Quote wiki: "The political platform of the Libertarian Party reflects its brand of libertarianism, favoring minimally regulated, laissez-faire markets, strong civil liberties, minimally regulated migration across borders, and non-interventionism in foreign policy that respects freedom of trade and travel to all foreign countries."
The Libertarians seem more obsessed about quantity than quality - whether for Government or regulation.
That sort of thinking seems rather stupid to me. Less does NOT automatically mean good. I don't see how "minimally regulated, laissez-faire markets" is going to serve the US people well. Trust me, you want _well_ regulated markets, not minimally regulated markets.
It's quality that matters more, not quantity.
Just look around the world and you'd see countries in deep shit because of small corrupt governments and minimally regulated "everything".
The markets need good regulation, and sometimes that means _heavy_ regulation, sometimes minimal regulation[1]. You have to put the right people in charge of stuff, but when the people at the top are obsessed with quantity and not quality, they're getting the fundamentals wrong already, so what can you expect?
[1] Remember the people voting at the ballot boxes would be doing just about as good a job (if not worse) voting with their wallets.
The alternate reality where Jesse Ventura actually managed to win and become Governor?
To me if the 3rd parties blame the "voting system" they are just making lame excuses for their failure. Nobody really wants the other parties that much, or hates the Two Parties that much.
1) So many here claim the "Two Parties" are so alike (Coke/Pepsi) 2) So many here claim they want something else instead (Water)
If the voters really agreed with those "many here", then using YOUR LOGIC, a 3rd party providing "Water" would easily win, since the people who wanted Coke/Pepsi would have the "Cola" votes split.
The unpleasant truth might be the voters don't actually want "Water" or the alternative parties are NOT providing a better option. And thus the Two Parties are the best option and the voters are voting correctly despite the below-par voting system.
Seems to me the voters don't actually want that much change either - just look at the screams and roadblocks when Obama went for US Healthcare (which is clearly broken by most sane measurements and thus an obvious thing to fix).
Steal your identity? I doubt your slashdot identity is worth "stealing" at this point. It's like pretending to be SCO or worse.
It's probably more to parody you and your other MichaelKristopeitXXX accounts.
Thing is, MichaelKristopeit172 is posting less "pathetic" stuff, if he keeps it up he'll be easily distinguishable from the other MichaelKristopeitXXX accounts by virtue of not being stuck at zero or lower karma.
I'm doubtful. When I tried using Ubuntu 9.10 to watch a movie, sound was too soft, so I tried all the GUI sound controls and sound was still either too soft, or clipped (and still soft).
In the end I had to go to the command-line, and run alsamixer and then push the "main-mix" volume up. The default volume somehow was _minimum_. Uh, WTF?
On a "mythical Desktop-Ready Ubuntu" you would just have to click on "the icon" at some system tray, or at worst click on System, Preferences, Sound, and work from there.
Perhaps Ubuntu 10.10 is different. But it's a bad sign if a Linux distro that positions itself as a Desktop OS couldn't even get something _core_ like that right after so many years (9.10 is far from their first release). I'm not saying it's easy to get right, I'm saying Sound is a core feature in a Desktop OS.
FWIW, I use Linux distros almost daily, but they're all servers. Coz every time I check, the KDE/GNOME bunch haven't got their act together yet (and seem more interested in inane "features" like "wobbling windows"), and frankly most other Linux GUIs seem to be what Linux fanatics use as wrappers around "screen". It's a pretty crappy GUI you have if screen does a better job of window management - think about that.
So far what works for me is one machine running windows for "Desktop" stuff, and the rest Linux/BSD.
The registry is bad because it's global and forces a lot of configuration to be global as well. For example, COM components are registered globally, so only one DLL can be associatded with a class ID at a time. That's why you can only have one version of Internet Explorer installed on the same machine.
Is the registry really the reason you can only have one version of IE installed?
Firefox uses the registry and I have more than one version of Firefox installed on a machine.
That counts as "can safely be ignored". In contrast the Two Parties would start getting nervous if those people actually went to the ballot box and voted.
As long as the winners of the game make the laws. And the police, military, banks etc enforce the laws, what makes you think the game would end just because most voters don't vote?
It's even easier for the winners if most of the voters took themselves out of the game.
So maybe the Libertarians have been doing abysmally not because of the "first past the post system" but because they're just not as good as the Two Parties at figuring out what most voters would vote for.
They have been the "Mellow Yellows" when most actually want something else.
FWIW, lots of people drink Coke/Pepsi regularly even though they know its bad for them (and it has been visibly damaging their health). Go figure.
Uh. THEIR guy losing? If he's really "their" guy they should vote for him! So maybe the voters have actually been voting for "their guy" all along. You just don't like "their guy".
If he's not "their guy" then they shouldn't vote for him. People think they're smart and try to game the system by voting for "second-most evil" to avoid "most evil" and when they keep getting "second-most evil" they grumble about the system.
It does mean the "most evil" often wins initially, but in this day and age of the Internet, mobile phones etc if the other voters can't figure out how to get together and get something better than "second-most evil" then they really deserve what they get.
Of course, maybe the parties that are winning ARE really the best of the choices, and are as good a representation of the People's Will.
Just look at some of the posts above- one guy thinks the alternatives are "Mellow Yellow" compared to Coke or Pepsi.
Lastly, if election reform is so important to the voters, then a party should be set up with its main promise as "We'll change the way elections are done, and then resign soon after to test the system". And if "election reform" is really so important that party should win right? But I doubt it's really that important to the voters.
Plus might help solve the "aging population problem" that many developed countries seem so worried about:).
That said, the great work by McD, Coca Cola, Frito-Lay, Philip Morris, Yum! Brands and friends towards solving this problem have so far been under appreciated...
I think that's the only use of "easily disassembly" as per the article - for repair and reuse.
Not for recycling.
If you are recycling stuff from an old laptop you don't really care that much if some stuff has to break in the process. By the time it hits the dump, hardly anyone would be reusing the parts as is. Costs too much to check if stuff is still working well enough.
Maybe someone should come up with a more environmentally friendly mining system that mines and processes certain types of landfills:).
When it's still worth extracting a tens of grams of gold from a ton of rock, I'm sure it's worth extracting up to a kilo of gold from a ton of motherboards ( along with lots more copper).
A typical PC contains iron, aluminium, copper, gold, silver, palladium, platinum. Yes toxic stuff like mercury might be released in the process - but you often have the same problem when mining and getting metals out from ore.
As long as the process is less nasty to the environment than the average mine (and cheaper per amount extracted), you're already doing good.
There's also a difference between a child crying and a child screaming.
"I've never seen a restaurant say, don't bring your screaming kids in here," said Ashley Heflin, who is a mom of two. "You can't help it if your kids scream."
A very young baby that screams does not belong in a restaurant and might actually need urgent medical treatment.
A toddler that screams needs to learn to shut up and not be a brat.
If parents can't stop their children from screaming then that's good reason for some places to not welcome screaming children.
They should go somewhere else which welcomes uncontrollably screaming children.
Or vote for a gov that'll tax/ban such "screaming child" hostile places.
They claim it was "someone hits the wrong button", but I think most slashdotters can guess what really happened:). Bug in computer programs - failure to handle corner cases or exceptions.
I understand a rollback if it's a bug in Nasdaq's programs that caused the problem. But if it's a bug in a trader's robo-program, the trader should eat the loss.
Otherwise, why shouldn't they cancel my trades if I ever lose more than 60% on Nasdaq? Or poker?
That's where the real profit is coming from - these people cheat and they get away with it.
Otherwise all those billions they make would be lost during the times they screw up.
It's their metascheme that is profitable. Not their actual schemes.
Metascheme= win, keep your winnings. Lose big? Stock exchange rolls back your losses. Lose really big? Government bailout.
Even I could make money like that. I just have a conscience and I wouldn't be able to fool myself on what I'm actually doing.
All that talk of liquidity and making the market more efficient is BULLSHIT. How the fuck is it more efficient if you have to do massive bailouts?
Parrot? Is that in the resting on pining for the fjords stage?
At the rate things are going, Javascript has an even better chance become the next thing than Parrot. Seems like everyone and their dog is obsessed with making it faster.
Seems it's actually not that slow unless you're trying to do stuff like calculate digits of pi.
In contrast stuff like Perl, Python and Ruby don't appear to be getting faster as fast. Javascript is already faster than all these 3. Go figure what the "community" has more interest in.
Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy if Parrot, Perl, Python and Ruby were all much faster (and complete in Parrot's case), but I'm not going to hold my breath.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe indeed.
But who should really vote for the Libs?
Quote wiki: "The political platform of the Libertarian Party reflects its brand of libertarianism, favoring minimally regulated, laissez-faire markets, strong civil liberties, minimally regulated migration across borders, and non-interventionism in foreign policy that respects freedom of trade and travel to all foreign countries."
The Libertarians seem more obsessed about quantity than quality - whether for Government or regulation.
That sort of thinking seems rather stupid to me. Less does NOT automatically mean good. I don't see how "minimally regulated, laissez-faire markets" is going to serve the US people well. Trust me, you want _well_ regulated markets, not minimally regulated markets.
It's quality that matters more, not quantity.
Just look around the world and you'd see countries in deep shit because of small corrupt governments and minimally regulated "everything".
The markets need good regulation, and sometimes that means _heavy_ regulation, sometimes minimal regulation[1]. You have to put the right people in charge of stuff, but when the people at the top are obsessed with quantity and not quality, they're getting the fundamentals wrong already, so what can you expect?
[1] Remember the people voting at the ballot boxes would be doing just about as good a job (if not worse) voting with their wallets.
The alternate reality where Jesse Ventura actually managed to win and become Governor?
To me if the 3rd parties blame the "voting system" they are just making lame excuses for their failure. Nobody really wants the other parties that much, or hates the Two Parties that much.
1) So many here claim the "Two Parties" are so alike (Coke/Pepsi)
2) So many here claim they want something else instead (Water)
If the voters really agreed with those "many here", then using YOUR LOGIC, a 3rd party providing "Water" would easily win, since the people who wanted Coke/Pepsi would have the "Cola" votes split.
The unpleasant truth might be the voters don't actually want "Water" or the alternative parties are NOT providing a better option. And thus the Two Parties are the best option and the voters are voting correctly despite the below-par voting system.
Seems to me the voters don't actually want that much change either - just look at the screams and roadblocks when Obama went for US Healthcare (which is clearly broken by most sane measurements and thus an obvious thing to fix).
Steal your identity? I doubt your slashdot identity is worth "stealing" at this point. It's like pretending to be SCO or worse.
It's probably more to parody you and your other MichaelKristopeitXXX accounts.
Thing is, MichaelKristopeit172 is posting less "pathetic" stuff, if he keeps it up he'll be easily distinguishable from the other MichaelKristopeitXXX accounts by virtue of not being stuck at zero or lower karma.
I'm doubtful. When I tried using Ubuntu 9.10 to watch a movie, sound was too soft, so I tried all the GUI sound controls and sound was still either too soft, or clipped (and still soft).
In the end I had to go to the command-line, and run alsamixer and then push the "main-mix" volume up. The default volume somehow was _minimum_. Uh, WTF?
On a "mythical Desktop-Ready Ubuntu" you would just have to click on "the icon" at some system tray, or at worst click on System, Preferences, Sound, and work from there.
In contrast look at the bullshit you have to put up with here: http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/10964/how-to-fix-sound-issues-in-ubuntu-9.10/
Look at the comments there to see more evidence of how crap the situation is.
Perhaps Ubuntu 10.10 is different. But it's a bad sign if a Linux distro that positions itself as a Desktop OS couldn't even get something _core_ like that right after so many years (9.10 is far from their first release). I'm not saying it's easy to get right, I'm saying Sound is a core feature in a Desktop OS.
FWIW, I use Linux distros almost daily, but they're all servers. Coz every time I check, the KDE/GNOME bunch haven't got their act together yet (and seem more interested in inane "features" like "wobbling windows"), and frankly most other Linux GUIs seem to be what Linux fanatics use as wrappers around "screen". It's a pretty crappy GUI you have if screen does a better job of window management - think about that.
So far what works for me is one machine running windows for "Desktop" stuff, and the rest Linux/BSD.
The registry is bad because it's global and forces a lot of configuration to be global as well. For example, COM components are registered globally, so only one DLL can be associatded with a class ID at a time. That's why you can only have one version of Internet Explorer installed on the same machine.
Is the registry really the reason you can only have one version of IE installed?
Firefox uses the registry and I have more than one version of Firefox installed on a machine.
He actually seems to have done a reasonable OK job as a governor.
Anyway, that's why I suspect that when push comes to shove, most of the US voters aren't actually that upset with the Two Parties.
Otherwise you'd see another "ventura" incident.
That counts as "can safely be ignored". In contrast the Two Parties would start getting nervous if those people actually went to the ballot box and voted.
As long as the winners of the game make the laws. And the police, military, banks etc enforce the laws, what makes you think the game would end just because most voters don't vote?
It's even easier for the winners if most of the voters took themselves out of the game.
So maybe the Libertarians have been doing abysmally not because of the "first past the post system" but because they're just not as good as the Two Parties at figuring out what most voters would vote for.
They have been the "Mellow Yellows" when most actually want something else.
FWIW, lots of people drink Coke/Pepsi regularly even though they know its bad for them (and it has been visibly damaging their health). Go figure.
Uh. THEIR guy losing? If he's really "their" guy they should vote for him! So maybe the voters have actually been voting for "their guy" all along. You just don't like "their guy".
If he's not "their guy" then they shouldn't vote for him. People think they're smart and try to game the system by voting for "second-most evil" to avoid "most evil" and when they keep getting "second-most evil" they grumble about the system.
It does mean the "most evil" often wins initially, but in this day and age of the Internet, mobile phones etc if the other voters can't figure out how to get together and get something better than "second-most evil" then they really deserve what they get.
Of course, maybe the parties that are winning ARE really the best of the choices, and are as good a representation of the People's Will.
Just look at some of the posts above- one guy thinks the alternatives are "Mellow Yellow" compared to Coke or Pepsi.
Lastly, if election reform is so important to the voters, then a party should be set up with its main promise as "We'll change the way elections are done, and then resign soon after to test the system". And if "election reform" is really so important that party should win right? But I doubt it's really that important to the voters.
Vote for a glass of water then.
If enough people do that, instead of voting for Coke or Pepsi when they really wanted water, they'd get their glass of water eventually.
Right now seems like >98% vote for Coke/Pepsi.
Plus might help solve the "aging population problem" that many developed countries seem so worried about :).
That said, the great work by McD, Coca Cola, Frito-Lay, Philip Morris, Yum! Brands and friends towards solving this problem have so far been under appreciated...
I think that's the only use of "easily disassembly" as per the article - for repair and reuse.
:).
Not for recycling.
If you are recycling stuff from an old laptop you don't really care that much if some stuff has to break in the process. By the time it hits the dump, hardly anyone would be reusing the parts as is. Costs too much to check if stuff is still working well enough.
Maybe someone should come up with a more environmentally friendly mining system that mines and processes certain types of landfills
When it's still worth extracting a tens of grams of gold from a ton of rock, I'm sure it's worth extracting up to a kilo of gold from a ton of motherboards ( along with lots more copper).
A typical PC contains iron, aluminium, copper, gold, silver, palladium, platinum. Yes toxic stuff like mercury might be released in the process - but you often have the same problem when mining and getting metals out from ore.
As long as the process is less nasty to the environment than the average mine (and cheaper per amount extracted), you're already doing good.
A bit too late for a recall of 1.0 right?
Don't see the problem there.
Person A: eat + listen to Person B (or music if Person B is boring)
Person B: talk + ignore/listen to music.
There's also a difference between a child crying and a child screaming.
"I've never seen a restaurant say, don't bring your screaming kids in here," said Ashley Heflin, who is a mom of two. "You can't help it if your kids scream."
A very young baby that screams does not belong in a restaurant and might actually need urgent medical treatment.
A toddler that screams needs to learn to shut up and not be a brat.
If parents can't stop their children from screaming then that's good reason for some places to not welcome screaming children.
They should go somewhere else which welcomes uncontrollably screaming children.
Or vote for a gov that'll tax/ban such "screaming child" hostile places.
Often limited to 9 uppercase characters too :).
WUNDERBAR
IIRC Jammie Thomas owes 1.5 million for 24 songs.
So how much did SAP copy? The equivalent of 240 songs?
The Scandinavian case he mentioned is when the small bunch beat the robo traders, they go to jail.
When the robo traders screw up big time, the stock exchanges roll back their losses.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-05-06/nasdaq-to-cancel-trades-of-stocks-moving-more-than-60-in-market-plunge.html
They claim it was "someone hits the wrong button", but I think most slashdotters can guess what really happened :). Bug in computer programs - failure to handle corner cases or exceptions.
I understand a rollback if it's a bug in Nasdaq's programs that caused the problem. But if it's a bug in a trader's robo-program, the trader should eat the loss.
Otherwise, why shouldn't they cancel my trades if I ever lose more than 60% on Nasdaq? Or poker?
That's where the real profit is coming from - these people cheat and they get away with it.
Otherwise all those billions they make would be lost during the times they screw up.
It's their metascheme that is profitable. Not their actual schemes.
Metascheme= win, keep your winnings. Lose big? Stock exchange rolls back your losses. Lose really big? Government bailout.
Even I could make money like that. I just have a conscience and I wouldn't be able to fool myself on what I'm actually doing.
All that talk of liquidity and making the market more efficient is BULLSHIT. How the fuck is it more efficient if you have to do massive bailouts?
Don't want to die of cancer? Just keep eating at McD and supersize your meals. Finish those huge sodas and servings of fries.
:).
You won't die of cancer if you stick to this anti-cancer diet for the rest of your life.
Side effects? You won't live very long either
I heard Siberia has two seasons. Snow and Mosquitoes.
:).
Snow is more photogenic
That's why AI is overrated. Especially "strong AI".
We haven't even solved racism. Creating strong AI would just add to the problems (or solve racism the Terminator way).
I thought the Slashdot crowd were more inclined to robes and wizard hats...
:).
Times change I guess
If you don't vote for anyone, not even one of the "others", you're also part of the problem then.
Because there is no good reason for the Two Parties to change if they keep getting > 98% of all the votes.
In contrast even when one of the Two Parties still wins, if that percentage starts dropping fast, you will see change eventually.
Those evil European "socialist" countries actually have a better migration path for that than the US.
Logically if there is a future when robots do all our jobs, you'd be better off in the countries which treat their jobless well.
Parrot? Is that in the resting on pining for the fjords stage?
At the rate things are going, Javascript has an even better chance become the next thing than Parrot. Seems like everyone and their dog is obsessed with making it faster.
Javascript is not as fast as Java but...
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=v8&lang2=java
Seems it's actually not that slow unless you're trying to do stuff like calculate digits of pi.
In contrast stuff like Perl, Python and Ruby don't appear to be getting faster as fast. Javascript is already faster than all these 3. Go figure what the "community" has more interest in.
Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy if Parrot, Perl, Python and Ruby were all much faster (and complete in Parrot's case), but I'm not going to hold my breath.