have anything to work from)"

      Fair point.

      "the interface that is actually exposed to plugin writers is not sufficient."

      Unless you've actually explored writing a Photoshop plugin, this is not fair to say. I have written plugins for various apps before and some SDKs are good, some aren't. On the flip side, having source code is nice, but if you have to change it in order to make your feature work, then you risk being boned when a new version comes along.

    15. Re:Fun stuff was best by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      I hear what you're saying and agree with you. But that last crack about the full-time, professional development team.. it's not an entirely accurate metaphore. I mean, when programmers get paid fulltime they're not very productive. They're MUCH more productive when they get paid by the hour, and they're significantly more productive when they're coding on something they're passionate about. Also, theoretically, popular open source projects like The GIMP have 10 times more people working on it than could be justified to work on a commercial project. So even if they are only working part time, there's 10x as many people working part time and they're more productive cause they're working on things they're passionate about.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    16. Re:Fun stuff was best by QuantumG · · Score: 1
      100's of mostly novice programmers isn't going to be the same as several very good programmers.

      1995 just called, they want their argument back.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    17. Re:Fun stuff was best by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I have a better idea, Why not just implement the feature, tally up the hours and expected pay per hour, then take donations until the amount is reached. Now once the amount exopected has been reached, release the code for the feature (s) and let someone using it maintain it.

      The argument seems to be that nobody has made it because nobody has paid for it but, if someone makes it people will pay for it because they already pay adobe but, they don't want to spend thier money for someone to make it later down the road because they want it not but, if they had the feature you would use it. I think with all the "quality" programers out there without a current job, They could easily make somethign like this and do what was suggested then add the "made feature X for program Y" to thier resume

    18. Re:Fun stuff was best by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      I know while many OS projects may seem like many chefs. I'm sure in most projects, there are a small group of core programmers that write most of the major parts.

    19. Re:Fun stuff was best by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1
      The thing about a professional development team, is that they are managed by someone. So in a case like Adobe developing Photoshop, the people running the Photoshop project can tell the developers what features are required. In a project like GIMP, it's the developers that are calling the shots in terms of deciding features and prorities.

      Developers oftern have different ideas about what is important, and may quite oftern lack a clear vision of the product when in comes to software who's workflow/goals are not something the developer is familar with, as is probably the case with something like Photoshop (as opposed to Apache, for example).

    20. Re:Fun stuff was best by Dot.Com.CEO · · Score: 1

      That's the way cedega works.

      --
      Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
    21. Re:Fun stuff was best by leaping_laughter · · Score: 1

      What's insufficient about the SDK? I wrote a couple filters for yucks, years ago, and found the process pretty straightforward. After Effects SDK is more fun, though.

    22. Re:Fun stuff was best by WhiplashII · · Score: 1

      To be honest, there are 2-3 people that think this would work for every hundred that don't. Yes, hopefully that is just because the few won't reveal their technology - but it is more likely that it just doesn't work.

      The reason it is considered unlikely is that hypersonic drag goes up with velocity cubed, while lift goes up with velocity squared. That means that as you go faster, the problems get harder. (The lift is included only to show that you cannot "fly to orbit". Blimps presumably won't use lift.)

      The only reason I can see that it may be possible (if very unlikely) is that the drag of a blimb would scale with the frontal area, not the volume. So a blimb the size of a Death Star (but cigar shaped) would have lots of mass available for engines, power, and fuel and a disproportionally small cross section.

      I don't see how that will be built, though.

      --
      while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
  11. Hey... by ImaLamer · · Score: 3, Funny

    Don't blame me, I accidentially voted for Pat Buchanan
  12. I for one welcome... by j14ast · · Score: 3, Funny

    the return of our slashback overlords.

    Anyone find it funny how the r's are trying this now? After all the hay they mad from the d's attempt?

    --
    Damn the man!
    1. Re:I for one welcome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Anyone find it funny how the r's are trying this now? After all the hay they mad from the d's attempt?

      What the hell are you talking about?

    2. Re:I for one welcome... by jimlau · · Score: 1

      I think he means r as Republican and d as Democrat. Took me a minute, too.

    3. Re:I for one welcome... by deanoaz · · Score: 0

      Let me take a stab at it. I think he means, "Does anyone find it funny that the Republicans are contesting a close election that they lost, even after the Democrats tried to do the same thing unsuccessfully."

      --
      If 'the people' in Amendment 2 are 'the state' then Amendments 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10 benefit the state, not you.
    4. Re:I for one welcome... by NaDrew · · Score: 1
      Let me take a stab at it. I think he means, "Does anyone find it funny that the Republicans are contesting a close election that they lost, even after the Democrats tried to do the same thing unsuccessfully."
      Hypocritical, yes. Expected, certainly. Funny, not really. In Florida 2000, the strategy of "keep counting until our side wins or we buy a judge" sure worked.
      --
      Vista:XPSP2::ME:98SE
    5. Re:I for one welcome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone find it funny how the r's are trying this now? After all the hay they mad from the d's attempt?

      They don't actually care one way or the other. They're basically trying to desensitize the public to the whole "alleged election fraud" thing. Clinton was and always will be the the last elected US president. From here on out, it'll always be close but you will be able to count on the Republicans to mysteriously pull ahead in the wee hours after the polls close. The Democrats might occasionally win but only when the Red's have f**ked things up so bad that they need to cool their heels for a while.

    6. Re:I for one welcome... by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      I seriously doubt the Democrats will be that bad at it.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
  13. That's funny by fm6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When they thought they had won the Washington Governor's election, and the Demos complained about votes that should have been counted but weren't, the Repubs sneered at them as poor losers.

    1. Re:That's funny by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      That is because it is only WRONG when the other side does/wants $IT. :)

    2. Re:That's funny by a+whoabot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The new(?) Republican thing is double standards. They get away with it because the left(not saying the Dems are the left) is toothless and because they themselves don't see it as double standards but just one standard: whatever helps "the right" is good, whatever helps "the left" is bad. Everything's a war for them nowadays and everything's fair in war.

    3. Re:That's funny by pudge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, no, they didn't. They said the law should be followed. Which is exactly what they are saying now.

      It's the Democrats who have changed their tune, previously saying the law should be bent to count every vote, and then once they took the lead, said the law should be followed strictly.

    4. Re:That's funny by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Maybe that's the Repub line now. Definitely wasn't back when they'd thought they'd won the initial vote. I remember official releases that said things like, "The Democrats never consider an election final until they've won."

    5. Re:That's funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, Rossi very openly called for Gregoire to concede the race, for the good of the office, or whatever it was, when Gregoire was still behind and asking for a recount and all that.

      Funny, also, in that Gregoire *DID* follow the legal steps...

      I want to know the party breakdown on ALL contested ballots and voters.

      Looks to me like the law *was* followed. It's sour grapes by Rossi and the Washington Republicans.

      Get over it.

      Move on.

      Oh, I live in Oregon.

    6. Re:That's funny by pudge · · Score: 1

      I think we're talking about two different things. The Republicans certainly did complain about the Democrats and their fishy behavior: continually finding new votes, trying to bend the rules (such as getting a list of provisional voters, which federal law prohibits), and such.

      And certainly, the rhetoric was heated on both sides: the Republicans called on Gregoire to concede, and the Democrats responded in kind. Then when the results flipped, so did their rhetoric.

      I was unhappy with the GOP rhetoric (and as a result I joined the unsuccessful opposition to Chris Vance's re-election as party chair), but I thought you were implying the Republicans were trying to deny legal votes at the time, which I have no knowledge of. They may have disagreed about which votes should count, but that's different. Yes, Larry Phillips' vote was questioned, but so what? The Secretary of State said no new votes should be included in the recount, and his vote was not included. The issue went before a court to be decided, and they were included. I don't see this is as a big deal either way; when you said such votes "should have been counted," that is an interpretation of an apparently unclear law, that even Sam Reed wasn't sure about, which is why it went to court.

    7. Re:That's funny by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The new(?) Republican thing is double standards.

      Not that I want to defend the Republican party (not while it's being controlled by theocrats and neoimperialists, anyway), but double standards are politically universal.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    8. Re:That's funny by tweek · · Score: 1

      I don't like either of the parties but back in November or some such I posted the exact same thing. Democrats bitch and bitch about uncounted votes and I warned that the same rules they want are fair game for the "other" side.

      I just keep warning all of the republicans I know that this path they are going down now (catering to the extreme right) is going to bite them in the end when the same laws they pushed through are used against them.

      It never ceases to amaze me when politicians are so shortsighted that they pass x law to keep appease y crowd and keep the job for a few more years. Then 10 years later x law is used to oppress y crowd and everyone bitches. I'm waiting for the day that donating to the Christian Coalition is deemed sponsoring terrorism because they gave money to the Eric Rudolph Anti-abortion foundation which blew up a clinic with 30 people inside.

      I swear to $DIETY that New Hampshire has is right when the state legislature is only allowed to meet for a very brief time period (I think 2 weeks?).

      Can't fuck up much in two weeks. Then again politicians never let me down in the sheer mass of things they can fuck up on a daily basis.

      --
      "Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
    9. Re:That's funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you hate America so much?

    10. Re:That's funny by WhiplashII · · Score: 1

      Not even to mention the fact that if the election was THAT close, obviously the people will be aproximately equally served either way...

      --
      while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
    11. Re:That's funny by miraclemax · · Score: 1

      double standards are politically universal in a two party system.

  14. A Word of Warning by ewhac · · Score: 5, Informative
    Adobe likes to think it has software patents on certain user interface elements of Photoshop. Macromedia was sued not long ago for emulating some of these elements in their Flash authoring tool (no idea how that suit resolved). Adobe are also litigious so-and-sos who are all too willing to harass people in defense of their intellectual "property".

    So if Adobe feels even the slightest bit threatened by it, expect the project to receive a nastygram.

    Schwab

    1. Re:A Word of Warning by NanoGator · · Score: 1, Troll

      " Macromedia was sued not long ago for emulating some of these elements in their Flash authoring tool (no idea how that suit resolved)."

      Macromedia counter-sued under the claim that Adobe violated some of their patents. They traded licences or something or other and it was dropped. (Macromedia may have had to make changes, but my memory is fuzzy.)

      "Adobe are also litigious so-and-sos who are all too willing to harass people in defense of their intellectual "property"."

      So long as Adobe is within their rights, that's the court's fault.

      "So if Adobe feels even the slightest bit threatened by it, expect the project to receive a nastygram."

      Maybe, but they can't claim ignorance. Adobe's suit was widely publicized. Whether Adobe's claims are legit or not, I really don't care. It strikes me that they should follow the spirit of patent law regardless. Patent protected? No prob, innovate. Do things a little differently, improve upon them, and suddenly you have stronger reasons for your development to be adopted. Additionally, you don't have to fear nastygrams! Two birds with one stone, yadda yadda yadda.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:A Word of Warning by Sebastian+Jansson · · Score: 1
      Maybe, but they can't claim ignorance. Adobe's suit was widely publicized. Whether Adobe's claims are legit or not, I really don't care. It strikes me that they should follow the spirit of patent law regardless. Patent protected? No prob, innovate. Do things a little differently, improve upon them, and suddenly you have stronger reasons for your development to be adopted. Additionally, you don't have to fear nastygrams! Two birds with one stone, yadda yadda yadda.
      The problem with Gimp is that they have innovated instead of copied. That is a problem because some people are used to the way Photoshop works, that's why GimpShop was made.

      It's like the MP3 patents. Sure, it's possible to innovate instead of infringing on patents, and therefore we have the free Ogg Vorbis format. The problem is that most of the portable music players only support the MP3 format. Innovation doesn't help when you have to deal with vendor lock-in, which is true for both file formats and user interfaces.
    3. Re:A Word of Warning by NanoGator · · Score: 0, Troll

      "The problem with Gimp is that they have innovated instead of copied. That is a problem because some people are used to the way Photoshop works, that's why GimpShop was made."

      Uh, no, that is not GIMP's problem. Innovation typically implies they made something better. Not even close.

      "The problem is that most of the portable music players only support the MP3 format. Innovation doesn't help when you have to deal with vendor lock-in, which is true for both file formats and user interfaces."

      Vendor lock-in? No, there are two problems there:

      1.) Vorbis requires significantly more processing power than MP3s to decode. A lot of MP3 players out there simply do not have the processing power for it.

      2.) MP3 is the de-facto standard. The market decided its dominance.

      The patents on MP3 have only made Vorbis more viable, not less.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    4. Re:A Word of Warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And teh copying isn't the fault of GIMP either. Users complain that GIMP is top hard to use because it doesn't look like Photoshop.

      At least it'll shut the dumb shits up when Adobe sues GIMPShop to look 'n feel.

    5. Re:A Word of Warning by bogado · · Score: 1

      Tell me exactly what is better? What is better for one person may be worst to other and vice-versa. There is no universal standard for better, well at least on subjective stuff like UI design. That's why closed source does usuability test (similar to those made by SUN to create the gnome HID).

      --
      []'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins

      ^[:wq

    6. Re:A Word of Warning by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      " What is better for one person may be worst to other and vice-versa. There is no universal standard for better, well at least on subjective stuff like UI design."

      You'd think fewer people would complain if that were the only problem.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  15. Activist Judges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder what the Republicans will say about activist Judges is the WA case goes in their favor ....

    I love the smell of hypocrasy in the morning.

  16. GimpShop by michelcultivo · · Score: 0

    GimpShop is the Photoshop aniquilator, every user that I showed GS wanted a version to Windows. And now let's see my IT Directory ordering to remove every PhotoShop on my network :)

  17. I don't understand the acrimony directed towards by MarcoAtWork · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the gimpshop guy by the gimp developers: they chose a license for Gimp that allows this kind of modification, the guy was definitely within his rights to go ahead with it whether or not Sven (or others) would've preferred him to 'work with them and not fork things'.

    Rather than focusing about his 'rude' modus operandi Gimp developers should notice the HUGE positive reaction to his modification by 'normal users': if instead of sitting in their ivory tower and going on about 'Gimp is not PS, we won't change how the UI operates' the Gimp devs listened to users who have been begging for a PS-like UI for YEARS there wouldn't have been any need for a fork (they've also been beggin for adjustment layers as well, but who knows when that will happen).

    I thought that this is what Open Source is all about: if you don't like it, fix it and release it (like this guy did).

    If he had 'followed due process' he'd just have been ignored because 'Gimp is not Photoshop'. This seems like a case of damned if you do (you shouldn't fork the gimp) and damned if you don't (you're not a coder, so you have no right to complain).

    --
    -- the cake is a lie
  18. Two-way high-sped communication? by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 3, Funny
    two-way high-sped communication
    Is that where one of the parties is on Ritalin and the other one is on Adderall? I'd hate to have to keep up with that conversation.
    --
    "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
    1. Re:Two-way high-sped communication? by Elenthalion · · Score: 0

      HAHAHA! That's wicked awesome!

    2. Re:Two-way high-sped communication? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      for people with adhd, hi-speed is normal. ritalin etc. slows them down --- the opposite effect to someone with a "normal" brain chemistry

    3. Re:Two-way high-sped communication? by Elenthalion · · Score: 0

      Huh? -1? why?

  19. The bad publicity from the election lawsuit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    will harm the Republican party in Washington far more than they will possibly gain.

  20. This page was blatantly fabricated by theiving gno by farquharsoncraig · · Score: 1

    Slashback is back after a long absence being devoured by gnomes.

    Gnomes? I want to know what happened to my cadra of angry stealth attack llamas.

    Insensitive clods.

  21. If you want to fix voting problems, vote 3rd party by Future+Man+3000 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Most of these problems are old ones, and the people you (may have) voted in last time have had ample time to make sure enough voting machines were out and triple check the felon lists.

    The fact of the matter is that neither side really seems to care about fixing the system when they are in power. Perhaps they feel they have more important things to do than perserve voting integrity, but each side seems to gloat when it looks like the other is getting the short end of the stick.

    It does not serve democracy to prop up this failed process; it doesn't even really serve the candidates. All it does is turn something that should represent the will of the electorate into an elaborate game of legal manipulation and shenanagans, and the only way to stop it is to have overwhelming and incontestible voting returns in 2006 for the Rastafarian candidates. Thank you.

    --

    I never vote for anyone. I always vote against.
    -- W.C. Fields

  22. Sloppy reporting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I started reading the Washington Post story about the cop killer, and everything seemed fine until one paragraph stuck out like a sore thumb:

    His eyes are not a madman's eyes, but they look dilated, nothing but pupils, and when he turns to face you, he stares. In the antebellum courthouse, surrounded by sheriff's deputies, the stare is merely awkward. Imagine, though, those black eyes at night, with him holding a gun.

    What the fuck is that doing in a newspaper? It's the newspaper's job to report the facts, not demonise him. Is this what passes for journalism in the USA these days?

    1. Re:Sloppy reporting by Sloppy · · Score: 2, Funny
      No, I'm Sloppy reporting. You must be new here.

      Seriously, though, it's pretty weird that some editor didn't notice that paragraph. Imagine those black eyes at night, looking at a computer screen.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    2. Re:Sloppy reporting by murphj · · Score: 4, Informative

      By William Booth
      Washington Post Staff Writer
      Monday, April 4, 2005; Page C01

      Section C in the Post is the Style section. This is a feature story, not a news story. Feature stories frequently contain prose like that. It would not have appeared in a story in the A section.

      --
      SONY. Because caucasians are just too damn tall.
    3. Re:Sloppy reporting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this what passes for journalism in the USA these days?

      Unfortunately yes. I had to stop reading the sentence before.

      He is tall, lean and jailhouse pale, and with his jutting chin and beaked nose, he looks avian, like a heron or crane, all angles and limbs.

      Another bad novelist stuck in a a newspaper job. The photo included in the article is much more authoritative than this self masturbatory prose. The WP should move this idiot over to Slate as fast as possible.

    4. Re:Sloppy reporting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does killing a cop have to do with the Fall 2005 collection or The Incredibles coming out on DVD?

      It is nice to know that instead of moving what passes for journalism in the style section to the features, they are moving the features to the style section.

    5. Re:Sloppy reporting by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      while one of the responses makes the someqhat adequate point that this article was written in Section C of the paper, i tend to agree with the AC.
      What does he think of the coverage so far? "I don't think they like me," Mickel says. And in this moment, he seems like a big, dumb, very dangerous kid.
      While he is dangerous, I don't think the Army Rangers accept big dumb kids into their ranks.

      Anywho, Printer Friendly Linkage

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:Sloppy reporting by gnovos · · Score: 1

      His eyes are not a madman's eyes, but they look dilated, nothing but pupils, and when he turns to face you, he stares. In the antebellum courthouse, surrounded by sheriff's deputies, the stare is merely awkward. Imagine, though, those black eyes at night, with him holding a gun.

      I dunno, it gets even scarier without the eyes...

      His eyes are not a madman's eyes, for you see, they have been plucked out, and when he turns to face you, he can not stare. In the antebellum courthouse, surrounded by sheriff's deputies, the unstare is merely disturbing and macabe. Imagine, though, those black sockets at night, with him holding a gun.

      I'd go for the one with the eyes.

      --
      "Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
    7. Re:Sloppy reporting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck is that doing in a newspaper? It's the newspaper's job to report the facts, not demonise him.

      Welcome to Slashdot Mr. Winkle. Sorry? ... Oh, 40 years give or take a few... Yes, based on your comments, I'd say you've been asleep for about 40 years.

    8. Re:Sloppy reporting by Alsee · · Score: 2, Funny

      I hear coverage of the next presidential election will be moved to the Style section as well.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    9. Re:Sloppy reporting by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      While my sampling is only one, the only ranger I ever met tried to get me to sign up for one of the idiot amyway clones.
      He did a few other things to prove he wasn't exactly a thinker. He was classic middle iq jock.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
  23. Electronic Engineering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it really that easy to confuse "Electioneering" with "Engineering"?

  24. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    This is what open source is about. Please don't let people's egos get in the way of making great software.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  25. More Offtopic... by MisanthropicProgram · · Score: 1

    How the fuck am I going to spend ALL that time reading the links in the article and post before /. moves on to another?!? Hmmmm?!?!
    In other words, sir, your post is just as on topic as everyone else's who really didn't read ALL of those links.

  26. soundpolitics.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The definitive source for facts about the problems with the WA election.

    1. Re:soundpolitics.com by Bad+Boy+Marty · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that, by definition, "sound politics" is an oxymoron. And, even if it isn't, such a thing has never been attained in the history of humankind.

      --
      RHCE; are you certified? Karma: ambiguous.
    2. Re:soundpolitics.com by pudge · · Score: 1

      In case you weren't sure, the "sound" refers to Puget Sound.

    3. Re:soundpolitics.com by Bad+Boy+Marty · · Score: 1

      I had figured that out.

      But it makes such a wonderful oxymoron.

      Or did that escape your notice?

      --
      RHCE; are you certified? Karma: ambiguous.
    4. Re:soundpolitics.com by pudge · · Score: 1

      I had figured that out.

      That was unclear. Excuse me for trying to be helpful. The next time you appear to not understand something, even if you ask a direct question, I'll assume you really understand it and are just screwing around.

    5. Re:soundpolitics.com by Bad+Boy+Marty · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. I think that was out of line. I was aware of where the name came from (though I don't consider it to have any relevance to its humor as an oxymoron), stated as much, and explained why I made the comment anyway. To reiterate, I find it a very humorous oxymoron. I expressed no indication of lack of knowledge (which does not indicate correct knowledge, of course).

      I'll assume you've just had a wee bit too much caffiene, and leave it at that. But if you ask me a question, I won't assume you're just screwing around.

      --
      RHCE; are you certified? Karma: ambiguous.
    6. Re:soundpolitics.com by pudge · · Score: 0, Troll

      I think that was out of line.

      What a coincidence: I thought the post I was replying to was out of line. Funny that!

  27. 90.5 FM by schnogg · · Score: 1

    And here in East Lansing, it is conveniently already tuned to NPR!

    --
    i just put in /. and nothing happens - ??
    1. Re:90.5 FM by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      Isn't that the station out of MSU in Ann Arbor? It's 104.1 where I'm usually at. (Muskegon and Grand Rapids). There's also 88.5 out of Grand Valley, but I tend to prefer Michigan Radio's coverage.

      Not that we get much of anything out of it this week, with the spring membership drives on all the NPR stations. Ah well, it'll be back to normal tomorrow evening.

    2. Re:90.5 FM by tardigrades · · Score: 1

      Forget NPR. here in the land of Rossi we have KEXP 90.3 the worlds only radio station that doesnt suck.

      --
      really bored? My blog
    3. Re:90.5 FM by wolfgang_spangler · · Score: 1

      90.5 is out of East Lansing

      91.1 is out of Flint

      91.7 is out of Ann Arbor

    4. Re:90.5 FM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uhm... isn't NPR on 91.7FM in e. lansing? (i went to school there, back in the dim, and misty)

      -ac msu alum

  28. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by k98sven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    they chose a license for Gimp that allows this kind of modification, the guy was definitely within his rights to go ahead with it whether or not Sven (or others) would've preferred him to 'work with them and not fork things'.

    Noone implied he didn't have the legal right to do so. He's not violating the law, just unwritten rules of etiquette; It's polite to try to cooperate before forking.

    The real issue here, which the poster mentioned, isn't that he forked Gimp, it's that it seems he may have changed parts which didn't have to be changed in order to achive what he did. That's doing a disservice both to both parties, since it'll make it more difficult to merge in his changes into the Gimp, and newer changes to the Gimp into GimpShop.

    If he had 'followed due process' he'd just have been ignored because 'Gimp is not Photoshop'.

    What exactly do you base this on? The Gimp developer who posted seemed quite open to the idea. There's a big difference between developers not considering requests from users and developers not considering an implementation of said request.

  29. You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't... by CSMastermind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not the system; it's the people who are using it. Both the politicians running it and the general public who buys into it. Here's a summary of what's wrong :

    The media
    The media in the USA is insane. They're the single biggest lobby group in America today and not only that but they're also in the director's chair because they control what politician's get elected. Everyone should go look up a documentary called Orwell Rolls in his Grave. Now a day's, all the media is controlled by a few companies thanks to deregulation by the FCC. And they can use the media to say whatever they please, and put down the opinions of anyone who disagrees.

    The politicians
    Basically all the politicians are rich white men. They got their wealth from inheritance. If they worked for it then they got some real lucky breaks. George Washington in his farewell address warned of political parties and named them one of three things that could break the American system. And guess what...they are. Right now there are two major political parties. It's impossible for two parties to accurately represent the broad spectrum of views held by millions of people. What more these two parties have near complete control so you're either part of them or you aren't a politician.

    The people
    We're the ones who let this happen and what more most people voting don't vote based on issues. Those who do don't check their sources and are very poorly misinformed. It's almost exactly like Fahrenheit 451 (The Ray Bradbury book....so help me god if someone mentions Michael Moore) where people vote based on who looks best, without even listening to them.

    End conclusion? If you want something to change do something about it, do it a little at a time, learn the facts, read your history books and be sure to watch your politicians closely.

  30. Eaten by Gnomes.. by marcushnk · · Score: 2, Funny

    Slashback is back after a long absence being devoured by gnomes.
    Lucky you don't use KDE.. Otherwise it'd be Dragons... 0.o

    --
    "Consider how lucky you are that life has been good to you so far. Alternatively, if life hasn't been good to you so far
  31. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by Speare · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Okay, I'm not a fan nor a foe of the GIMP dev team, but I have to ask the same thing Sven said: how long do you think GimpShop guy is going to keep up a modern version of the modifications? Will there be a GimpShop 2.6? 2.8? 2.10? 3.0? If he has the personal dedication to rewrite GimpShop mods into each "end user" release of the GIMP for just a year, I'll be impressed. Itches fade and some itches aren't worth scratching for long, no matter how many other non-technical users are clamoring for the implementation.

    Sven had some good points: if the GimpShop were done "right" with the architectural aids that the GIMP already offers, then the work would be a lot more manageable, and would end up being a long-life supported option, even after the GimpShop guy was no longer itching to keep it up. However, in the one little posting linked, Sven said he got no reply-- it's hard to tell if the GimpShop guy was ignoring Sven for past sleights and attitude, or just didn't get the messages, but either one is pretty believable.

    I do think the GIMP development team needs to realize that as the premiere image editing package for the OSS world, that they have a certain obligation that comes with it. Whether you like it or not, you're a role model, so you should act like one. Listen to users who don't code. Do some of the heavy lifting for those users. Incorporate features which interested Photoshop users want. Spend time on doing a few more things in a slightly more leader-compatible way, and drive adoption forward. You can't expect outsiders to become developers in the huge GIMP codebase to scratch their itch, because the key people who have the key feedback are not coders. Approach your userbase with magnanimity and humility instead of arrogance and disapproval.

    --
    [ .sig file not found ]
  32. What the.. by StikyPad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    5 minutes ago:
    Slashback: Electioneering, Blimps, Shuffling
    Posted by pudge on Thursday April 07, @10:20AM
    from the like-a-rolling-stone dept.

    Now:
    Slashback: Electioneering, Blimps, Shuffling
    Posted by timothy on Thursday April 07, @10:20AM
    from the like-a-rolling-stone dept.

    Who is this mysterious pudge? And why was he quickly and quietly removed as the author?

    1. Re:What the.. by rzebram · · Score: 2, Informative

      I believe pudge (Chris Nandor, http://sourceforge.net/users/pudge/) is one of the Slashdot programmers (if you look in the slash CVS you can see he has commit access). As for why he was removed, your guess is as good as mine.

    2. Re:What the.. by pudge · · Score: 3, Informative

      I started the article and handed it off to timothy, who then forgot to change the ownership to himself. And as I've edited hundreds of stories on Slashdot, I am not that mysterious ...

    3. Re:What the.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I've edited hundreds of stories on Slashdot

      Too many jokes... must hold it in...

    4. Re:What the.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *boom*

    5. Re:What the.. by troc · · Score: 1

      I find you truly mysterious, but that's because you are the last person to join slashdot before I did :)

      --
      Troc's dubious podcast and blog: http://www.trocnet.net
  33. Pudge, Get Over It by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When Pudge returns for a SlashBack, only the "Republicans wronged" phase of the contested WA governor election gets press. When their candidate was ahead by a statistically identical margin, after the first count, Pudge didn't seem to care how small it was. Even though the Republican margin, 46 votes out of 2.9 million, 3x smaler than this Democrat's final "small margin". And all the Republican rhetoric was "it's over, we won", and "Democrat crybabies just get over it". Especially poignant was the Republican candidate's public speeches demanding the Democrat stop the challenge, for "the good of the state". Now that it's months later, the good of the state demands a Republican challenge. Apparently, the good of the state of Washington originally demanded that hundreds of Seattle (Democratic) absentee ballots be rejected, including that of Seattle Councilman Larry Phillips. Isn't Pudge just a Republican partisan hack, sliding promotion of his side's weaselly campaign into the first story of a SlashBack peppered with other news of broad appeal?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Pudge, Get Over It by bonch · · Score: 1, Insightful

      To be fair, Pudge is the only conservaive editor on Slashdot. On a site where any random Bush joke, no matter what the topic, gets an upmod, calling someone who falls on the other side of the fence a "partisan hack" simply because you disagree with him is just as bad as if I called you a partisan hack for being a Democrat (don't know if you are one, just using an example).

      This kind of stuff is normal for political parties, because political parties are nothing more than big lobbying groups. Like the RIAA and other lobby groups, they try to push legislation through that helps them, they sue people to push agendas, and they brainwash people into thinking a certain way. In that way, they're also very similar to most organized religions.

      That's why I'm an independent and refuse to affiliate myself with either party. Not only because I happen to hold views from both sides (which confuses their lackeys...both sides have accused me of being partisans for the other side), but because people don't realize how fragile their own perceptions are, and when you fall in with a group, you tend to start thinking like them.

      I should say that there are good Republicans and good Democrats. Like any group, a lot of the individuals you'll meet are just good people. But the leadership and the hardcore types live in their own world of good guys and bad guys, and their perception of the world is colored by their group's agendas. I think this nation would improve greatly with the abolishment of the two-party cabal. At the least, a vocal third-party (and not Ralph Nader) could affect a lot of change for the good and keep both parties on their toes. Just my $0.02.

    2. Re:Pudge, Get Over It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      where does the story say the Republicans were wronged? i think you're reading way too much into it. isn't a trial to nullify a governor race sortof a big deal? what would YOU have written the story to say?

    3. Re:Pudge, Get Over It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And, it would be great if the judge does rule a new election should take place, that new candidates must run as well, ala a new election. Give it a two-step process: 1) open election in Sep-Oct range, 2) run-off election between the top two vote getters, a month or so later. And Rossi and Gregoire can't run.

    4. Re:Pudge, Get Over It by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      When a "liberal editor" (what is that? can you check for a tattoo on their neck, like a bishop for their diocese?) posts a sneaky, one-sided partisan hackery, it will be time to out them as a partisan hack. Which you and I, both members of no political party, are each qualified, and entitled, to do. Having been made a "Foe" by Pudge (thereby justifying my calling him a Freak) during a threaded debate during the election last year, I watch him carefully. His partisan hackery is dangerous, because he posts blatantly biased "reporting" in favor of his heroes in the Republican Party. While the anti-Bush posts come from posters with no special privilege to form the discussions on Slashdot. Hardly surprising, when even the broad American demographic supports Bush by under 45%, the least-popular second termer ever, trailing the second-least by a quarter of his support, and that includes lots of people who get only TV news, unlike Slashdotters.

      So yeah, it's predictable that Pudge will post Republican propaganda. That doesn't make it any better, though it does make it easier to spot. And given the attitude of Slashdotters these days towards Bush, his partisan hackery is not only wrong, but unwelcome.

      "The facts are clearly biased against George W Bush" - As Seen On _The Daily Show_

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    5. Re:Pudge, Get Over It by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Reporting that Republicans have filed a lawsuit over a slim Democrat margin, on a "Nerds" website, is obvious promotion of the Republicans suing - repeating the propaganda. Slashdot's format doesn't usually let editors publish stories they write themselves - they usually have to select from the stories submitted by "outsiders". SlashBack is an exception. And it hasn't been used in months. So it shows up just in time for Pudge to report Republican news barely relevant to the interests of this site's readers. If this trial were relevant at all, it might be appropriate to publish a submitted story about its outcome. But instead, it's obviously an abuse of Pudge's privileged position to publish Republican propaganda.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    6. Re:Pudge, Get Over It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's predictable that Pudge will post Republican propaganda

      do you have any examples? you have not given one, including this story, except for some stupid stuf about whether a user submitted the story or not. bfd.

  34. let's get the noise out of the way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this noise is important, because...?

    why not waste your time thinking up a fucking 5 mark system to tell people that attempt posting stories to your site why they've been rejected.
    start with the sad story similar to adequacy.org's that sounds oddly similar to the politicians song:
    it's my god damn boys club; you go to hell.

    maybe I should sign up and subscribe to this site so my voice can be heard; and not so anonymous.

    bring yer cowerdus talk over here; boy

  35. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by mr_burns · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah, even given the argument that they didn't want to have the gimp look like pshop, they should have at least fixed the interface they DO have.

    It's BAD. I've been trying out GIMP on and off for many years and I always left with a very bad "if I have to work this way every day for the next X years until they fix it, I'll go totally mad" feeling.

    The job of running this project is not to hold it back, it's to maintain and improve it. If you say no to things out of stubborn personal preference you're not doing your job: You're getting in the way of people who want to do the work.

    I feel the same way about this fork as I do about x11.org. It was a long time coming.

    --
    "Let him go, Ralph. He knows what he's doing." --Otto Mann (simpsons)
  36. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by SiliconEntity · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...because 'Gimp is not Photoshop'.

    Shouldn't that be 'GIMP Is Mot Photoshop'?

  37. Sorry, but this was a couple of years ago. by ptbarnett · · Score: 3, Informative
    "On March 30th, Slashdot reported on the FBI request for the logs of several radical-leaning sites. The Washington Post has an article about the man who was responsible for the posts which resulted in the FBI request. He claimed to have killed a cop in several forum posts."

    The Washington Post article was about a murder committed in November, 2002. The subsequent postings were six days later. The FBI is likely to have been disappointed if they just now made requests for server logs, after two years have elapsed.

    I remember this particular incident, because I got a call from the FBI about it. The perpetrator sent his "manifesto" to an email address associated with a website I no longer maintain, apparently from an outdated list. The address got so much spam that I was simply using incoming messages to train SpamAssassin's Bayesian filter, then dumped them into the bit-bucket.

    But, someone else forwarded it to the FBI (as I would have done, if I actually received it). Since my contact info was available for my domain name, I got a call from an agent who was trying to find any link between the recipients and the sender.

  38. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    The problem is this feature of open source projects that everything has to go through some dictator before it goes to the users. The users should be decided which features and good and which features are bad. By that I mean that forks like this should be encouraged and users should actually support the software they choose so the best software has more resources.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  39. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 1

    I do learn the facts, I do read my history books, and I do watch my politicians closely.

    And I'm getting the hell out of here!

  40. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by pudge · · Score: 2, Informative

    Basically all the politicians are rich white men. They got their wealth from inheritance.

    One of the people in this race was a woman, and the other was a lower class guy who worked his way through college.

    Washington in his farewell address warned of political parties and named them one of three things that could break the American system. And guess what...they are.

    We've had two-party rule since Washington left office. If it hasn't "broken" the American system in the last 200+ years, what makes you think it will happen now?

    We're the ones who let this happen and what more most people voting don't vote based on issues.

    Actually, this was one of the most issues-oriented campaigns in many years in WA. It focused primarily on the size of the government budget and taxation.

    But hey, don't let me dispel your illusions ...

  41. Like... by ImaLamer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Do you mean anything like in Pakistan where there is no age floor for sex acts? Where you can legally sleep with 3 year olds?

    Oh, sex outside of marriage is illegal, punishable by death though.

  42. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Kell_pt · · Score: 1

    >> We've had two-party rule since Washington left office. If it hasn't "broken" the American system in the last 200+ years, what makes you think it will happen now?

    Actually, it makes you think it took 200 years to subvert everything. Which is why gradual changes are so hard to detect. In the span of so few generations, so much has been lost.

    --
    "I don't mind God, it's his fan club I can't stand!" E8
  43. Is this really a surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You DO realize that neither of them actually care about anything but winning, right?

    Both of them adopt whatever standards happen to be most convenient at the time.

    Sometimes, people refuse to do refuse to go along with this. But they don't appear end up in the party leadership because they don't win if they give in when they're wrong.

  44. Killed a cop by conway · · Score: 1

    The slashdot blurb is quite misleading. If you RTFA, you notice that not only did he "claim to kill a cop", but made a specific reference to a specific murder of a specific cop. (Who actually was killed).
    Now, whoever posts info in internet forums admitting he committed a specific murder, with details, is so stupid that he probably deserves what he'll get.

    1. Re:Killed a cop by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      Mickel is someone that believes that only through blood can Freedom be obtained. He believes that there is serious problems with the government and Corporations. Something that a lot of slashdotters rant about.

      While I don't think killing a cop was the right thing to do, nor should Mickel be demonized for waging a revolution.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    2. Re:Killed a cop by Legion303 · · Score: 1

      Yes he should.

      He tries to start a revolution by shooting a random cop in the back in Buttfuck, CA? Those are some brilliant tactics.

      Bear in mind that I used to run copkiller.org and advocated killing cops in self-defense. Even *I* recognized that not all cops are bad. This guy's just a fucking moron. He'd better hope he gets the death penalty, or he'll find out how abusive cops can really be.

  45. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Michael Moore ROX!

  46. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by _Hiro_ · · Score: 1

    We've had two-party rule since Washington left office.

    But we haven't. Two-party rule has only been around since the Civil War or so. Prior to that there were between three and four electable political parties, depending on the year. I will have to re-research this again to find out exact names and years. (Whig springs to mind.)

    --
    -Pope Peter Porker, S.O.W., K.M.K.R., U.G.O.A., F.S.G.S.D.
  47. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by CSMastermind · · Score: 1

    In this case you are correct about the canidates and the campaigns. But the parent to my orginal post said that the American system in and of itself was broke, my responce was a generalization of the system as a whole. As for the system not being broken for the past 200 years......well all I have to say is that I would argue that over time the two party system as degraded the electoral process. The vast majority of American presidents would not be able to get elected today. I'm not saying we should throw out the system competely, the point of the orginal post was that it's up to us to use it correctly.

  48. Right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    in so far as the law is a laughably narrow interpretation over the semantics of "counting." Also, it turns out actually counting the votes the Republicans didn't want counted was what the law precribed. See the resolved case on the matter.

    The fact is they advocated denying the votes that were legally made in a timely fashion, and they simultaniously sought to have votes that were legally made in a less than timely fashion counted.

    1. Re:Right... by pudge · · Score: 1

      The fact is they advocated denying the votes that were legally made in a timely fashion

      They opposed including them in the recount, because that is what the Secretary of State said, and what they thought the law said. They did not oppose including them in the initial count.

      and they simultaniously sought to have votes that were legally made in a less than timely fashion counted.

      I know of no examples of this, except for maybe overseas ballots, and then only because King County sent them weeks too late.

  49. Are you on crack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This has been huge for the Republican party in Washington. The hicks hate the city dwellers more than ever. And the vault of their National Party dumped a TON of money into the state races, and it'll only increase (proportunately) in the next election. Now's a great time to be in the Republican party in Washington. No, you won't be invited to many raves. Sorry. But in four years, it might well be new laptops for everyone who's been involved with us for the past couple of years.

    It's pretty clear that Rossi is going to lose. But the Republicans will probably have control of the legislature, and most executive offices including Governor next time around.

  50. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The users should be decided which features and good and which features are bad.

    Why should they? It's Free software and the users get what they pay for.

    Free software is mostly not being developed by people for their own motivations and not for those of any users. It's not a 'problem'; it's the main driving force of the whole phenomenon.

    Now, if some users get together and decide they're willing to pay someone to develop a particular feature, they'll create the incentive for someone to do so.

    But if they don't do that, developers have no obligation to fulfill a user request, and there's no guarantee it'll happen.

    This is how F/OSS works. Contribute or shut up.

  51. I shot the sheriff... by identity0 · · Score: 1

    ... but I didn't shoot no deputy.
    Oh no, oh
    I shot the sheriff, but I didn't post anonymously
    Ooh, ooh, ooh Yeah

    All around in my BBS
    They're tryin' to track me down, yeah
    They say they want to bring me in guilty
    For the killing of a deputy, for the life of a deputy
    But I say, oh, now, now...

    - Bob Marley

    Oh no, the FBI will be after Slashdot now!

    1. Re:I shot the sheriff... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Marley did it nice, but Clapton did it nicer.

  52. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by pudge · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, it's been two parties. There were short periods, such as before the Civil War, where one party declined while another gained power. First the Republican-Democrats and Federalists declined while the Democrats and Whigs gained power, in the early 19th century. Then the Whigs declined while the Republicans gained power. But apart from those short transitions, it's always been two parties in control.

    That's also not to say a third party candidate never had a chance at the Presidency: Roosevelt nearly pulled it off in 1912. But he was like Perot: the party had no power in Congress, just a charismatic leader.

  53. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Compared to many parliamentary democracies, the US has very weak parties. That's because politicians raise most of the money they need for reelection directly from their supporters. The legislative party leaders still control committee chairs and often have leadership PACs that fund their supporters' campaigns, but the parties themselves are weaker than they were for most of US history.

  54. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by pudge · · Score: 1

    In the span of so few generations, so much has been lost.

    Such as?

  55. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GIMP Imitating/Mimicking Photoshop :)

  56. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by pudge · · Score: 1

    The vast majority of American presidents would not be able to get elected today.

    That's not evidence anything is broken or degraded. Clinton and Bush probably couldn't have been elected 100 years ago, yet most people can agree that at least one of them is a pretty good President. And I am sure you can think of many of those "vast majority" of Presidents who could not get elected today who never deserved to be elected in the first place.

  57. A couple of observations.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) A civil war certainly should count as a catastrophic failure of a system. This was eventually patched (by putting In God We Trust on the coinage incidentally), but not fixed.

    2) Issue-oriented? Is that what call-and-response attack ads are now? Why didn't we just fill up the cinerama with one third republicans, democrats and undecides, and have Rossi and Gregiore bust snaps on each other until a clear victor emerged. Televise it, sell commericals, and tickets. That would have *made* money.

    1. Re:A couple of observations.... by pudge · · Score: 1

      A civil war certainly should count as a catastrophic failure of a system

      You're saying a civil war was caused by having political parties? It's the opposite, the same factors causing the war also caused political factions which manifested as parties.

      Issue-oriented? Is that what call-and-response attack ads are now?

      I don't think you saw those in the WA governor race.

    2. Re:A couple of observations.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm saying a civil war is by definition a political failure (war being the politics of last resort). Any political failure is a result of the system that spawned it.

      Oh HELL NO. Are you shitting me? You can't have forgotten all the "Incompetence by Gregiore's office cost the state millions" ads followed by the equally dubious "I made the state billions with the Tobacco lawsuit, for the children, by the way, I like farms" ads.

    3. Re:A couple of observations.... by pudge · · Score: 1

      You can't have forgotten all the "Incompetence by Gregiore's office cost the state millions" ads followed by the equally dubious "I made the state billions with the Tobacco lawsuit, for the children, by the way, I like farms" ads.

      No, I just think that if this is the best you've got as examples of "attack ads," it only helps prove me right.

    4. Re:A couple of observations.... by hesiod · · Score: 1

      What the hell do you want, uncontrolled swearing? That does not "prove" you anything. Right OR wrong.

  58. You're not biased by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Yeah, after all, Democrats have no experience with double-standards or speaking out against things they later happily accept.

    Come on. Your post is rather biased. "The new(?) Republican thing?" You and I both know I could post as long a list of Democrat hypocrisy as you could of Republican hypocrisy. Welcome to politics; it sucks.

    Just take a look at this, which, as you'll notice, isn't getting any mention in the media, because it's GOP-bashing season right now (well, all the time really). If it was claimed to be a Democratic memo, the media would be describing it as a Republican "Rove-esque" trick. Remember the Democratic memo during the election which talked about claiming voter fraud even when there were no claims of it? CNN, CBS, and the major newspapers completely ignored it...but they jumped on this. It's funny how that works, isn't it?

    One of my favorite amusements is listening to people bitch and bitch about the hypocrisy of the other side as though their side doesn't take part in the same kind of crap every single day!

    --
    "Sufferin' succotash."
    1. Re:You're not biased by rmerrill11 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "Just take a look at this, which, as you'll notice, isn't getting any mention in the media, because it's GOP-bashing season right now (well, all the time really). If it was claimed to be a Democratic memo, the media would be describing it as a Republican "Rove-esque" trick. ..."

      You are complaining that the anonymous Terry Schiavo Republican Talking Points memo was faked by the Democratcs. Because, of course, any reporting on criticism of the Republicans is a partisan trick and an indication of media bias?

      Actually, no. The Terry Schiavo memo is true - this morning the Washington Post is reporting that a Republican Senator fired a his staffer who admitted writing it.

      Look I hate to break it to you, but the all the evidence and actions of the Republicans in Washington (Schiavo, Delay, lies about cost of Medicare, Social Security "Crisis", WMD's, torture policy, Clinton Impeachment, budget busting deficits and concurrent tax cuts for the hyper-rich, media consolidation, "nuclear-option" of taking away the filibuster option from the minority party, lack of any sort of investigation of White House actions) demonstrate that the Republicans in Washington are acting like amoral, unethical, hacks who will do anything for power and their party, in contrast to acting for the benefit of the country.

      There are some principled Republicans in the country, I know some. But what are the core values that the ones in Washington are demonstrating? Why is it "media bias" to report on their actions?

      Reporting on unethical actions is not media bias - and not reporting on false speculation that the Democrats "faked it" without any evidence suggesting that they did is not "media bias". Because, again, the Republican Senate staff DID write the Terry Schiavo Talking points memo. And it is good that people reported it, and that people be held accountable for it.

      I have voted Republican, and will again for the right people. But this crop's willingess to lie, and to tolerate lies for their own benefit and to the long-term detriment of the country and our democracy is shameful and disturbing. I don't care if you vote Republican or Democrat - but vote for someone better than the current schmucks in power. There are some candidates our there who care more about what is good for the country than for their personal short-term gain, and who can still tell the difference between the two. We deserve, and need, better leaders than are currently running the show in Washington.

  59. You only need one stratalite? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't find it right now, but I recall there being an article about how a blimp shaped like an airfoil could actually launch directly into space. The idea was that it inflated taking you up a bit, and then started to accelerate slowly. As it goes the airfoil shape causes it to rise further, making the air thinner allowing it to go faster until it is at the outer edges of the atmosphere and starts to get significant rise from being near orbital velocity. Accelerate more and you're in orbit. You come back down the same way without ever going through the level of re-entry heating that a traditional rocket does.

    Getting to or from orbit this way takes several days in the computer simulation.

    It worked in theory, and there was a company which was in the process of building the capability to do it in reality as well. There were a lot of technical hurdles, but when done they thought that they would have a reusable launch vehicle that was a lot cheaper than a traditional rocket.

    1. Re:You only need one stratalite? by QuantumG · · Score: 1

      Yep, that's JP Aerospace. Havn't heard much from them lately.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
  60. GTK+ on Windows by JorenDahn · · Score: 1

    This GimpShop looks awesome, but it requires GTK+. So how do I go about installing GTK+ on a Windows machine? (people say Windows is simple, but I find many more headaches in Windows than Linux)

    In visiting this page I've found a copy of GTK+ which should supposedly work, but how do I install it? It seems this line is the current latest and most appropriate:
    glib-2.4.7.zip. Runtime of GLib 2.4.7. Requires libiconv and gettext-runtime.

    --
    Blatant self-promotion: Jerek.net
    1. Re:GTK+ on Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      install gaim, it comes with it

    2. Re:GTK+ on Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      DUH!!!! WOW, are you guys really so illiterate that you cant figure out how to install GTK+ for windows? Or, did i correctly understand the OP which states, basically, that the OP doesnt know how to install ANY software on windows?!?!?! amazing. whats wrong with you guys?

      http://gimp-win.sourceforge.net/stable.html

      directions for all you asshats:
      1-go to above link
      2-click on GTK+
      3-watch as it magically "downloads"
      4-click on it again to magically "unzip it"
      5-click on it ONE MORE TIME to magically "install it"

      yes, installing software on windows is so mysterious and magical isnt it? CLICK ON IT!!!!!

  61. Re:fp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I waited all day... You waited all day... But you left before sunset And I just wanted to tell you The moment was beautiful. Just wanted to dance to bad music Drive bad cars... Watch bad TV... Should have stayed for the sunset... If not for me.

  62. About slashback absence... by Zangief · · Score: 3, Funny

    I thought slashback was absorbed into the whole dupe system...

  63. Exactly! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're not a member of the ruling class, the Bush Crime Family wants you in prison or starving to death. Never forget that.

    Skinner

  64. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by CSMastermind · · Score: 1

    The ones who didn't deserve to get elected? Grant, Hoover, Adams, Buchanan, Johnson, and Harding all come to mind. As for those who did get elected, we're amazing presidents and would be crushed today? Jackson, Lincon, FDR, and Polk. But you are correct in your statement of this not being edvidence of it being broken. Still can I ask you this....do you honestly feel that the people we elect are the best for the job?

  65. Not why FBI wanted server logs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    While this is a really interesting story about the kid that killed a cop, that's not why the FBI subpoenaed server logs from flag.blackened.net.

    flag was subpoenaed because some fool was saying he was going to assassinate the FBI's Director.

    See this comment to the previous /. story:
    http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=144320&cid =12097580

  66. Washington gubernatorial race by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If we don't fix the problems and have a fresh race among all the candidates eligible, then this will drag on and on for the four year duration.

    At the very least, we should have another election this November, but it shouldn't be a run-off. It should be among all the candidates eligible last time, otherwise it's unfair cause it's changing the rules. If we want a run-off between the top two, then we'd have to hold a primary and have those two go on, or in other words, two more elections. I stick by what I say. I hope someone can back me up.

    1. Re:Washington gubernatorial race by damsa · · Score: 1

      I think that we should pick two new candidates. Picking between a douche bag and a turd sandwich is way too hard and people will get confused again. There are many Washingtonians they are perfect for this position. I nominate Sir Mix-a-Lot.

  67. Why the FBI subpoenaed logs... by Jizzbug · · Score: 1

    See this comment as to why the FBI subpoenaed logs from flag.blackened.net:
    http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=144320&cid =12097580

    --

    -=/\- Jizzbug -/\=-
  68. They Republicans do care about fixing it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just not fixing as in "not broken."

    You forget just how many repuke party members are felons. Something like 80% of them have stolen money from either the public or from private companies. If the Democrats had more guts, almost every repuke would be in jail now. The Democrats are just too scared to enforce the law and put the repukes in jail. A third party would be even weaker and be even more afraid to put those criminals in jail so your plan would never work.

    Skinner

    1. Re:They Republicans do care about fixing it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is posts like yours that make us Democrate look good and appear rational!

      Keep up the good work, and slaming thoese rePUBs!!!111one

  69. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by pudge · · Score: 1

    the parties themselves are weaker than they were for most of US history.

    The party *leadership* is relatively weak, yes. But I don't know that parties are weaker, they may just be manifesting their strength in different, less centralized, ways.

  70. Re:You may be right, I don't know by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    _The Daily Show_ is a comedy show. Bush is a joke. The joke about "biased facts" is funny, because it's so right on: Republicans routinely demand "balance" against truths about their bad actions in the form of lies or propaganda. This current trend for "balance" is a travesty. Journalism isn't like the "ls" command on a commandline: it requires the journalist to figure out what is actually going on, based on evidence, then to tell the story that lets everyone relate to it. The objectivity comes in the reporter's outlook - finding the actual story, based on facts, not just the story they'd like to tell. It's hard, slippery, and never really worked. But it was much closer than the current system, where two opposing, vested interest viewpoints are set in conflict and presented to the consumer, with the reporter disclaiming any judgement on the accuracy, veracity, bias, or even sanity of the viewpoints. At the very least, the stories are poorly served by including only two, brand-name representatives, rather than the actual diversity of opinions of any of the naturally complex stories we get, especially in politics. Because otherwise it would be obvious as opinion, or advocacy, or just propaganda - or the reporter might have to make a decision, which might make them accountable. Which is a liability that corporate news avoids at all costs. We live in a complex world, where important decisions are made in the fake world of the media. Without any of the safeguards that got us here. So consumers of news have a responsibility to ourselves to view every story critically before accepting it, especially before repeating it.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  71. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bah, they're just upset he didn't call it Pimp.

  72. Re:Doc, Get Over It by ptbarnett · · Score: 1
    While the anti-Bush posts come from posters with no special privilege to form the discussions on Slashdot.

    You obviously haven't haven't been reading postings by Timothy and the late, unlamented Michael.

    And given the attitude of Slashdotters these days towards Bush, his partisan hackery is not only wrong, but unwelcome.

    So, given the attitude of Slashdotters, partisan hackery from the other side is not only tolerated, but welcome?

    (from another independent that recognizes partisan hacks when he sees them. But frankly, Doc, I don't think you qualify as an independent: Exhibit 1)

  73. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by pudge · · Score: 1

    do you honestly feel that the people we elect are the best for the job?

    In the case of Reagan, I think so. In the case of W, the jury is still out (I wouldn't think he is the best for the job looking at resumes or abilities, but OTOH, he might turn out to be the perfect leader for the time we are in; ask me again in 20 years).

    But largely, no, I don't think they are always, or most often, the best. And I don't think that's ever been the case. I think Washington was the best for the job, but not Adams or Jefferson, for example.

    And to the extent the problem today may be worse, I would tend to find fault with the larger issues of mass media, not the political parties.

  74. Slashback is back... by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Funny

    Slashback is back after a long absence being devoured by gnomes.

    So will there be a Kslashback to fill in?

    1. Re:Slashback is back... by dodobh · · Score: 1

      A Klashback perhaps?

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
  75. Devoured by GNOME? by dodongo · · Score: 1

    Does this mean we can expect a slashback applet in GNOME 2.12?

  76. Media by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

    Ah yes, the American media, who genuinely don't care that they are doing far more harm than good. There is no debate in which they can't reduce the level of discourse. There is nothing they can't spin into something unrecognizable.

  77. Hilarious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    I feel for you. I just spent 10 minutes chasing down DLL dependencies to try and get this working, and it still complains about g_value_take_string being missing from libgobject-2.0-0.dll. I can tell this means I have a version mismatch, but I don't care enough to keep trying at this point.

    I love open source sometimes.

    "We made a version GIMP that is finally almost tolerable to use! Come check it out and see how easy it is!

    Just make sure you first download an unspecified version of GTK+ for Windows, available from some dude's personal home page if you Google for it, since we're still a bit foggy about the responsibilities of an 'installer'.

    While you're at it, make sure you find the correct versions of iconv and pango, and don't have any old DLLs anywhere in your path.

    Anyway, I'm sure you can figure it out."

  78. The moderators drank the kool-aid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their attack on my post is proof of their wrong political affiliations!

  79. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by Greg@UF · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, actually, you're dead wrong.

    This is how - and why - F/OSS doesn't work.
    That attitude is a complete turn-off. The only logical answer is "Bollocks to you, I'll go talk to the professionals". They actually want their products to improve. Better products = bums on seats = food on plates.
    Doesn't cost the users a cent.

    Every time I hear that "Contribute or shut up" line, I get another reason to keep using windows. Cos here's a hint :
    When someone takes the time to say "Your program could be improved by doing xyz" they just contributed.

    "Contribute or shut up" slaps them in the face.
    It's not professional, it's not constructive, and it doesn't help Open Source.

    --
    -- You can't give it, you can't even buy it, and you just don't get it!
  80. The Gnomes - I knew it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Slashback is back after a long absence being devoured by gnomes. "

    Dang, I knew the recent Gnome upgrade was something, but this is rediculous!

    Disclaimer: Yeah, I play there, and then read slashdot all the time. My life is pathetic. :(

  81. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by crucini · · Score: 1
    Basically all the politicians are rich white men. They got their wealth from inheritance.

    John Kerry didn't get his wealth from inheritance. Well, not directly.
  82. Gnomes? by smokeslikeapoet · · Score: 1
    Slashback is back after a long absence being devoured by gnomes.
    People always blame it on the gnomes. It's the kdes I'm worried about.
  83. I agree: the Washington election was fixed by WillAffleck · · Score: 1

    as reported on slashback.

    The solution: a revote.

    For the ENTIRE USA!

    Without diebold machines.

    --
    Will in Seattle
    1. Re:I agree: the Washington election was fixed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That simply won't do, I'm afraid.
      So many are mad about, high gas prices which benefit the Bush/Cheney good ole boy oil buddies, (There is not and never has been a gas or oil shortage in this country, only successful attempts by oil Co's and investor's using scare mongering tactics to drive the price up so they can rip of the american consumer.) attempts to destroy social security, revelations over WMD, out of control government spending and intrusion into our private lives.
      If an election were held today I believe Bush/Cheney would lose.

    2. Re:I agree: the Washington election was fixed by monkease · · Score: 1

      Oh wouldn't it be nice?

      Question: Have you seen any follow-up on the disparities between voting trends in DieBold counties compared to other counties? I never got a satisfactory explanation for that, nor, for that matter, the machines in the first place. Did everyone randomly lose interest, or have there been follow-ups clearing that suspiciously-right-wing company of wrongdoing?

      Please, post links if you've got 'em.

    3. Re:I agree: the Washington election was fixed by WillAffleck · · Score: 0

      If an election were held today I believe Bush/Cheney would lose.

      What, don't you like the Bush Tax on the Middle Class at the gas pump?

      --
      Will in Seattle
  84. Is the system designed to find the best person? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. We live in a representative democracy, not a meritocracy. Arguments that the system doesn't produce the best possible leaders are spurious because they assume that the system should do such a thing. Rather it's expressly designed to elect the person who is acceptable to the greatest proportion of the populace. The chance that such a person will accurately represent all the beliefs of each individual is of course very low. Again--part of the design of the system, which was expressly intended to insulate to some degree the decision-making of the government from the will of the people, and to protect against mob rule.

    The U.S. system of government is a system of autonomous leaders, subject to periodic review by the populace. If you're upset that you are not represented in the system now, the first step is to accept the fact that you never fully will be. The second step is to identify the few issues that matter most to you. The third step is to work to try to get the people who agree most closely with you on those issues elected.

    Shelby Foote said it best, that "the real genius of our nation is compromise." For those who believe passionately in a pure ideal, this seems the worst kind of system. But I'd say it's done ok so far.

    1. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      Actually the selection of president was originally designed with some meritocraticit elements. The current 'popular election' system where each state is 'winner take all' (with a couple exceptions) isn't the original design, but rather a cludge pasted onto it by the political party system to better enable them to get elected based popularity and momentary passions rather than merit and the deliberation of the electoral colledge. Who where supposed to be elected based on thier merit, that is ability to wisely select a supreme executive.
      Most of the rest is spot on, and given the current system the glossing over of this detail is understandable, but it is actually pretty important IMHO.
      The job of the electoral colledge is to be responsible to the people for WISELY selecting the president. However it is a good idea to have them not directly bound to the people's imediate wishes else the very rule of the mob the founders sought to avoid becomes much more closer to the norm.
      The electoral colledge serves as buffer in the system. In theory it's THIER job to prevent us electing someone ill suited to the job or worse because of momentary passions. THEY are supposed to be how we avoid electing our own Hittler (don't ever forget that madman was elected).
      Most of us don't have the time to study in detail a candidate, but the job of the electoral colledge was to do just that and decide there on.
      These days they're reduced to being just yes men for the popular vote within thier state, wich is cast by people with time for little else than a 30second soundbite durring re-runs of whatever mindless drivle they watch on tv.
      Is it any wonder we had a choice this last time between a pathalogical liar and a militant oil tycoon.
      That's the other thing restoring the electoral college could do, give a better chance to third parties and independants. To many (IE most) who like a third partie candidate foolishly buy into the myth that voting for whom they want in office is wasting thier vote if it's not a republican or democrat stooge.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    2. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by WhiplashII · · Score: 1

      This is an excellent analysis, but I don't agree with the conclusion. In my opinion, the primary reason we needed an electoral college in the past was the insuficient flow of information. In the past, the average citizen could not really know enough about the candidates to make a decision. Today, with the internet, I believe that has changed. Information about candidates is available from everyone with something to say, and the internet uses survival of the fittest (or most often correct) to determine who is listened to. (As opposed to only hearing what the candidates have paid for me to hear. Of course, my opinion of most often correct is different from yours - but that is the great thing about it!)

      So I think that the current system working pretty well for our time.

      --
      while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
    3. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      The current 'popular election' system where each state is 'winner take all' (with a couple exceptions) isn't the original design, but rather a cludge pasted onto it by the political party system to better enable them to get elected based popularity and momentary passions rather than merit and the deliberation of the electoral colledge.

      Actually, the winner take all system for the Electoral College was put in to place largely to make it less likely that the President would be chosen by the Congress. Both of Clinton's elections would have been decided in the Congress, as an example, using the original system (which would likely have meant that Clinton would win the first one due to a clear Democratic majority in both Houses, and lose the second, due to a clear Republican majority in both Houses).

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      I'm not shure about that. IF the electoral colledge had a tie yes, but a smaller group like that is less likely to tie, and can actively choose not to.
      With the current system ties cannot be avoided through deliberation. That is once the popular votes are cast we're stuck with a tie. Where-as with the smaller group they can debate amongst themselves who's best fit for the job. IF there are no compelling arguments then I suspect a tie would be less troublesome as it'd be more likely the th parties to the tie would both have simular merit. With the current system all a tie means is that both parties put out good attack adds.
      Aslo with the electoral colledge system you can more realistically have more than two choices (and this is why the current parties like the current system so much) and should the two majors put up for election looses who's only redeeming feature is charisma, the collede can choose a better candidate.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    5. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      The reasons you cite did figure into why the founding fathers chose the system they did, in deed not only did they see a national campain as problematic, but distastefull and unseemly (the office should seek the man, not the man should seek the office). They did give reasons such the unlikelyness of the common man to learn much of people outside his own state or to have time to do so.
      They did indeed desire to solve many problems including the well known potential disparities between the populous states and rural states (much the same problems as the two house congress we have solves). And they also recognized the tendancy for factionalization (parties) and sought to minimize that as well (they considered parties to be a bad idea indeed).
      But they did make it clear one of thier reasons was to have a well informed and, hopefully wise and trustworthy, group of men who could choose a man for office based uppon his merits for the office. And by tying thier hands in the manner we have we short ciruit one of the many safeguards built into the consitution, this one against 'the passions of the moment'.
      Fourtunately it's still possible for the electoral colledge to vote other than ordered should circumstance be sufficiently dire and thier courage strong enough, but in so doing they will violate the laws of thier home states and no doubt kick up a significant ruccus should an election be decided other than indicated by popular vote. But as far as I can tell there is no constitutional means to not count thier votes as they have cast them, laws and votes of thier home states notwithstanding.
      Another factor is that they firmly believed, not in democracy, but in representation. They didn't shout no taxation with democracy, but none without representation. This, if anything, was thier guiding principle. That the people should participate yes, but via thier chosen proxies, people who could and should study the issues and make wise decisions on thier behalf.
      An interesting tie in to current events is that the college of cardinals was one of the inspirations for our system, (My condollences to the Catholics and other Christians who might read this, he seemed a Good man honestly trying his best to make a better place of our world) as was the centurial assembly system in use in ancient rome.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    6. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      It isn't about ties. Without a clear majority (not plurality, but majority), the election is passed to Congress to decide.

      Which is why our system is pretty much designed for two-party dominance, by the by (though which two parties is open for reconsideration at any time).

      Clinton's elections (and I use those as only the most recent examples) would have been decided in Congress because Clinton never won a majority of the popular vote, and anything other than winner-take-all would have resulted in Clinton not getting his required majority of the Electoral College.

      Now, it can be argued that the result in the Congress would not have followed the straight party line (in either or both of Clinton's elections). This is true. Might not have. But betting on the Party Line for something as important as a Presidential election is pretty much a no-brainer.

      Note that you are assuming that the Electoral College will have no political bias. Don't be so foolish as to think that. Pick any seven people at random, and you'll have eight political opinions on any given subject....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    7. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      It is of course possible to not have a majority in the case of the electoral college. And I'm shure the electors will have political opinions.
      The real question is whether the system our founding fathers set up, or what it has been changed into, is the better system.
      The current system is more prone to 'the passion of the moment' than the electoral system, though there is no guarantee that an electoral college would be immune. I do find that the smaller the mob the less likely mob rule will take over.
      And frankly if none of the candidates can get a majority then we're in a situation that bears greater attention and scrutiny.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    8. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      The changes you disklike happened largely as a result of an election which was decided in Congress (Thomas Jefferson's - the only one, so far as I know).

      Most people who advocate "election reform" in any form really are saying "my guy lost last time, and I want to change things in a way that I think will ensure that my guy never loses again". Personally, I find that the current system works adequately.

      It doesn't, in general, cause people to riot (as in the Ukraine recently), nor do we often have tanks crushing protesters.

      Yeah, some people bitch about the results - you don't like it that Bush won twice. I wasn't too happy that Clinton won twice.

      I would have been FAR more unhappy if 2 of every three elections were decided in the Congress (the only President in my lifetime to really make me unhappy was Gerald Ford - the only unelected President/VP pair in US History - it was a bad precedent)

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    9. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      Actually I don't like eigther major party, but that is only tangential to my distrust over a kludge.
      I don't mind the amendments that adjust the electoral system, that's what the amendment process is for. What I distrust is the winner take all format adopted by 48 of the 50 states.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    10. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      What I distrust is the winner take all format adopted by 48 of the 50 states.

      And you distrust it why? Because it reduces the chance that the Electors will be rendered irrelevant? Or because it increases the influence of any given State on the process?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    11. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      Actualy I distrust it because it mangles a safeguard in the system, a safeguard designed to prevent such things as what happened in Germany in the late thirties.
      Also I'm not shure what you meant by reducing the odds of rendering the electors irrelevant, since the winner talk all system doese exactly that, makes the electors little more than a strange way to report tallies rather than actual electors.
      Winner take all neigther serves to accurately reflect the will of the people nor to safeguard against a momentary passion of the peole from electing a charismatic madman. At best it serves s a mechanism to re-inforce the near duoppoly of the current parties.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    12. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      safeguard designed to prevent such things as what happened in Germany in the late thirties.

      What happened in Germany in the late 30's that the Electors would have saved us from?

      If you mean Hitler, that was the early 30's. He also wasn't elected Chancellor by the German people, in spite of popular rumour to that effect. He was chosen to be Chancellor by President Hindenburg.

      Also I'm not shure what you meant by reducing the odds of rendering the electors irrelevant,

      It's like this - no absolute majority of the Electors does NOT mean the Electors vote again - it means the Congress in Joint Session picks the President. So, three serious candidates would mean the Congress picks the President.

      At best it serves s a mechanism to re-inforce the near duoppoly of the current parties.

      Actually, it doesn't do that very well - a Third Party candidate, with just the right regional support, could conceivably become President with only 16% of the vote. (That would require getting 34% of the vote in States that add up to a bare majority of Electors). In a proportional allocation of Electors, that Third Party guy would need 34% of the vote to win.

      What reinforces the Duopoly is that the two major Parties are basically left-center and right-center. Third Parties must be extreme-left or extreme-right to pull voters away from the two centrist Parties. And there aren't enough votes in either extreme (or both together, for that matter) to get someone elected President.

      In order for the existing duopoly to go away, you'll need a Third Party that is centrist enough to attract a lot of votes, and extreme enough to pull voters from the current Parties, and a crisis that the current Parties aren't handling well.

      Which translates mostly to really tough times in America and the world as a whole (to generate the crisis and loss of confidence required).

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    13. Re:Is the system designed to find the best person? by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      Even if I got my history mixed up (likely, been a while) the point is that as intended the electors would be free to debate and discuss merits of a candidate, rather than be the mouthpieces of the popular vote (wich at times equate to mob rule) filter through the odd distortion of the winner take all system in most states.
      It's thier job is to act as a buffer against mob rule and ignorance.
      At least that's what the design intention is. I'm not saying the current system is absolutely wrong, but it certainly has oddities that seem potentially problematic to me.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
  85. Oh bah. by oGMo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Obvious propaganda" etc. my ass. Just because it's not "promote the democrats!" it's eeeevil propaganda, right?

    Wrong. Now it's fairly obvious that the Republicans want to win, and they change their tune when losing like anyone, but you hardly know the situation up here. It's much different than the national election; the Democrats have locally held the office for a long time, and we're in need of serious change. The business law up here is terrible, the economy is going to crap, the corruption at the upper levels is rampant, and the overspending is ridiculous. (Check out our "light rail" project sometime.)

    I'm not a Republican. I'm an independent. I'm even fairly anti-Republican in many respects (especially as it relates to corporate law and big business). But the local government here needs change, and a Republican term or two would do us some good. Besides, there were some serious problems with the election: take time to actually read the posted facts before being blinded by your partisan-fanboy judgement.

    Besides, the Dems had a chance to investigate things in the national election. Everyone seems to know there were serious problems there, too. There was barely anything done. So what gives?

    --

    Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    1. Re:Oh bah. by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You're not registered with a party, but you're pretty Republican. Democrats have had the elected offices too long, so Republicans should steal the election? Floating a story outside the usual Slashdot channels of selecting stories from submissions, in a disused category of "SlashBack", reporting that Republicans have filed a lawsuit without any technical or otherwise nerdy implications, isn't obvious propaganda to you? Mocking the Republicans, when they follow up their rhetoric criticizing recounts in Washington as bad for the state with a lawsuit for a recount, is "partisan-fanboy"? What are you talking about?

      And under what rock do you live, where you can ignore the House committee investigation into the Ohio frauds, which was ignored by the Republicans who control the House? Or the stand taken by Boxer in the Senate, to force a rare reconsideration of the Ohio count during the actual ballot count, which was likewise ignored by the Republicans who control the Senate? What does it take for you to tell that the Republicans have perverted elections in this country possibly past redemption, with the power they wield in the government? Will it take several devastating Republican administrations in your state, despite the preference of your neighbors for Democrats? I hope you never learn, because I can't afford the price of your education.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    2. Re:Oh bah. by Rayonic · · Score: 1

      Did you even read the guy's post? Perhaps you heard him, but weren't listening. Those particular Democrats have screwed up his state, and those particular Republicans seem, to him, to be a good alternative based on their rhetoric.

      And then there are the facts of actually provable election shenanegans that were well within the margin or error. We're talking under a hundred votes here.

      The democrats in general, and the Kerry campaign in particular, never pressed the issue of the national elections because they didn't have a case. At least not one that would possible make up for a 100,000 vote margin in Ohio. The national Democrat leadership was very serious about winning the national election, and had many highly-paid professionals look into it thoroughly.

      What Ms. Boxer did was grandstand based on some flimsy internet rumors. Rumors which were pretty vague, at that. If the election feasibly have been won by the Democrats, they would have actually challenged the results.

  86. Re:Doc, Get Over It by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    As I pointed out in my post, we're talking about Pudge coming up with a story on his own, rather than selecting from submissions posted by noneditors. Do you have an example of Timothy or Michael creating their own story for publication? Do you have a reason to create an argument with me over whether Slashdot editors pick stories of interest to them, naturally reflecting their bias - when I haven't even referred to that practice?

    And what makes you say that Bush partisan hackery being unwelcome, that some hypothetical partisan hackery, that you're making up, from "the other side" (whatever that is, exactly) is therefore "welcome"? I never said that, and only selfserving logic would make anyone say that. Actual logic would not.

    Finally, what is it about outrage and disgust about Republicans cracking Democrats email on the Senate Judiciary Committee, to spy on them, that is "partisan"? Show me Democrats cracking and spying on Republicans' email in the Senate, and I'll be outraged. Waiting...

    Really, I don't know what you mean by "idependent", if you say that I am not. I'm a member of no political party. Republicans are currently engaged in an aggressive assault on American government in obvious ways. As scary in their success as in their incompetence. Does your sense of integrity kick in only when the people with whom you disagree are screwing up? It sure seems so, from your examples and rhetoric.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  87. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    Actually, when I said users should support the fork they like the best I ment they should pay the developers money. So I agree with his post more than yours.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  88. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by jackbird · · Score: 1
    Now, if some users get together and decide they're willing to pay someone to develop a particular feature, they'll create the incentive for someone to do so.

    I'll bite:

    I want to pay for adjustment layers and float images (16-bit is old news thanks to Paul Debevec's HDRI work) in GIMP.

    How much will it cost? To whom do I send the RFP?

  89. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by mgs1000 · · Score: 1
    Basically all the politicians are rich white men. They got their wealth from inheritance.

    Besides the two Bushes and Kennedy, name one president in the last fifty years that was born rich.

  90. Um, Doc - this was a combined effort... by Samrobb · · Score: 1

    Take a look at Pudge's comment about the authorship of this slashback. He started it, Timothy finished it. Complain about the the behavior of the Republicans and Democrats all you like, but the both /.'s token conservative and leading liberal poster had a hand in the article blurb.

    --
    "Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgement." Job 32:9
    1. Re:Um, Doc - this was a combined effort... by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Oh, so Pudge was the insider "submitter", and Timothy published it. So much for Timothy's rep as "liberal", but consistent with Pudge's reputation I've been describing here. Those collaboration details do highlight the continuingly mysterious, and increasingly relevant nature of the Slashdot editor process. Maybe time for an "Ask Slashdot" nosy question campaign. Because at its age and popularity, with its emphasis on openness, and insistence on including politics in a "nerd" newszine, Slashdot's flaky editorial bias is a story in itself.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    2. Re:Um, Doc - this was a combined effort... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those collaboration details do highlight the continuingly mysterious, and increasingly relevant nature of the Slashdot editor process.

      LOL...

    3. Re:Um, Doc - this was a combined effort... by stinerman · · Score: 1

      Michael is the one who is liberal, and its a shame the axed him.

  91. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by MarcoAtWork · · Score: 1

    He's not violating the law, just unwritten rules of etiquette; It's polite to try to cooperate before forking.

    I'm not the guy, so I don't really know his motivations, but he might have felt that 'do first, ask for permission later' was best in this case to create buzz about this issue.

    it's that it seems he may have changed parts which didn't have to be changed in order to achive what he did

    if that's the case, and it could be done better, somebody will do it better (if they so decide). If the Gimpshop guy won't (or won't be able to) mantain his modifications, hey, whatever, people will just go back to 'mainstream' Gimp which by then, likely, will have some option to achieve the same functionality I bet. It could also happen that some devs who'd have liked to PS-ize Gimp as much as possible (but couldn't) will join his effort and there will be a 'true' fork.

    What exactly do you base this on? The Gimp developer who posted seemed quite open to the idea.

    I base my opinion over many years of resistance by the Gimp developers when asked to make Gimp more like PS (the whole 'Gimp is not PS' thing) and their priorities within Gimp itself (spending who knows how much time on Script-Fu and successors when an extremely basic and extremely useful function like adjustment layers was not worked on).

    Obviously when faced with LOTS of users cheering this modification the Gimp developers will be a lot more open to the idea than if a lone developer asked for this feature through the 'proper channels'.

    It's not that I think Gimp devs are evil, far from it, it's just that sometimes it seems they think their way is the 'best way' and people should just follow their lead (if I had a dime for every complaint about Gimp not having only one window I'd be rich by now for example).

    This is entirely their prerogative, them being the ones who do the work, but it doesn't necessarily mean that this is what the users would like, given the huge cheers this very simple mod generated for example.

    It would be nice if the Gimp devs listened to some experienced PS folks (not me, I'm no expert) who could point them in the right direction in terms of features users REALLY want vs features that the devs want.

    --
    -- the cake is a lie
  92. This page was blatantly fabricated by another... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gnomes? I want to know what happened to my cadra of angry stealth attack llamas.

    Quite simply your apertizer of angry stealth attack llamas were far too tasty, and the gnomes filled up on them beforehand, therefore they couldn't finish all of slashback.

  93. RTFWP? by buchanmilne · · Score: 1

    On that page, you actually *read* the 2nd paragraph, which says:

    There are GIMP installers for Windows and FAQs at gimp-win.sourceforge.net. The installers are created by Jernej Simoncic.

    So, you go to gimp-win.sourceforge.net, click the download link on the left, which takes you to a page which has another download link.

    But, maybe you thought you qualified for The packages below are for people who develop software that use GLib and/or GTK+.?

  94. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    most people voting don't vote based on issues. Those who do don't check their sources and are very poorly misinformed

    Interesting how your mistake here drew attention to the sentence. I would like to point out that they are, in fact, very skillfully misinformed.

  95. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by tialaramex · · Score: 1

    I suggest you write this to the GIMP developer's mailing list which iirc is gimp-developer@scam.xcf.berkeley.edu

    Make sure you specify that you're serious about offering people real money that will pay rent & bills, not just giving some college kid more pocket change. Or if it's the latter, don't be surprised at the lack of traction.

    The features you want are already in the long term plan for the GIMP (obviously, because they're desirable and the developers aren't stupid) but I have no idea how far this plan is from fruition, or even how viable it is in practice (it smelled like Second System Syndrome to me when I first heard about it, some years ago now). So you need to ensure that it's clear you're paying for results - a usable GIMP with floating point images & adjustment layers.

  96. Why would he lie to his fellow Republicans by Udo+Schmitz · · Score: 0, Troll
    "Why would he lie to his fellow Republicans[...]"

    Huh, dunno. Ever asked your president the same question?

  97. seacrest out! by dwntwnboi · · Score: 1

    ya know, i've been hearing this debate for as long as anyone (my whole life, that is-- all 26 years, lol). i've been empassioned by it, and i even chose my career around it.

    but you know what? i'm supposed to think that i still can't do anything. the entire system (not to sound like a conspiracy theorist or anything) is set up, amongst many other things, to make sure that no matter how opposed to something you may be, no matter how militant, empassioned, or whatever, you will do ANYTHING BUT get like-minded people together and go protest, or some other form of affecting change. and if you do manage, somehow, to get enough people together about a thing, it's either A) not enough (gay adoption) B) too loosely organized to be of any effect (gay marriage) or C) called out by those who are threatened by the change as lunatics, fanatical extreminsts, perverts, or, Dog forbid, unamerican (michael moore).

    so, what does this say? it's like they say in poker: if you look around and can't tell who the sucker is, it's you. and us, like those who fought to get here, to be free in this great land of the tyranny and opression that our forefathers could no longeer bear (taxation without representation-- hmm... remind you of someplace?), are trapped... trapped in a state of suspended disbelief, numbing outselves with unbridled hedonism and self-indulgent denial ro our surroundings, in uncathartic aquiescence-- no, submission-- to what those in power have chosen as our fate. our elections can't be trusted, our politicians are all CEOs/corporate fatcats with hidden agendas, and the free, the brave... what have we? exactly what we were running from: the greed and opression of rich white aristocrats. and it's happening all over again-- but this time, it's not opression, it's "FREEDOM", and "LIBERTY", and "JUSTICE". it's the whool being pulled over our eyes. and the more we hear it, the more we believe it.

    but why? why do we listen to this crap? why don't we stand up and shout, "you liars! give me back my freedom!"? because we want, we need so desperately to believe that we still have free speech, that we still have a right to a fair trial, and to not have our private homes searched unjustly... all those freedoms that they shove down our throats till we puke, that we are willing to create a fantasy world in which it all exists. population: 320 MILLION. but in the end, each and every fucking person on the planet, even if on the most unconcious level, knows this. but they won't admit it. not to others, and especially not to themselves. their whole world, their whole reality would come crashing down around them. welcome to the world of modern media.

    just as ad agencies manufacture desire, the spin machines manufacture reality. slowly and surely they draw your attention farther and farther from what's really happening by distracting you with "pop" bullshit, into what's "really" happening, what's "news" (martha stewart goes to jail at the EXACT same time the opressive homeland "security" act passes?). the desire to care about anything other than who's doing who on the Real World or what the latest hair-style is "in" is washed out of us by dangling shiny objects in front of us. shiny obejects we try to use to forget the fact we're getting it up the ass. or they say "we're fighting terror," an oft-too-used term in political jargon. anytime something so reprehensible happens that it can't escape the public eye, "we're fighting terrorism". bah!

    and it comes to this: we can either uprise on a national level and overthrow our government (great, now i get to be in the fbi database!), or do what i have chosen: to work my ass of, save up, and get the fuck outta dodge cuz there will be no uprising, there will be no revolt, and when the U-S-of-fucking-A folds in on itself, i don't want to be anywhere nearby.

    hopefully the moon will be colonized by the english, and we can all live happily ever after.

    ha!

    1. Re:seacrest out! by Koiu+Lpoi · · Score: 1

      Give me 5 years, I'm moving to Japan. And, I look at it all: It doesn't matter who's in office: dem or republican, left or right, etc. It's all the same people in the background.

  98. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Read the bill of rights sometimes and see wich of those in-aleinable rights haven't a defacto 'unless the federal government decides otherwise' tacted onto them.
    An easy, if somewhat contriversial example: how is it possible to be jailed for simply having a firearm on you when BEAR and NOT INFRINGED both apear in the second amendment (and before some ignoramus quotes the 'well regulated millitia part' please be aware if you are a us citizen of leagle age and sound mind you ARE the millitia. That and well regulated means functioning, not legislated)
    Going further the fifth prohibits the taking of private property for public use without 'fair compensation', yet look at the drug fortieture laws. One man was hired for a charter flight and flew the customer from one island to another. The customer was dressed like many of the bussinessmen he'd flown before and he had no reason to suspect this person as anything else. Yet when he landed he, <b>his plane</b>, and the customer were arrested (yes his plane was 'arrested' not impounded). The man was carrying a fair amount of of some illeagle drug in his briefcase (it was full). The charges against the pilot/owner was dropped, not even a grand jury or anything, but the plane was still sold off.
    Many of these drug siezed properties were a result of an anonymous tip (errr, confront accusers, no warrents shall issue? there's two more), in some cases the tip turns out bogus, but since 'suspicion of drugs' is the cause of the search and siezure the state gets to sell it off at auction anyway. Though that last has slowed almost to a stop because of the outcry.
    Or more recently the 14th amendment directly prohibits the draft, yet it has used since the 1th was passed.
    Many of our rights are regularly ingored. Unless of course you were taking issue with the implication this is a recent phenomena, which of course it's not, it's just a bit more pronounced.

    Mycroft

    --
    https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
  99. Electronic Voting Woes by mrosgood · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Washington State Republicans, passing over dollars to pick up pennies.

    Evidence Of Election Irregularities In Snohomish County, Washington, General Election, 200

    This is only about winning, at any cost. If the GOP was actually concerned about fraud, they'd insist that electronic voting machine vendors like Sequoia open up their boxes for independent inspection. As it is today, the contracts stipulate that vote counting is a trade secret.

    That's just lovely.

  100. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by (trb001) · · Score: 1

    The media in the USA is insane. They're the single biggest lobby group in America today and not only that but they're also in the director's chair because they control what politician's get elected.

    While I would agree with your first sentence on the sanity of the media, but your second sentence would be proven incorrect by Bush being reelected. The media was pretty deadset against his reelection and it still happened.

    --trb

  101. More votes found... by kwietman · · Score: 2, Informative

    In King County, another 95 votes have been recently "discovered," which were not counted in the November election. By themselves, not enough to change the outcome of the race, but enough to fuel the fires of those (myself included) who feel we deserve another election. In another note, special election ballots sent to servicepersons overseas last week apparently contained everything except the actual ballot. Once again, the soldier gets screwed out of his or her vote, either by sending absentee ballots out too late or by simply not being given one.

    --
    The universe is made of atoms and empty space. All else is speculation. --Democritus of Abdera, 435 BC
    1. Re:More votes found... by Detritus · · Score: 1

      They should send the responsible people to Iraq, and have them make a personal apology to every service member who didn't receive a proper ballot.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  102. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by OAB_X · · Score: 1

    And I am sure you can think of many of those "vast majority" of Presidents who could not get elected today who never deserved to be elected in the first place.

    Abe Lincon. He was not even close to being attractive, apparently had a terribly gruff voice, grew up in a log cabbin, and was one of the best Presidents ever.

  103. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by lordsid · · Score: 1

    actually the biggest lobbying groups you never here about because they are doing their job properly. the biggest lobbyists are the chemical companies making sure they can bury their nasty chems where ever they want.

    --
    IMAGE VERIFICATION IS EVIL!
  104. blah blah by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    No, it is *you* who is listening *too hard* - to the Republican voices in your head. I read a post which favored any Republicans: "But the local government here needs change, and a Republican term or two would do us some good.". No specifics, just explicit preference for one party over another, because one party had power too long. BTW, that post also includes a ridiculous rant about needing "better" business and corporate law in WA, though Microsoft seems to like it there. In short, just another cryptoRepublican begging for more abuse from their favorite Daddy party.

    Unlike you, they at least have the dignity not to come out and barf actual lies from the Republican talking points machine. I'm not going to debate the Ohio election with someone as lost a cause as you obviously are. Except to correct your miserable assertion about "some flimsy Internet rumors", which ignores the hundreds of thousands of Ohioans scammed out of their right to vote, as reported in detail, with hundreds of witnesses, by Rep. Conyers' Congressional committee. The Republicans on that committee ignored the report, so why should a mere mouthpiece like you pay any attention? Why do you hate America?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  105. 81.55 per 1000 people is 8.155%, not 10% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    81.55 per 1000 people is 8.155%, not 10%

    1. Re:81.55 per 1000 people is 8.155%, not 10% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its mindles nerds like you that has forced Karl Rove to recommend that the NSF budget for mathematical research this year.

      Yours is not to question why, yours is but to pay and die.

    2. Re:81.55 per 1000 people is 8.155%, not 10% by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 1
      No, it's mindless nerds like him who have forced Karl Rove to recommend "No Child Left Behind", an attempt to force all school children to learn to take standardized tests, rather than learn to think for themselves. Once we stop the public from thinking for themselves we can implement our plans with impunity! And demand a ransom of
      One Million Dollars! (bwa-ha-ha)
      --
      If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  106. iCopulate by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The iCopulate really exists!!

    http://www.luxpro-corp.com/e_sc01.htm

  107. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    He's not violating the law, just unwritten rules of etiquette; It's polite to try to cooperate before forking.

    I'm not involved with the development of the GIMP in any way, so I don't know, but there does seem to be a tone surrounding the GIMP developers of, "We know you want it to be more like Photoshop, but we don't, so it's not going to happen." Well, I should say, at least that's the general perception of those of us unconnected to the project.

  108. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Free software is mostly not being developed by people for their own motivations and not for those of any users.

    And part of the problem is that coders often don't make good interface architects. They're too close to the problem and too familiar with the technical issues when good interface architects have to step back, look at it fresh, and imagine that they have no idea how to use software.

    So insofar as FOSS is a developer scratching a personal itch, that's fine. If they don't have a problem with their software, there's no problem. However, if you're a FOSS developer, and you want to make *good* software, fit for general use, supporting the FOSS movement, then "scratching a personal itch" isn't good enough. You have to consider your users, and that means listening to them.

    If you don't want that obligation, then don't take a leadership position in developing software for end-users.

  109. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is the Media that has sent around the idea that the Media is liberal and/or has a liberal bias. (I still can't understand why liberal has become a bad word.) There are just as many conservative media outlets as there are liberal. The problem is that jurnalism is no longer a profession, it is a job. The integrity has been removed. There is no longer any attempt to hide bias in either direction. Even Fox's "fair and balanced" isn't fair or balanced. In fact, a study was done a few years ago that concluded that Fox was WRONG in a lot of what they reported. The study asked people what source they got their news from, how much they watched/read that source, and then asked them questions about factually provable events. For every source but Fox, the more the responder watched/read, the more accurately answered the questions. For Fox, the more they watched, the WORSE they answered the questions. It isn't that the Media has a Liberal bias, it is that the World has a Liberal bias, and the Media is reporting on that.

  110. Re:Stop your whining. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yours is not to question why, yours is but to pay and die.

    If you feel so sure of yourself, why haven't you signed on to Bush's directive to cut social security benefits by 40% for everyone who signs on to start a private account?

    Besides, the pope was just modded up and look where it got him. Dust onto dust.

  111. Close Elections Suck by Old+VMS+Junkie · · Score: 2, Informative

    The only way to ensure a valid result is a blowout. Then no matter how much fraud there is (and there is always some on both sides) you can be pretty sure that the right guy (or girl) won. I highly recommend "Stealing Elections" by John Fund for those who want to read more about the depths to which politicians will sink.

  112. Re:More votes found... AND THEY ARE ALL REPUBLICAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We simply need a new federal law that states that any time a republican looses and election there is an automatic relection.

    This can be done at no cost to the taxpayers as voting machine contractors are willing to pay for the cost of elections in exchange for permanent no-bid contracts.

    Help end social security (except for the super-rich, they need it more than you because inflation cuts into their life-style disproportionately).

    Yours is not to question why, yours is but to pay and die.

  113. Election Fraud in the UK by Detritus · · Score: 1
    According to a story from the BBC, Labour politicians in Birmingham were caught engaging in massive and blatant vote fraud. Postal ballots were the tool used to perpetrate the fraud.

    At least it proves that other democracies are not immune to the problems that afflict the U.S. election system. It used to be that you had to demonstrate a genuine need to get an absentee ballot. Election officials knew that they were prone to fraud and abuse. In the lemming-like stampede to make voting "easy" for those without a sense of civic duty, the doors were opened to election fraud on a massive scale.

    --
    Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  114. Re: American Citizenship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The nice thing about American citizenship is that within the country, we DON'T have to admit to it if we don't want to.

    Just because a person doesn't check a box, does NOT mean a person is not a US citizen.

    I find this campaign by republican operatives to force all voters to register their social security numbers so that their pals in the voting machine companies can manipulate their votes disgusting.

    Lets get back to paper ballots.

    PS The guy who received crack was George Bush, the state was Texas.

  115. Re Forget chrisitanity we need republicanism! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yours is not to question why, yours is but to pay and die.

    Don't forget to sign up for your personal saving account, so that we can cut your social security benefit by 40%!

  116. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
    When someone takes the time to say "Your program could be improved by doing xyz" they just contributed.

    Yes, they contributed criticism. Making the changes requested are going to cost the developers time. If the satisfaction gained by making these changes is judged by the developers to be sufficient to implement them, then they will. If not, then try providing them with a different incentive, such as money.

    Software Libre is about the freedom to make modifications, it is not about getting shiny things for nothing. If a particular feature is valuable to you, then either implement it yourself or pay someone else to implement it. Do not expect developers to bend over backwards for you.

    Most (all?) free software exists because the developers either needed the tool they created or they thought they would gain something useful from making it (either experience / knowledge or money). Unless you are willing to give away the products of your work, do not expect other people to.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  117. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by swinte · · Score: 2, Interesting

    True that!

    You hit the nail on the head: GIMP's interface sucks. There are no two ways about it. At work we use Photoshop every hour of every day. Being locked in to one vendor--especially Adobe--makes me nervous so we looked at the GIMP as an alternative. Our designers laughed it out of the shop because the interface was so badly designed.

    Instead of bitching about the GIMPshop guy, the GIMP developers need to hire him and have him start reworking the standard interface; anything is better than the cobbled together mess they have now. The interface is so bad it completely eclipses all of the hard work they have done on the core features.

  118. Re:Airships.? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn, all this time I thought they had to do with kinky French sex.

  119. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by pudge · · Score: 1

    how is it possible to be jailed for simply having a firearm on you when BEAR and NOT INFRINGED both apear in the second amendment

    Yeah, but that has nothing to do with two-party rule. And the tide lately has been turning back in favor of the 2nd Amendment, not against it (thanks in no small part to the Bush DOJ).

    As to seizing property ... do you know your history? We're better now than we were 200 years ago. Just because we don't follow the Constitution properly today doesn't mean we are worse than we used to be. Eminent Domain has been abused throughout our nation's history.

    And of course, there was no 14th Amendment 200 years ago, so that's a bit of a poor example, but even accepting it, I'll counter with the Sedition Act and the suspension of Habeas Corpus and the internment of Japanese citizens and slavery and separate-but-equal ...

    Unless of course you were taking issue with the implication this is a recent phenomena, which of course it's not, it's just a bit more pronounced.

    I don't think that it is more pronounced. I think it is less so. Can you imagine any of those things in that list directly above happening today?

  120. Re: They guys a Democrat so hes fair game. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You must be an old timer. You no longer understand the purpose of newspapers.

    Get with the program.

  121. GIS by punkass · · Score: 1

    Now that Slashback has returned, does this mean we're going to see a new Geeks in Space Episode any time soon?

    --
    "Nobody owns the fucking words man." - James Dean
  122. Reagan? Really? by bodrell · · Score: 1
    do you honestly feel that the people we elect are the best for the job?

    In the case of Reagan, I think so. In the case of W, the jury is still out (I wouldn't think he is the best for the job looking at resumes or abilities, but OTOH, he might turn out to be the perfect leader for the time we are in; ask me again in 20 years).
    As far as the original topic goes, I do think there should be a reelection, to be fair. After all, the winner was originally Rossi, and no one can argue it wasn't ridiculously close. Here in Oregon the election gets plenty of coverage.

    But how can you in good conscience say Reagan was the best person for the job, or even a good person for the job? What conservative values do you hold, if you feel that way? I can think of probably a dozen reasons I think Reagan was the worst president in the history of the US, but here are just a couple:

    1) His unsuccessful "War on Drugs" is not only still wasting taxpayer money, but is responsible for the US having the highest incarceration rate in the world. Above China, above Russia, and even above Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
    2) If you look at the national debt over time, you will see exactly when it began to skyrocket: 1980-1988. And the subsequent presidents didn't help the problem.
    3) Reagan was a documented liar (unless you believe that string of "I don't remember"s), and in my opinion committed treason via the Iran-Contra arms deals. Not to mention the massive human rights abuses that occurred at a direct or indirect result of the CIA meddling in Honduras, Nicaragua, and probably a dozen countries we are not yet aware of.
    4) Back to the "War on Drugs" fiasco, we effectively no longer have a 4th ammendment, because it was deemed more important to find drugs than to respect the Bill of Rights.

    Pudge, I regularly read your submissions, and appreciate your diplomacy when discussing these matters, but that statement about Reagan really makes me question your sanity.

    --
    Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a soportar Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a espabilar
  123. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by k98sven · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm not the guy, so I don't really know his motivations, but he might have felt that 'do first, ask for permission later' was best in this case to create buzz about this issue.

    Um, yeah. But it seems he didn't do that either. Seems the guy hasn't made any effort to work with the Gimp people, even when they contacted him.

    That is unpolite, whatever way you look at it.

    Obviously when faced with LOTS of users cheering this modification the Gimp developers will be a lot more open to the idea than if a lone developer asked for this feature through the 'proper channels'.

    No, no, no. The Gimp developers know a lot of people want a PS-similar interface. It's been talked about for years. But it seems the people actually hacking on Gimp were happy with the interface as it was. That doesn't mean they wouldn't want to give it a "PS theme" if someone was willing to do wone. It just means they weren't willing to do it themselves.

    Again, you don't seem to understand that there's a big difference between whinging "I want a Photoshop-like UI!!" and actually approaching them with "Hey, I've got a Photoshop-like UI here, do you want it?".

    A user asking for a feature is asking is nothing more and nothing less than someone asking a complete stranger to spend hours of his time doing him a favour. You simply can't expect that unless the guy he's asking wants it himself.

    Now actually contributing is offering someone a favour. And that is a completely different matter.

    It would be nice if the Gimp devs listened to some experienced PS folks (not me, I'm no expert) who could point them in the right direction in terms of features users REALLY want vs features that the devs want.

    That is simply not going to happen. Free software development doesn't work like that. It's software developed by people 'scratching an itch' for something they want. Now for some people, perhaps that itch is 'helping others'. But I assure you they are in the minority. You never have any guarantee a feature will be present unless you're either willing to code it yourself or pay someone to do so.

  124. Re: American Citizenship by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 0

    Why do we bother with voter registration if you're not going to bother with filling out the forms right?

    The FACT here is that those who allowed voter registrations to occur with such faults, should be held responsible, and the errors should be corrected. Entire elections can be determined by just 1 margin vote, so every single vote must be verified good and accurate if possible. And as far as possibility is concerned, this is why we should have more local voting systems, with strict compliance up the chain, so that errors can be checked with some local travel, and also that errors cannot persist upward to destroy the validity of a national vote.

    Of course, all this assumes the citizenry even cares. Given your attitude, that's a bad assumption.

    --
    [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  125. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

    IF (IF ((you.facts=learn) AND (you.history(books)=read) AND (you.politicians=watch(closely))) THEN you.location=europe) THEN me.too

    --
    [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  126. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

    Get caught with cocaine (itself, a lost right to not be prosecuted for simply having a personal chemical) in your car, and then come back and tell us what you've lost. (Hint: your entire fucking car, Ace.) Ever heard of the 4th Amendment? Well, law enforcement nowadays hasn't heard of it either.

    I love it when people like you pull the innocent act and pretend like you don't understand what we real progressives are talking about. You've lost a veritable TON of rights ... freedom of speech (SLAPP suits), freedom to own weapons (gun bans), freedom from search and seizure (property forfeitures for narcotics) ... the list is annoyingly, FAR too long. And I equally love to rub your fucking noses in it, Roscoe.

    --
    [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  127. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it is that the World has a Liberal bias,

    This is the kind of disconnect from reality that makes so many leftists laughable. "No, we're not biased, we're just always right."

    Just keep on thinking that. I'm sure the Whigs thought the same thing.

  128. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

    In the case of Reagan, I think so.

    Yeah, love those deficits. The international bankers thought Reagan was a great guy too. Too bad we're still making payments on his so-called greatness.

    Republican shill.

    In the case of W, the jury is still out (I wouldn't think he is the best for the job looking at resumes or abilities, but OTOH, he might turn out to be the perfect leader for the time we are in; ask me again in 20 years).

    Shit crock. George W. Bush is the first Hitler of the 21st Century. The only jury deliberation going on is by people like you who have entirely bought into American Imperialism. In that light, you aren't deliberating anything. You've long decided to support the biggest murderer.

    This 20-year thing is yet another piece of festering shit to spill from that asshole you call a mouth. Sure, we knew Viet Nam was a problem in the 1980s ... long after we should have acted to stop it. Iraq is mounting up the same way as Viet Nam 2.0.

    20-years-later is not a way to run a just society. Crime and war must be stopped NOW, not judged adversely a generation after the fact, when there's no one you can really even punish for the crimes committed.

    If you're so keen on waiting, post your address and your schedule. I'll burgle your house, and then let me know how you feel about THAT in 2025.

    You might well be right about one thing, in all your horseshit: GWB is the PERFECT leader for the American Empire. If you're an Imperialist, then that's a great, great thing. For the rest of us decent folk that don't advocate (or act) to murder people for oil, American access and Israeli security, GWB is simply a Hitler clone.

    --
    [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  129. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by pudge · · Score: 1

    You've lost a veritable TON of rights

    You named the property seizure. And it is not a right that has been lost recently, as that right was abused much 50, 100, and 200 years ago.

    As to the freedom of speech, that is equally laughable, cf. the aforementioned Sedition Act, right on up through the Pentagon Papers. We have far more free speech today than we have ever had before in this country, without question. Oh sure, there's a few setbacks here and there, like McCain-Feingold. But those are the exceptions that prove the rule.

    I am with you on guns, but we are better off in other ways, too, as mentioned in the reply to the other post: habeas corpus, internment, slavery, segregation, women's rights, homosexual rights, the list goes on.

    That's the point of my playing "innocent": your enumeration of the few rights we don't have only highlights how far we've come in the past 200 years, and makes claims that we are worse off laughable.

  130. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by pudge · · Score: 1

    Obviously, you couldn't care less about rational discussion, so I'll keep my pearls to myself.

  131. Re:More votes found... AND THEY ARE ALL REPUBLICAN by kwietman · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately for your comment, the first two recounts in the WA election were requested by now-Governor Gregoire and the Washington Deomcratic Party. It was only after the votes swung her way that she suddenly decided that the election fracas had gone on long enough and it was "time to move on." It was at this time that the Republican Party switched its stance from "no more recounts, just get over it," to asking for a recount and challenging the election in court. I'm angry at both sides for their shameless manipulation of the system, and I'm angry at the Washington SecState for such an ineffecient and incompetent election staff/process. Given that, no matter what the results, the election was the closest gubernatorial race in US history, a repeat election seems in order.

    --
    The universe is made of atoms and empty space. All else is speculation. --Democritus of Abdera, 435 BC
  132. Re:More votes found... AND THEY ARE ALL REPUBLICAN by kwietman · · Score: 1

    Whoops, this was posted to the wrong subthread. Meant for the AC who replied further down. Sorry.

    --
    The universe is made of atoms and empty space. All else is speculation. --Democritus of Abdera, 435 BC
  133. Go ahead throw away your vote... by uqbar · · Score: 1

    [obligatory Simpson's reference]

  134. Re:Reagan? Really? by bodrell · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The deficit, eh. A huge percentage of that was to fight the Cold War, which I am very happy we did. I am not happy about all the increases in social spending, but so what? How could I ever be happy with everything anyone does?
    I guess I'm just unclear on the ideology here. Do you believe in fiscal responsibility? That's generally a "conservative" principle, whereas the pattern of spending during the Reagan years is anything but responsible. Do you believe in a nation's right to self-determination? That's another principle generally considered conservative, but fighting the Cold War went directly against it. Protecting a foreign country from communist invaders is one thing, but that is not what happened in Nicaragua, where the US funded the foreign invaders to try to overthrow a democratically elected Sandinistas. You may not agree with Sandinista politics, but do you really think they were a threat to the United States?
    As to lying ... he is a "documented liar unless you believe" ... ? If it is left up to belief, he is not therefore a documented liar, and saying he is is, well, a documented lie on your part.
    Point taken. That was poorly worded. I guess I should say that Reagan has been documented saying things that would be considered lies beyond a reasonable doubt. He was the commander in chief, and it is unreasonable to believe that he had no knowledge of what Oliver North was doing, or what the CIA was doing. In retrospect, Reagan's Alzheimer's makes his "I don't remember" statements slightly more believable, but not enough to exculpate him. But since there is really no way to determine someone's memory, it is untestable. He was certainly involved in some despicable covert operations, and that is documented (they happened on his watch, and he--not Congress, not anyone else--was responsible for the CIA's activities).
    Anyway, more directly to the point: what President has not had terrible problems on his watch, some even caused by him? Abe Lincoln essentially started the Civil War, suspended habeas corpus, etc. and we revere him. It's the big picture, and even regardless of anything else, Reagan will be considered the right man at the right time because he is what we needed to defeat the Soviets.
    I don't revere Abe Lincoln for precisely the reasons you mentioned. The Civil War tore this country apart, and was almost surely unnecessary. I believe it helped perpetuate racism in the American South. By 1900, the last country in the Americas (Brazil) had repealed slavery. Perhaps if there had been a more organic opposition to slavery in the Confederacy, our country would be less racist today. Instead, blacks continued to suffer under carpetbagger regimes and foot-dragging Southerners who wished for the good ol' days before the war. It's all hypothetical, but it is a certainty that slavery would have been abolished eventually, even without Union intervention.

    As for Reagan's legacy (defeating the Soviets), perhaps you are right. But I think it's much more likely that the US will have a financial crisis due to the massive debt accumulation that will far overshadow any gains from "defeating the Soviets" (if that's what the arms spending race really was).

    Besides fighting the Cold War, why else do you think Reagan was great? I'm genuinely curious, because I can't think of anything.

    --
    Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a soportar Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a espabilar
  135. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by MarcoAtWork · · Score: 1

    Seems the guy hasn't made any effort to work with the Gimp people, even when they contacted him.

    I am not privy to the exchange(s) between the guy and the Gimp devs: I remember reading Sven posting on the guy's blog that he thought it was 'unfortunate' that he released the hack in this way and that he should've done it the way he had asked (basically via the proper channels). Given this maybe the guy felt that talking with the devs was kind of pointless.

    The Gimp developers know a lot of people want a PS-similar interface. It's been talked about for years.

    exactly, and it's never been done because they are happy with the interface as it is, regardless how many people think it sucks and it's a barrier to a more ubiquitous Gimp adoption.

    It's software developed by people 'scratching an itch' for something they want

    I am fully aware of that, hey, I've done it myself ;) and that's why I'm saying: this guy had an itch (he wanted a Gimp UI more similar to PS), he scratched it and released his modifications so other with the same itch could benefit. There's absolutely NOTHING wrong with that from the point of view of 'free software development', the whole 'due process' angle is in some way like trying to put some limits on that freedom!

    It's as if the Gimp devs said 'yeah, we released things under a license that allows you to do this, BUT, you really should not exercise your rights and instead partecipate in xyz committee that might or might not decide that your itch is worth scratching'.

    Should the Gimp be re-released under a GPL-but-need-a-committee-approval-before-modifying -it license then?

    You never have any guarantee a feature will be present unless you're either willing to code it yourself or pay someone to do so.

    exactly, that's why after several years of trying to work with Gimp and being frustrated by its lack of progress (when it comes to features people actually need, like a PS-like UI, adjustment layers, better color tools, etc.) I took my money and bought Photoshop Elements 3 which, together with my PS5 LE, does everything I need for now. When the new CS comes out, if they'll have the $299 upgrade path from Elements 3 I might even get that.

    A development model based on 'scratching an itch' is fine for an emergent OS, with Linux coming more and more in the mainstream users expect to be listened to, catered to and most of all respected, and not told to 'code it or shut up'.

    In this case the non-free software world is better: PS is not #1 because it sucks, PS is #1 because it's the best, otherwise PSP and others would take its place. Gimp has really no competition in the free software world and so it can just rest on its laurels and have the whole 'we are the devs and WE put in what WE like, users should shut up or code' attitude.

    --
    -- the cake is a lie
  136. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by CSMastermind · · Score: 1

    You proablly meant that slightly less offensive than it came out but let me make the statement that, even though I hate many of his policies and appointments, GWB is not a new hitler. Hitler was a very smart man, he was nobody's puppet it. The things Hitler did were evil, but he was a gifted speaker and a briliant politican. King George II is neither of these. He at best is a good guy who made some terrible choices and at worst a puppet who's lost.

  137. Re:I don't understand the acrimony directed toward by k98sven · · Score: 1

    this guy had an itch (he wanted a Gimp UI more similar to PS), he scratched it and released his modifications so other with the same itch could benefit. There's absolutely NOTHING wrong with that from the point of view of 'free software development', the whole 'due process' angle is in some way like trying to put some limits on that freedom!

    Noone said it was wrong. But it's stupid. It's stupid not to collaborate if you can. And in this case, the impression I get is that he did have the opportunity to collaborate directly with the Gimp folks, and achieve mutual benefit. And he didn't do that. I can fully understand if the Gimp devs are a bit sour; not because what he did was wrong, but because it's frustrating to see someone do good work and then shoot themselves in the foot by making it incompatible for no reason. And the impression BigSven gives is that it could've been avoided if he'd bothered to contact people with a better understanding of the Gimp internals beforehand.

    It's as if the Gimp devs said 'yeah, we released things under a license that allows you to do this, BUT, you really should not exercise your rights and instead partecipate in xyz committee that might or might not decide that your itch is worth scratching'.

    No, what the Gimp devs are saying is that you can exersize your rights and do whatever you want, but we'd be much happier if you cooperated with us, so that we could achive something benefitial to everybody.

    A development model based on 'scratching an itch' is fine for an emergent OS, with Linux coming more and more in the mainstream users expect to be listened to, catered to and most of all respected, and not told to 'code it or shut up'.

    Then I suggest those users go buy a supported distribution like Red Hat and send their requests to their developers. But nobody can tell anyone else what they can and can't do in their own time, and as long as the work is being done by unpaid developers working in their own time, that is just not realistic.

    Personally, when coding free software, I do try to listen to users and respect their requests. But I do not tolerate the idea that I'm under any kind of obligation to do so. If the users are going to come to expect that, then they'll have to be prepared to be disappointed as you were.

    In this case the non-free software world is better

    Yes, it is. But not quite for the reason you stated. The non-free software development is supply-and-demand, where the 'demand' part is that of the paying users. In free software development the 'demand' part is that of the developers themselves.

    I don't think this is a major problem. It's not like the opinions of users and developers are radically different. Or very different at all. Personally I think the Gimp UI is absolutely horrible. (although somewhat better in 2.0), and this guy obviously thought so too.

  138. Does Dick Cheney count? by douglasq · · Score: 1

    How about this: name one president in the past 50 years who wasn't wealthy 4 years after leaving office.

    --
    "Form should follow function...unless it's just plain ugly."
  139. apparently 2 of your 3 work for the USAF by alizard · · Score: 1
    JP Aerospace is one of the blimp-to-orbit companies. http://www.jpaerospace.com/ http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/pongsat_0210 04.html
    === quote
    The company is really flying high thanks to a recent U.S. Air Force contract.

    Work is underway at JP Aerospace on the Ascender, a hybrid aircraft for flight at the upper most part of the atmosphere, as well as the Vee Airship. These type vehicles are of interest to the U.S. Air Force Space Battle Laboratory in Colorado Springs, Colorado. They are focused on perfecting a near-space maneuvering vehicle, Powell said. === end quote

  140. Re:Doc, Get Over It by ptbarnett · · Score: 1
    Finally, what is it about outrage and disgust about Republicans cracking Democrats email on the Senate Judiciary Committee, to spy on them, that is "partisan"? Show me Democrats cracking and spying on Republicans' email in the Senate, and I'll be outraged. Waiting...

    Doc, you know very well that the problem with your posting that I referenced was your complaint that "the Republicans resorted to the unprecedented, and grossly wrong trick of appointing the judges during a Senate recess, unopposed." I cited a Senate report that detailed a number of recess appointments by previous Democrat and Republican administrations as long ago as Eisenhower.

    Sadly, you didn't learn from your error, subsequently claiming that Tom DeLay had been indicted. While DeLay was (and still is) confronting several ethical problems, he has only been subpoenaed to testify about the matter, and had not been indicted for anything.

    And today, you are claiming that Clinton didn't lie under oath, conveniently mis-citing the definitions provided during his testimony to the grand jury. Even if you succeed in splitting hairs the way Clinton did, Clinton's own testimony is contradictory.

    Really, I don't know what you mean by "idependent", if you say that I am not. I'm a member of no political party.

    Doc, your postings on Slashdot identify you as a partisan hack. You are about as "idependent" as Karl Rove.

  141. Re:Doc, Get Over It by iminplaya · · Score: 1

    To say one side lies more than the other may be a mistake. The fact that one side gets caught more often is another matter. I firmly believe that both of the majors like things just the way they are. Both sides are extracting huge amounts of money and power from the rest of us. Their methods may be different, but the goal is the same. To that end, they are completely united as one.

    --
    What?
  142. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

    Perhaps it is indeed a matter of perspective, every generation does indeed tend to consider the time of thier youth before the troubles of the world were so clearly visible to them as 'the good old days' and romanticise even further the days of thier parents and grandparents.
    But it still seems to me that for every step forward in our rights in one area we loose just a tad more in another. Perhaps the 2nd suffers less under the gop, but doese not privacy and freedom suffer more? perhaps the big evils of slavery are finally cast down for what they are, but do we not through pc-ism find our right to speak our mind diminished?
    A tough call I suppose, but when I find I am no longer safe from search or siezure in my own car because the officer's remote odds of reduced safty somehow trumps my rights under the fifth I am dispirited. Mind you I like most police officers I've met and feel they are underpaid and do a hard thankless job, but thier job is NOT about thier percieved safty but about the rule of law and public safty, which becomes jepordized when our constitionally protected (not granted or given!) rights are diminished.
    There are thousands of tiny examples. I feel it's more we gone from a few big failures to a great many tiny faults, from a few bad timbers in the building to an infestation of termites and rot.
    But I do hope your right and I'm merely mistaking an increase in awareness for what has always been there for an actual increase the faults themselves.

    Mycroft

    --
    https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
  143. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by pudge · · Score: 0, Troll

    But it still seems to me that for every step forward in our rights in one area we loose just a tad more in another.

    It doesn't seem that way to me. Maybe if you look only at the few years since 9/11 ... but even then, since that time, we've had anti-sodomy laws ruled unconstitutional, and virtual child porn ruled legal (not that I am in favor of virtual child porn, but it's nice that the courts recognize we can do fake things and distinguish them from reality, which didn't happen before).

    Perhaps the 2nd suffers less under the gop, but doese not privacy and freedom suffer more?

    "Freedom" is ambiguous. The Second Amendment is about freedom too. As to privacy, I am unconvinced. The great majority of the things the left complains about -- for example, being able to search library records -- is not, in my opinion, the least bit antagonistic to our rights. Further, these things all had bipartisan support, so I question your attack of the GOP in these matters.

    And one thing also to remember is that the most egregious moves by the Congress are being challenged in court, and are often losing, including getting support in some cases from conservative justices like Scalia, who sided against the government in the Padilla case. The point being that when the government does overstep its bounds against our rights, we can't run around like chickens with our heads cut off, because at the end of the day, our rights will usually be just fine.

    perhaps the big evils of slavery are finally cast down for what they are, but do we not through pc-ism find our right to speak our mind diminished?

    I find that to be absoutely, in every way, irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I am talking about the legal right to free speech, not whether you feel constrained by cultural forces that have no force of law. I never feel constrained to speak my mind.

    There are thousands of tiny examples.

    I doubt it. But even if so, there are thousands of examples from 200 years ago, from 150 years ago, from 100 years ago, from 50 years ago, too. And most of those are worse, and most of those we would not stand for today, and most of those included the ones we take issue with today, such as property rights and search/seizure rights. Those are not new problems; at most, they are existing problems amplified both by our current situation (terrorist threats + new technologies).

    And getting back to the courts ... these things take time. You can't expect the government to immediately recognize and adapt to our new situation in a way that is going to be entirely congruous with our rights. This is a slow process. An example: it has always been legal to stand outside someone's property and view it, as long as you don't actually enter the property. So a cop can listen and look through your window from the sidewalk, hear or see a crime, and then arrest you, without a warrant.

    That's all well and good, but what about new technology that allows me to actually "see" through your walls using UV or heat sensors? Is that an invasion of privacy? How should the law be rewritten to prevent it, if it should be prevented?

    I have confidence these things will work themselves out in favor of our rights, because with the notable exception of guns, they almost always do. But it takes time.

  144. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by (trb001) · · Score: 1

    It isn't that the Media has a Liberal bias, it is that the World has a Liberal bias, and the Media is reporting on that.

    Okay, that's an assanine statement you just made. If the media just reported on the goings-on of the world, and those goings-on happened to be positive for the liberal agenda, I would agree. But that's not the case. As it happens, the issues in question are those which liberals/conservatives have differing opinions on. Look at how the media portrays those topics:

    - Taxes. Always cited is that the top earners received a huge tax break under Bush. It's rarely mentioned that not only do they pay the predominant share of taxes, but they pay a much larger percentage than anyone else. Even with the Bush tax cuts, we have a very progressive tax system.

    - Abortion. Those against abortion are always depicted as religious zealots, when a good many just don't think it's right. Contrast this with...

    - Death penalty. Those for it are depicted as either religious zealots or barbarians, whereas those against it are fair-minded and seeking equality. Never mind that race has to get brought up in nearly every discussion, with citations about the skewed minority population of death row.

    - Poor/entitlement/welfare. You'll see the angle of lost jobs or government irresponsibility, but not drug habits, personal fiscal irresponsibility or lack of motivation.

    - Anything about women. Larry Summers was castigated for suggesting that women may just not have an interest or not be as good overall as men at science and math. You won't hear the media follow that with a study showing that the lowest paying and most dangerous jobs employ almost 100% men.

    Read 'Bias' or 'The Myth of Male Power' or 'Why Men Earn More' for other examples.

    --trb

  145. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Scroatzilla · · Score: 1

    Michael Moore

  146. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 0, Troll

    Gosh, a typical neo-con non-response to the outlandish Fascism exhibited by Your Beloved and Glorious Leader, George W. Bush the First. You can't possibly defend his murderousness, so you duck. Tell us again why this "jury's out" guy sent TEN TIMES as many troops into Iraq (where Osama bin Laden was NOT) than he sent into Afghanistan (where OBL probably WAS), and ZERO troops into Saudi Arabia (where OBL probably now IS)? You can't possibly defend that rhetorical truth, either. Who's "Bandar Bush"? Care to discuss that for a while? I doubt it. We wouldn't want to establish any nasty link between your Republican Godhead and those terrorist-supporting Saudis.

    Go fuck yourself, Neo-Con. The only deliberation possible is what GWB will be doing like Kissinger does right now, by thinking carefully about what country he visits in case he's captured by local law enforcement and then indicted for his crimes against Humanity.

    Imperialist shitbag. YOU ...

    LOVE ...

    MURDERING PEOPLE! And all the world can see that's perfectly true.

    --
    [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  147. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by LaCosaNostradamus · · Score: 1

    You probably avoid noticing the rapt audiences to a GWB speech. His gift at speaking is essentially the same as his father's ... that including extensive tough talk, invoking of religious feelings, and all the rest of the general appeal to our baser natures. It doesn't matter about your judgment about his skill ... the real matter is that he has a hold over millions. And so did Hitler.

    As for the puppet angle, you can't even begin to tell me that Hitler wasn't in thrall to Germany's business interests. War is always good for business ... and CONQUEST is even better. Hitler was backed by conquest-driven economic base with the usual Imperial culture, and so now is GWB. War bit Hitler in the ass eventually, and so it's going to go with GWB. The similarities go on and on.

    I was entirely correct: GWB is the first Hitler clone of the 21st Century. I shudder to think of ninety-five years more years of this Perpetual Conventional Warfare.

    --
    [You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
  148. Biased, no -- Stupid, yes by fm6 · · Score: 1
    Jeez, talk about childish and subjective. I get flamed and downmodded every time I say anything that's vaguely anti-Bush.

    It's amazing. The Bigoted Right controls the White House, both branches of Congress, most state governments, is moving to "control" the courts, and has a more than proportinate say in what goes on TV, movies, and radio. I know people who've lost their jobs because they're "unpatriotic" or "anti-Christian". Yet the BR continues to paint itself as victimized by the "mainstream"! Brainless.

    1. Re:Biased, no -- Stupid, yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I know people who've lost their jobs because
      >they're "unpatriotic" or "anti-Christian".

      While that makes a great story, the real reason they lost their jobs was because they were too stupid to figure out which end of the mop went on the floor.

  149. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

    Well as I said, it can be matter of perception, and mine could easily be off since I haven't really done any 'hard' studies, just gut impressions which are notoriously unreliable.
    Good points about my use of freedom. It is a bit bague in that usage.
    As far as attacking the GOP, I wasn't. My point really was that while eigther major party might be good for some rights, thier track record on others is often not so good.
    The pc-ism I was refering to wasn't just, or even mostly, about social reaction. It was more about making some words and views a leagle liability. The most obvious is many of the hate crimes laws. Some make the words illeagle directly and some only indirectly. Don't get me wrong, most of what hate-crimes laws target is indeed foul behaviour, but the words or beliefs (however stupid and wrong) themselves should not be lest we find ourselves at the bottom of the proverbial slippery slope someday.
    As far as running around in panic, no of course not, but by the same token simply hoping it will get fixed is not recommended eigther.
    Someone around here has an apt sig. It lists the boxes to be used in defence of freedom and our rights in order as soap,ballot,ammo (I think I may have missed one, mail?).

    Mycroft

    --
    https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
  150. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by CSMastermind · · Score: 1

    Name one president in the last fifty years who wasn't rich before they got elected

  151. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by CSMastermind · · Score: 1

    As a matter of fact they did, the whigs were a liberal group in imperial England. You may have heard of them, they broke off and founded this one country called America. They were the liberals of their time as opposed to the torries who were the conservatives in the British system.

  152. Re:You're proablly trolling but in case you aren't by CSMastermind · · Score: 1

    But do to things he inherited and his name he was able to gain fame and many advantages that normal people simply wouldn't have.

  153. Re:Reagan? Really? by js7a · · Score: 4, Interesting
    How can you in good intellect have to ask that question?
    Reagan started a downward trend in real income and poverty that his followers continue to this day.

    "Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

    "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

    "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

    "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." -- Matthew 25:41-46, NIV

    Note that "His left" will be the right of those of us with the good conscience to face Him.
  154. Re:Reagan? Really? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    I hope the white-skinned, blue-eyed, Talking Jesus Doll says this. The site has him sanctimoniously intoning "For God so loved the world...", which are not even the words of Yesheveh Ben-Miryam!

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
  155. Re:Reagan? Really? by js7a · · Score: 1

    This one? Check your gmail.