Slashdot Mirror
Obama Campaign Seeks LAMP Developers
kgamiel writes "The Obama campaign's CTO is hiring LAMP-biased geeks for the Boston office to help elect the Senator in the fall. This got me to wondering, what if he instead announced a SourceForge project toward the same end? What would such a project look like? Tools that both sides could use 'equally' would not achieve the desired end. And philosophically, could the Open Source community support one side in a competition such as this? What other issues does this raise?" Another reader notes that the Obama campaign is also searching for a security expert to plug the holes that allowed a hacker to redirect Obama's site (Linux/Apache hosted by GoDaddy) to Hillary Clinton's (Windows/IIS hosted by Rackspace).
I *really* think Hilary Clinton's should've been advised against being a female candidate, and hosting her site via 'Rack'space.. :-D
[Slashdot Comments We Liked]
Lead to a project which is probably incomplete, no documentation, and maybe a tarball that won't build.
-- Many men would appreciate a woman's mind more if they could fondle it
for any political campaign would be pretty hard to keep track of. Subversion, anybody?
Is slashdot going to turn into Obama propaganda like digg and other sites too? The Obama campaign is looking for people with server and programming experience. Big deal.
Please don't encourage the use of SourceForge for things like this. Not only is SourceForge a dead-end for time-limited projects, it is also full of dead, empty or completely abandoned projects.
A good 60% or more of the projects there have seen no activity at all (because people think creating a project there will automatically write itself), and many projects haven't been touched in 4, 5, 6 or more years.
They've consistently crippled the use of standard OSS tools like CVS, Subversion and Mailman just so they can try to retain control of projects by limiting the ability to use them effectively. They don't support other tools like git and proper MTA support for mailing commits to developers.
Also, quite a few projects have pulled the source to previous releases (a violation of the GPL that these projects were released under; gaim is one of them). Their management of projects and overall administration leaves MUCH to be desired.
Lastly, SourceForge was originally going to be called "Cold Storage", and it was supposed to partner with Freshmeat to permanently archive projects. I've seen many projects vanish from SourceForge, which completely negates the whole policy of its existance.
So while I respect and encourage the use of OSS tools, LAMP, retaining the mindshare of key developers who can help support a candidate they support, I don't think choosing SourceForge to host the project is a wise move.
Do you choose the type of hammer and nails you're going to use, before you draft the plans to build your new house? Do you choose the kind of vehicle you're going to drive before you know your destination and travel route? Of course you don't.
Why choose the hosting service before you've even chosen what kinds of components and requirements the project will need?
Actually not.
If you're referring to the injunction "Thou shalt not kill" in the Ten Commandments, you'll find that the word used--transliterated as ratsach--does not necessarily refer to murder. While that is one of its primary meanings, it also includes unintentional killings as well. Indeed, this is the most common use of the word in Deuteronomy. It enjoins the Israelites to found three cities as refuges for those who kill unintentionally, so that they can flee there and be safe from vengeful relatives.
I'm not sure where the claim that it just means "murder" comes from. A good translation and a concordance will quickly show it to be simply and obviously false. In any case, it is shamelessly used by (mostly) Protestant preachers to justify all kinds of killing as not being "murder." Which isn't exactly in the spirit of Christian charity, to my mind.
Not that it matters to me all that much. I haven't been a believer for years.
The "unintentional" killing you're referring to is closer to the American concept of "negligent homicide" - it was crimes for which the punishment was exile to once of the cities of refuge.
lo tirtzah in the Ten Commandments is a little bit broader than "don't murder," but it's a long distance away from "don't kill." Attempts to interpret it to mean "don't kill" are well-intentioned, but are not faithful to the actual meaning or historical interpretation of the text. If "don't kill" had been intended, lo ya'areg would have been used instead.
This is the standard Rabbinic interpretation of the phrase in the Ten Commandments - all of them refer to crimes for which one can receive the death penalty, so "don't steal" is limited to "don't kidnap [i.e. "don't steal people"]" - one cannot receive the death penalty for homicide which is not murder in Jewish law, so the that's another data point supporting the interpretation of the word as "murder."
Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise!
/that is all
http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
Second should Obama win both the Democratic nomination and the presidency, Hillary Clinton will never have a shot at the presidency. Her and her supporters feel she is entitled to that position. In their minds, she was supposed to be the first woman President of the U.S. In addition to the Clintons' feelings of entitlement and the gender politics involved, lets throw in racial politics (possible first black president), a failed presidency (Bush, Jr), a faltering economy, the expensive quagmire in Iraq, and fear of losing control by a generation entitled Baby Boomers. In point of fact, the whole thing is about the future of freedom - specifically who will set the tone and policies of the next generation of U.S. politics. If you spent half the effort on real problems that you spend electing a leader for your arrogant little country, the world be be such a better place. Go ahead throw your stones. We can take it. We have enough real problems to deal with (like fixing our economy, ending a stupid war & bringing our troops home, repairing our standing in the world, replacing our aging infrastructure, competing with the rising new economic superpowers, and healing the internal wounds from the corrosive Culture War in-fighting of the aging Boomers). We really appreciate your constructive suggestions on how to run our political selection process. Christ, _just get along_. We're trying. You're not helping.
-IV
"These laws they're passing won't even compile anymore, let alone execute." - anon
I don't know about a statement in support of XLOPQFLOSS, but I do know that he's a colleage and friend of Lawrence Lessig, and Obama sat down with Lessig before declaring his candidacy to discuss tech and internet policy.
Lessig endorses him wholeheartedly (you could cynically say it's because he wants a SCOTUS appointment), and from what I've read on Lessig's blog, Obama agrees with much of Lessig's tech/internet policy.
And as Lessig is my hero ("hero" is not the right word, but "role model" doesn't suffice), that's enough for me.
Missing Option: Active, Representing Your Needs.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
Give it to Hans Reiser.
Obama isn't a Baby Boomer. He's in the post-boomer generation variously called Generation-X, Generation-13, Post-Boomers, etc. Basically those born between 1961 and 1981 (read GENERATIONS by Howe & Strauss for a profile of American generations for the last three centuries).
Also, Obama is a reformist leader who has based his campaign on changing how American government works. He is literally the voice crying "STOP" for the two frustrated generations (Gen-X & Millenials) who follow the Boomers.
Clinton is a machine Democrat with 35 years invested in keeping Washington working the way it does now (aka lobbyist rule). So your "same side" argument lacks any basic understanding of current American presidential politics. As such, I have to devalue your criticisms of our system.
So you prefer your nastiness to go on behind closed doors? I guess tastes differ. I prefer openness even if it is messier. Sunlight and fresh air will kill lots of nasty things that live in the dark places.
What the hell are you talking about with my supposed "sit back until they die" approach? I said that we are in the initial stages of shoving the fractious Boomers out of power. We certainly aren't waiting for them to die. Heck, it may require copious amounts of holy water and wooden stakes through their hearts just to get them to back down.
As to the Boomer children being taught to act like their parents, the Millennials are a largely a civic and cooperative generation unlike the Boomers, who are individualistic and rhetorically idealistic. The Millenials do not show the narcissistic sense of "we're right, everyone else is wrong" ego that the Boomers enjoy. As a group the Millennials seem to be naturally cooperative and conscientious, if somewhat immature and naive. Like most civic generations, they were sheltered and cherished so it will take them a while to mature. But when they do, America will change as it has not since the last great civic generation: the G.I. (aka "The Greatest Generation").
In the interim it is the Gen-X folks that will be taking the reigns for a while. This is the truly galling part for the Boomers. They HATE the Gen-X generation (its a long story. read GENERATIONS). So the Boomers will renew their grip and force everyone to drive them out of power inch by bloody inch. Their entire generational ego is predicated on the notion that they know better than anyone else. They won't go easily. This fight is going to take years. The 2008 election is just the first battle in a long war.
Your logic on tying the War on Drugs to the campaign rhetoric is flawed. Certainly that is one of the many stupidities we have to address, it is NOT however one of the problems with the functioning of the primary campaign (your original point). It may be an issue not addressed by the campaigns, but it isn't an issue WITH the campaigns' operations. Nice try at a redirect, but a failed one.
Finally your statement that no one over here seems to be doing anything either is specious and insulting. Of course we are doing something about it. Why do you think so many people are actively working to elect their favored candidate? Its a fight. It is ugly and it will get uglier still. We who are actively engaged in that fight know this. We aren't disheartened that it is ugly. We know things will get better. That is what we are fighting for; not just to fix some of our problems but to fix the system so that it doesn't create these catastrophes in the first place. So bear with us while we try to sort this out.
Of course you wouldn't know what it is like to have to dig in and try to fix the basics of a broken govenment, since you rely on it all being nicely sorted out in a comfortable back room some where.
"These laws they're passing won't even compile anymore, let alone execute." - anon
I don't believe that once Obama graduated from law school, that he ever made less than $60,000 a year. And I'm curious as to which twenty years he spent as a "community organizer"? I'm curious because since 1993 he's worked variously as an associate lawyer or held a state or federal senate seat. None of which are going to be paying $30,000 a year. The twenty years before 1993 would have been 1973 - 1993. Given that he was born in 1961, I'm somewhat suspicious that he was community organizing when he was 12 years old.