All these freaks tend to be good in one area. For instance many of the best professional sports players are complete morons outside of their sport, but for whatever reason they understand their sport extreemly well. And a lot of the great scientists had a ton of personal problems. I believe Newton, for isntance, was confined to his home for the last 20 years of hsi life, or soething like that. And I think RMS fits this bill pretty well.
Fucking redsox. I hate them, why couldn't the mariners get in the playoffs. God damnit they deserve to win the world series, bleh. Stupid. Oh well, go Seahawks!!!
Depends on what Patriot Act II is. If it's more of the same, IE basically just legallizing what they could already get away with, I probably wont' care enough to protest it.
It's not that I think protests are dangerous, as much as I think any large gathering of people is dangerous. And with protests people take things a lot more personally than something like a football game. and when people take thigns personally abd thigns happen a lot more than otherwise. Of course, i Live in seattle and knew people at the WTO protests so maybe I am a bit paranoid, but basically, I'm not gonna protest something like the Patriot act because I feel, with or without it, our lives will be almsot entirly the same, even if I feel it's wrong.
WHile i'm not gonna comment on your view on laws being passed..
It's pretty sad that people organize "protests" in a fucking -game- but won't stand up for their rights in real life. What is the matter with you people?
As much as I may be against something like the patriot act, I would never protest it. Why, because I basically deem it not important enough to protest it, which involves going someplace, in an unfimiliar situation and in a potentially dangerous situation, and could result in a number of things least likely would be that I would get my point across. Now then if it was something like legalizing slavery or something, it would be a different story. But the patriot act, is imo, not bad enough that I think it's worth my personal risk.
I'm sure plenty would call me a coward for this viewpoint, but I think it's common sense.
PS: For the record, I support Bush. Full disclosure or whatever.
and it gets modded to +5 insightful!!! My god/. you ahve restored my faith in you that you are fairly unbiased and intelligent! Thank you! I'm on the verge of tears.
Yes, GC is just shifting the responsibility,
but the freeing-unused-memory pied-piper must be paid by something, no matter the language, no matter the os. And, when it comes right down to it, we are already developing more programmers now that *cannot* work on os-level code (straight C or asm, always) because they've been indoctrinated into the "just let another process handle that bit o' trivia".
I know it's a very popular opinion here that details must be paid attention too. But when you have a language, tho perhaps a bit slower, allows you to abstract more, You gain a lot more than you lose. And often times you will have a program that is faster than one you would of develoepd with out that abstraction, because You're more worried about solving the problem than all those details. And So waht there's more programmers that don't know these things? Hell, this is good, less compitetion for me:) programming is changing, as everything else does. In 100 years, I would be surprised if anyone but the highly elite paid any attention to things like memory management, assuming we still ahve similiar computers.
Also, when it comes time to write an app that
is as fast as possible with the fastest possible reaction time to the user, a solid minute of unscheduled, but necessary, GC will make such an endeavor impossible.
This happens when? you're goign to make leaps and bounds of improvements in hardware and better algorythms compared to optimizing your code. And I believe the military uses mostly Ada for their stuff. And i've never doen ada, but I thought ada had automatic memory management, but I could be wrong on this. BUt still, All these slowness things people love to bring up, are overrated, they are largely irrelevant and trivial. Yes there are cases where they are not. BUt as i said before..
No, good design *could* eliminate bugs, but we
don't yet know how to make such a design. What I'm referring to is the *process* of creating software, which involves both good design and pattern usage inorder to to *allow* a process that can find the bugs that will inevitably appear.
I dunno what you're trying to say.. we will never reach perfection, we will jsut get closer and closer, perhaps we'll reach a point when it's trivial. But we're lightyears from that. So memmory leaks will happen.. if you use GC they won't happen except if there's an error in the GC itself.
All a computer program is *is details*. Every
single non-comment line is a crucial detail. Using C instead of assembly is because C takes care of details that I have no need of taking care of. My overall point here is that if you don't structure your data structures in reference to the three types of changes they incur (addition, modifcation and deletion) you aren't thinking clearly about you design.
Programms are details, this does not mean programming has to be. Something like GC allows you to abstract a bit more, which increases effeciency which includes speed of development, and lack of bugs, among another things. BUt your overall point, is invalid. If you can't structure your programm halfway decently you shouldn't be doing it, well for money anyhow. Memory leaks that I have seen, are mostly little silly thigns that are inconspicuous. Design and all teh attention to detail will not prevent this from happening. To err is human, right? However when you can automate this, it takes away a possible source of error, which is a good thing, right?
To paraphrase a book on Go from a 7-dan,
he said "the difference between the amature and the professional is that the professional *never* strays from the fundamentals". Furthermore, *all* his actions are manifestations of the fundamentals.
GC is straying away from fundamentals? Fundamentals are a relative thing. fundamental in C is vastly different from LISP or java. C you have to manage memory, it's a fundamental. Java, that is not part of the game. And if you use a GC for C lib, it wouldn't be part of C either.
And, *absolutely not*, are mistakes for
inferior programmers. Inferior programmers don't *catch* their mistakes. Being able to catch your bugs is what separates the amature from the professional.
I aggree, but you can still not catch all your bugs. Debain stable is software from how many years ago? Most people don't even go that far to correct their mistakes. But you seemed to imply that any memory leaks were due to bad programmign design. My point is, good design, while makes these things less frequent does not eliminate them, and that most of the leaks i've seen were not from bad design. They were from human error.
Hmmm. I better not see you bashing Micro$oft for their bug-ridden, insecure os's:-)
I don't bash them for that, i bash them for being a monopoly and such. Tho i do use that as a point when trying to convince people to switch from windows.
IMO, if you can't organize you code such that
you prevent leaks, you probably can't organize your code to accomplish anything simpler than bubblesorting a text file.
First i'm not sure this post isn't a troll.. but whatever. While code organization could have a huge impact on the complexity of a program, this is simply not the reason's for most memory leaks in my experience. Most are because of stupid human mistakes. IE creating an array and only deletingthe first node. These are hard to catch because the syntax and everything appears correct at first glance.
It is attention to detail and the creation of
highly patterned structures of code that allows software-in-the-large to be successfully constructed. Not that I've ever tried designing a production system that utilized GC, but I can't imagine that forgetting about when/where you are creating new memory structures will improve your total comprehension of the information flow within the software.
Erm then why not do everything in assembly? It's a waste of time to constantly pay attention to details in large projects. Why pay attention to deleting stuff at the proper time, when something like GC can take care of it, at a trivial cost. You increase the speed of development.
While every 30th article on/. bemoans the
outsourcing of programming jobs to India, ask yourselves this: will they do what it takes to make sure there are no memory leaks? I'm fairly certain that they will, and, moreover, they just consider it a part of creating quality software.
This is pure speculation, but my opinion is at first they will be careful about such things, but I think eventually they will realize they can be rather sloppy because the cheap amount they cost, the poeople getting the code, will simply not care so much. I mean if i can have one program for 80k and a similiar one for 10k, but the 10k one has some slightly annoying bugs.. so what?
Now, in implementing functions that accomplish
both 2a and 2b, there will be memory structures created that are used in a transient/temporary fashion to accomplish the creation of data structures that get attached to the tree of permanent data structures.
This is where I think you are trolling. what you've said is like no shit sherlock, but understanding these thigns are not the problem, well in my experience. IMO it is due to human error. It's like asking if a developer has ever made a program that crashed.. mistakes happen. You seem to think that mistakes are for inferior programmers, which is a very arrogant view, and once again, in my experience, is held by extremely ignorant people.
The onyl thing that would be better is if you could play old carts on a modern system. Tho playing mario and such with gc controller might feel a bit wierd.
This is still not a freedom of speech issue. It is an use of the freedom of use of a medium that provides freedom of speech, which is not the same thing.
Yeah but You do not have a right to use anything. You have a right to not fear being punished for your opinions. I don't question the usefulness of the internet for getting your opinion out, and I think it's ag reat place to do that, but, You don't have a right to use whatever means you wish too. If you can use those means then great. This is not an issue of free speech, it's an issue of the free use of the internet, which can allow free speech as well. You can't just go set up a tv station without a license, correct? What's the difference between tv and internet as far as speech goes?
Should we be required to have an internet license, we would be yanked back to the situation we had prior to the internet -- newspapers and such controlled by just a few large corporations all with pretty much the same message and no viable alternatives. I don't want that. I hope you don't want that.
This depends on what the requirements would be. If the requirements were to know difference between protocols or something, then no that would not be good. But if it was attending a 3 hour lecture on safe usage of the itnernet, and safe usage for yuor children, I might be for that.
this goes against freedom of speech how? freedom of speech just says you can says you are entitled to your opinions and can share them. Press? Well you have to get a license to broadcast.. maybe i'm missing your point, but as I interpret it, there's nothing accurate about your statements.
With Bush as president, we all are losing: we are getting wars, economic problems, huge budget deficits, a failing educational system, rollback of civil rights protections, deterioration of international relations, etc.
Getting wars - Wars plural. yes let's let osma just run free and attack more people.. oh yeah sounds like a plan. No other president would have sent troops to afganistan for this. Please. So you have Iraq which is questionable.
Economic problems - Dotcom bomb.. mmm bush sure fucked up that one. Oh look! our economy is recorving as we speak! damned we're all doomed.
HUge Budget deficits - This is new how??
Failing Education System - I dunno how it's exactly failing like everyone seems to think. but they've thought this for a long time too.
Rollback of civil rights - DMCA oh oops clinton signed that one, Patriot act? yeah overeaction from 9/11
Deterioration of international relations - Yes cus everyone hates us now. Funny thing is, most people who've changed their views of us, are within the US. Yes politicians will use our invasion of iraq in arguements. Just like they'll use our lack of actions in other places.
It is pretty depressing that Republicans care more about who the President had sex with than about how the country is doing.
Yes that's what they went after clinton for.. having sex with interns. Oh wait no, for obstruction of justice and such.. wait that has nothing to do with sex. Gee?
THis complaint was valid a few years ago.. but have you tried Redhat or Mandrake of late? They're awesome or even something like Knoppix. Worked like a charm, even changed my mom's opinion of linux because of how well it worked. Don't need to know how to change directory or anything. Tho they still show all the logs and such on startup, so I guess that's a bit intimidating.
I've got to agree with your friend. In most races, someone who isn't one of the two major party nominees just isn't going to win. Heck, in presidential elections my vote is a waste no matter what: The fact that my state will go Republican is a foregone conclusion, and thanks to the Electoral College, what percentage it goes Republican by is irrelevant
So you're going to vote for someone you don't want to win? Why vote at all then. Furthermore if you believe your vote doesn't matter if you vote outside demo/republican why vote at all then? If anything, voting outside those 2 parties is saying more than voting with one. Why vote at all then. No matter who you vote for, it does not make an ounce of difference unless of course the race is won by 1 vote.. but I haven't seen that happen (not saying it hasn't either..). Voting for something/one you don't believe in, (or don't want someone else to win) is selling out. Here take my vote, you haven't earned it, but have it anyhow, because you're a democrat. The system would be much better if people wouldn't do this. There would be more competition among politicians, which is almost unquestionably a good thing.
Definitely. Having only two viable parties means they're both pretty centrist. But they're also pretty polarized. Like the Republicans stand on one big issue and the Democrats on another? Well, there's probably plenty of potential candidates who agree with you on both, but sorry, they're political road-kill.
Yes because of the way people vote. If they, as I said above, would vote for who they believe in, we could have more than just rep/demos.
I wouldn't, so I guess I can complain. I know it's blasphemous, but I think our founding fathers screwed up. Gonvernmental systems created after ours in several countries do a much better job of dividing power. In our system, if the same party holds the presidency and a one seat majority in both houses of congress, they can do pretty much whatever they want. They have all the power, even though the voters may be split almost exactly down the middle.
This is both good and bad (like everything else). If there was more dividing of power, it would would be extremely hard to do anything. Like whether or not to cut taxes, what would happen if it was divided up? nothing, more than likely, because btoh sides would disagree. THis is where the balance of power comes into play. The president cannot inact laws, cognress can, which is divided up, and would be even mroe so if people would stop voting only rep/dem.
My magic solution? Abolish the electoral college and elect the president by popular vote. Abolish the Senate.
Have you ever seen the map that showed the displacement of who voted for who in the 2000 election? The only place that gore won anything was in the big cities. I cant' find it in a quick googling but it's there. One of the reasons the electoral college works, but there are certainly downsides to it. But that's another debate entirely.
Because the major parties are the ones who make the rules, and they make the rules so as to keep it that way.
That's a bit out of left field. I'll decide what to put on my server thank you.
this wasn't the best analogy, but it was the best I could think of at the time. Basically, you simlpy cannot know everything any other person knows, president or not. So when people critize the president or any expert in any field, I tend to default the decision to the expert as opposed to the ordinary guy who has an opinion. So when the President (along with many others in power and with intelligence info) says we should go to war, I believe them unless there is good evidence otherwise or good evidence that their interests are not what's best for our country/world. The reason i made that analogy, was if say you were deciding what software to use for service and you said go with X, but a fair amount of people who will use the service say go with Y. These people are not experts and have varying degrees of knowledge of why you should go with X. What will you choose?
And we should decide whether to commit our country to war. We will do it though our elected representatives, certainly, but that doesn't mean I won't expect those representatives to provide us with as much accurate information as possible. And when I'm told it's not possible, but here's a summarry, I'm going to be five times the stickler on the accuracy part. I was told Iraq had WMD ready to use on twenty minutes notice. We knew where they were. Massive stockpiles. There was not the hint of doubt. Well, it's not true. So the administration lied to me intentionally, or they didn't even know themselves. I don't really care much which it was.
I dunno, i was never under the impression that they had WMD ready to use in five minutes. I thought that it was just the military making sure that they did not endure unessecary(spelling?) casualties. But even if they did, this has not been proved or disproved true.
A quote of what Clinton said on Larry King, "but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks... [Dole says that's right]... of biological and chemical weapons." Which is why I am of the opinion that if we don't find WMD, we're(we meaning the world) that a political backlash because of a war with false reasonings. I don't see how people can even begin to argue Iraq has destroyed them. And another thing, it's Not just this Bush adminastration (which includes Colin Powell) It's also has the backing of Tony Blair who has basically put his career on the line, perhaps his life, for this cause. This cause that really will not do much for him if the people think he was right, but will do a load of harm to him if they think he's wrong. As well as several other foreign governmental leaders.
Amen to that. At the least, I don't see why we should encourage thoughtless party-line voting by putting the party names on the ballots. If you want to vote a straight party lines, you could at least be asked to learn the names of your party's nominees.
You know, I really like this idea. maybe we could start a movement or something here on/. for it?;) More than parties though, I hate the amount of people that believe a vote for a non Democratic/Republican is a waste. And those that think you have to be one of them to have your ideas pushed. My best friend is this way and it annoys the hell out of me. Why vote if you don't believe in who/what your voting in. And how they always turn liberal itno Demo and conservative into rep. As if those two were all encompassing together. They're both very much middle of the road. But then again, i'd take our government with all it's flaws, over any other government in the world so i guess I can't complain to much.
i know that was stupid of me, actually had it checked but the 20 second delay ahppened so I typed it over and forgot to cehck it. Oh well there goess some karma
I know you're probably just trolling, but what the hell:
I dont' see how his post was anywhere near a troll. He said his ideas and thoughts on the matter.
Lying to them works well too. In fact, both techniques work equally well regardless of whether the war is necessary. Anyway, it's sure a good thing we have these smart people deciding whether a war is necessary, then selling it to the people by any means possible. I mean, if they just presented the actual facts and let people make up their own minds, the people might think they lived in a democracy or something.
Maybe that's why we're more of a repblic than a democracy. I don't see what facts they haven't presented, they've told us of the reasons they wanted to go to war. Whether you think they are valid or not is another comment and not relevant to this discussion.
A side note, if you were president and you felt very strongly that going to war was teh right thing to do and most of the people who knew what you know agree with you, would you not do it just because the people, whom don't have all the intelligence you do, decide it's not worth it.
And while we're at it, I suspect even most of the "ordinary non-educated workers" you think ought to be led about like sheep could demonstrate a better grasp of basic gramar that you did in that last sentence
Ahh yes resort to name calling/making fun of. But on your note, I think you are mistaken. Educated or not, proper grammer is a hard subject to perfect, and why one would expect proper grammer in a forum like this, i dunno. But he was certainly understandable, so IMO you are nitpicking.
And yes there is a point where people should be led. You wouldn't want people deciding what software to use on your server, would you? You may try and accomodate them, but you wouldn't put some buggy and very exploitable piece of crap on there, just because they wanted it, would you? If you would well.. you'd give the people what they want but you should be fired.
"Proud Patriot and Republican voter"
You suspect it means blind follower and blind follower? hrm I'm both as well but hardly am blind. In fact i am very critical of all opinions stances when it comes to national ideas. As everyone should be, but most people seem to just vote republic or democrat because taht's what they consider themselves for some reason. personally I wouldn't mind gettign rid of parties all together.
Xbox is not a failure. KOTOR has been selling like hot cakes since its release last week. MS has come into an industry dominated by sony and already displaced nintendo in the US for the #2 spot. MS has the #1 online system for consoles after less than a year.
It's third out of three and it's losing money? For the immediate future, this is a failure. Maybe in the future it won't be, but just because you got an F English in 6th grade and an A in 7th, doesn' tmean you didn't fail 6th grade english.
Xbox will probably not beat PS2 for this generation, but i do expect it to reach parity. PS3 vs XBox2 is a level playing field, IMO.
Umm no it won't, It's also is losing to the Gamecube.
Slashdot Mirror
All these freaks tend to be good in one area. For instance many of the best professional sports players are complete morons outside of their sport, but for whatever reason they understand their sport extreemly well. And a lot of the great scientists had a ton of personal problems. I believe Newton, for isntance, was confined to his home for the last 20 years of hsi life, or soething like that. And I think RMS fits this bill pretty well.
Fucking redsox. I hate them, why couldn't the mariners get in the playoffs. God damnit they deserve to win the world series, bleh. Stupid. Oh well, go Seahawks!!!
At home it's on the ground, at the dorm it's about 5 feet off the ground.
Depends on what Patriot Act II is. If it's more of the same, IE basically just legallizing what they could already get away with, I probably wont' care enough to protest it.
It's not that I think protests are dangerous, as much as I think any large gathering of people is dangerous. And with protests people take things a lot more personally than something like a football game. and when people take thigns personally abd thigns happen a lot more than otherwise. Of course, i Live in seattle and knew people at the WTO protests so maybe I am a bit paranoid, but basically, I'm not gonna protest something like the Patriot act because I feel, with or without it, our lives will be almsot entirly the same, even if I feel it's wrong.
WHile i'm not gonna comment on your view on laws being passed..
It's pretty sad that people organize "protests" in a fucking -game- but won't stand up for their rights in real life. What is the matter with you people?
As much as I may be against something like the patriot act, I would never protest it. Why, because I basically deem it not important enough to protest it, which involves going someplace, in an unfimiliar situation and in a potentially dangerous situation, and could result in a number of things least likely would be that I would get my point across. Now then if it was something like legalizing slavery or something, it would be a different story. But the patriot act, is imo, not bad enough that I think it's worth my personal risk.
I'm sure plenty would call me a coward for this viewpoint, but I think it's common sense.
Everyone except SCO is my guess.
and it gets modded to +5 insightful!!! My god
I know it's a very popular opinion here that details must be paid attention too. But when you have a language, tho perhaps a bit slower, allows you to abstract more, You gain a lot more than you lose. And often times you will have a program that is faster than one you would of develoepd with out that abstraction, because You're more worried about solving the problem than all those details. And So waht there's more programmers that don't know these things? Hell, this is good, less compitetion for me
This happens when? you're goign to make leaps and bounds of improvements in hardware and better algorythms compared to optimizing your code. And I believe the military uses mostly Ada for their stuff. And i've never doen ada, but I thought ada had automatic memory management, but I could be wrong on this. BUt still, All these slowness things people love to bring up, are overrated, they are largely irrelevant and trivial. Yes there are cases where they are not. BUt as i said before..
I dunno what you're trying to say.. we will never reach perfection, we will jsut get closer and closer, perhaps we'll reach a point when it's trivial. But we're lightyears from that. So memmory leaks will happen.. if you use GC they won't happen except if there's an error in the GC itself.
although a linux or mac port of Halo would be nice. Who knows that might be the next step.
There will be a mac port
Programms are details, this does not mean programming has to be. Something like GC allows you to abstract a bit more, which increases effeciency which includes speed of development, and lack of bugs, among another things. BUt your overall point, is invalid. If you can't structure your programm halfway decently you shouldn't be doing it, well for money anyhow. Memory leaks that I have seen, are mostly little silly thigns that are inconspicuous. Design and all teh attention to detail will not prevent this from happening. To err is human, right? However when you can automate this, it takes away a possible source of error, which is a good thing, right?
GC is straying away from fundamentals? Fundamentals are a relative thing. fundamental in C is vastly different from LISP or java. C you have to manage memory, it's a fundamental. Java, that is not part of the game. And if you use a GC for C lib, it wouldn't be part of C either.
I aggree, but you can still not catch all your bugs. Debain stable is software from how many years ago? Most people don't even go that far to correct their mistakes. But you seemed to imply that any memory leaks were due to bad programmign design. My point is, good design, while makes these things less frequent does not eliminate them, and that most of the leaks i've seen were not from bad design. They were from human error.
I don't bash them for that, i bash them for being a monopoly and such. Tho i do use that as a point when trying to convince people to switch from windows.
First i'm not sure this post isn't a troll.. but whatever. While code organization could have a huge impact on the complexity of a program, this is simply not the reason's for most memory leaks in my experience. Most are because of stupid human mistakes. IE creating an array and only deletingthe first node. These are hard to catch because the syntax and everything appears correct at first glance.
Erm then why not do everything in assembly? It's a waste of time to constantly pay attention to details in large projects. Why pay attention to deleting stuff at the proper time, when something like GC can take care of it, at a trivial cost. You increase the speed of development.
This is pure speculation, but my opinion is at first they will be careful about such things, but I think eventually they will realize they can be rather sloppy because the cheap amount they cost, the poeople getting the code, will simply not care so much. I mean if i can have one program for 80k and a similiar one for 10k, but the 10k one has some slightly annoying bugs.. so what?
This is where I think you are trolling. what you've said is like no shit sherlock, but understanding these thigns are not the problem, well in my experience. IMO it is due to human error. It's like asking if a developer has ever made a program that crashed.. mistakes happen. You seem to think that mistakes are for inferior programmers, which is a very arrogant view, and once again, in my experience, is held by extremely ignorant people.
The onyl thing that would be better is if you could play old carts on a modern system. Tho playing mario and such with gc controller might feel a bit wierd.
This is still not a freedom of speech issue. It is an use of the freedom of use of a medium that provides freedom of speech, which is not the same thing.
This depends on what the requirements would be. If the requirements were to know difference between protocols or something, then no that would not be good. But if it was attending a 3 hour lecture on safe usage of the itnernet, and safe usage for yuor children, I might be for that.
this goes against freedom of speech how? freedom of speech just says you can says you are entitled to your opinions and can share them. Press? Well you have to get a license to broadcast.. maybe i'm missing your point, but as I interpret it, there's nothing accurate about your statements.
Getting wars - Wars plural. yes let's let osma just run free and attack more people.. oh yeah sounds like a plan. No other president would have sent troops to afganistan for this. Please. So you have Iraq which is questionable.
Economic problems - Dotcom bomb.. mmm bush sure fucked up that one. Oh look! our economy is recorving as we speak! damned we're all doomed.
HUge Budget deficits - This is new how??
Failing Education System - I dunno how it's exactly failing like everyone seems to think. but they've thought this for a long time too.
Rollback of civil rights - DMCA oh oops clinton signed that one, Patriot act? yeah overeaction from 9/11
Deterioration of international relations - Yes cus everyone hates us now. Funny thing is, most people who've changed their views of us, are within the US. Yes politicians will use our invasion of iraq in arguements. Just like they'll use our lack of actions in other places.
Yes that's what they went after clinton for.. having sex with interns. Oh wait no, for obstruction of justice and such.. wait that has nothing to do with sex. Gee?
THis complaint was valid a few years ago.. but have you tried Redhat or Mandrake of late? They're awesome or even something like Knoppix. Worked like a charm, even changed my mom's opinion of linux because of how well it worked. Don't need to know how to change directory or anything. Tho they still show all the logs and such on startup, so I guess that's a bit intimidating.
No, it's just that we are scrutinized the most because of our power/wealth.
So you're going to vote for someone you don't want to win? Why vote at all then. Furthermore if you believe your vote doesn't matter if you vote outside demo/republican why vote at all then? If anything, voting outside those 2 parties is saying more than voting with one. Why vote at all then. No matter who you vote for, it does not make an ounce of difference unless of course the race is won by 1 vote.. but I haven't seen that happen (not saying it hasn't either..). Voting for something/one you don't believe in, (or don't want someone else to win) is selling out. Here take my vote, you haven't earned it, but have it anyhow, because you're a democrat. The system would be much better if people wouldn't do this. There would be more competition among politicians, which is almost unquestionably a good thing.
Yes because of the way people vote. If they, as I said above, would vote for who they believe in, we could have more than just rep/demos.
This is both good and bad (like everything else). If there was more dividing of power, it would would be extremely hard to do anything. Like whether or not to cut taxes, what would happen if it was divided up? nothing, more than likely, because btoh sides would disagree. THis is where the balance of power comes into play. The president cannot inact laws, cognress can, which is divided up, and would be even mroe so if people would stop voting only rep/dem.
Have you ever seen the map that showed the displacement of who voted for who in the 2000 election? The only place that gore won anything was in the big cities. I cant' find it in a quick googling but it's there. One of the reasons the electoral college works, but there are certainly downsides to it. But that's another debate entirely.
One more reason to NOT vote the 2 major parties.
this wasn't the best analogy, but it was the best I could think of at the time. Basically, you simlpy cannot know everything any other person knows, president or not. So when people critize the president or any expert in any field, I tend to default the decision to the expert as opposed to the ordinary guy who has an opinion. So when the President (along with many others in power and with intelligence info) says we should go to war, I believe them unless there is good evidence otherwise or good evidence that their interests are not what's best for our country/world. The reason i made that analogy, was if say you were deciding what software to use for service and you said go with X, but a fair amount of people who will use the service say go with Y. These people are not experts and have varying degrees of knowledge of why you should go with X. What will you choose?
I dunno, i was never under the impression that they had WMD ready to use in five minutes. I thought that it was just the military making sure that they did not endure unessecary(spelling?) casualties. But even if they did, this has not been proved or disproved true.
A quote of what Clinton said on Larry King, "but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks... [Dole says that's right]
You know, I really like this idea. maybe we could start a movement or something here on
i know that was stupid of me, actually had it checked but the 20 second delay ahppened so I typed it over and forgot to cehck it. Oh well there goess some karma
fp
I dont' see how his post was anywhere near a troll. He said his ideas and thoughts on the matter.
It's third out of three and it's losing money? For the immediate future, this is a failure. Maybe in the future it won't be, but just because you got an F English in 6th grade and an A in 7th, doesn' tmean you didn't fail 6th grade english.
Umm no it won't, It's also is losing to the Gamecube.