DOD also targets those with high SATs too
on
Clever Girl Bess
·
· Score: 2
This outcry about the DOD purchasing demographic information on kids is a bunch of liberal rhetoric. Especially considering that the DOD (and civilian colleges/universities) also target those PSAT/SAT/ACT test takers who fit a certain criteria. For example, I remember way back in high school that everyone who scored 1200 or over on the SAT got cute glossy brochures imploring them to join the Long Gray Line.
What's so wrong about serving your country? Oh, wait, some folks apparently think it is an evil concept.
From the O Brother review...[the movie riffs on] the Southern streak of moral and religious high-mindedness that still crops up in American politics and Washington debates over values, morality and culture....
Gimme a break! To assert that folks in the South have a monopoly on "religious high mindedness", is a bit of a stretch, even for a movie review. I can understand how shocking it may be for those of you from big metropolitan areas to see that in much of rural America (Southern or Northern), religion is a huge influence for many people.
And OH MY GOODNESS religion could influence their politics! We're doomed! But why is it so alarming to some of you that religion MAY color someone's worldview??? It is fine to disagree politically with these people, but please restrain yourself from ATTACKING them. When you attack them, it is like shooting fish in a barrel.
BTW {OT}, from the Mamet review, for the record there are no hicks in Vermont (hicks are indeed from the South, which includes anyplace beyond Massachusetts), natives are known as "woodchucks".
"Solitaire," "Free Cell" and similiar bundled games are the most frequently played of all online and offline games.
Those "most frequently played games" Solitaire, Free Cell, Harts and Mindsweeper are bundled with Windows so even your middle aged, balding with a spare tire in the middle, boss can find them under Start>Programs>Accessories>Games.
I ironically saw this article yesterday on CNN which postulates that video games are harmful to young girls (and boys) because of their unrealistic stereotypical portrayals of female actions and of the female body. (You know the valleys of cleavage, the thin waists and the high pitched giggles...)
Now, I don't game, so I can't really say much about this. But I sure as hell don't know any women who look like Lara or Johanna Dark in real life. And I am not sure that adult fantasy figures are a good thing for young minds. Just a thought.
Further discussion brought out the case of Stockholm, Sweden. Stockholm and certain other cities have taken on the job of laying fiber-optic cable as a municipal service, similar to sewer service or water or roads. Since the municipality built the pipe to the home, there is no issue of a company attempting to monopolize the pipe, and any company which wants to offer Internet service over the pipe may do so.
Being the devil's advocate on this issue, I just wanted to bring up the case about Burlington, Vermont. Burlington recently voted for a bond issue to fund the building of fiber optic network in the city. If I remember correctly, the city voted to not only build the fiber, but to also provide access services. And as can be predicted, since the bond vote, the city hasn't even begun to string wire yet. A few questions arose in my mind about this.
First, do I really want my municipality to be responsible for a fiber network? Given the glacial pace of bureaucratic decision making and budget constraints in most municipalities, it seems quite possible that by the time a municipality BUILDS a network, it could rightly be outdated. Not to mention the idea of maintenance. Or the idea of folks screaming about their taxes being raised to fund these projects.
Second, what about issues like security and censorship? Think about the trouble AT&T is getting because of the mere availability of adult content on their cable network. Or the issues swirling around Internet access in public schools and libraries. I could just imagine the policy implications....
I think the notion of transferring the responsiblity of Internet access to the public sector is admirable, and of course we want everyone to have "fair access" to the Net, but I question the viability of public projects like these.
I know a guy (who lived used to live near me) about my age who did nothing but shift work and then game on his time off. During many mid-afternoons I would see him, blurry eyed, wearing a couple day old clothes, retrieving his mail and he would say something to me like "Wow man, I was on the Quake server for over 20 hours yesterday!" and he was proud of that fact.
Like this guy has the chance to change the world. I don't think he even has a chance at procreation.
I'm not stereotyping all gamers, just those who subsitute gaming for real life experiences.
I agree that the situation in PBC is completely nuts, but I state that I'm not a supporter of a national online voting system...(BTW, there was a great article on the AP wires this morning about the acutal socio-economic demographics of PBC).
If you recall Jon, in the States we don't hold federal elections but instead elections run primarily by the state apparatus. Each state has laws-different laws-I might add, about balloting, voter registration guidelines, office holder eligibility, etc. Even though I might disagree with some of these laws (like the one that allowed a convict in a Massachusetts prison to run for governor of Vermont), I'm completely wary of increasing federal intervention in this instance. Plus, I'd even argue that making this a federal responsibility would disenfranchise the smaller/less populated/rural states like mine. (We don't have as much influence in Congress other states, etc.)
And about those 19K ballots that were thrown out of the election in PBC, I just have to wonder what are the statistics for spoilt ballots in other states....(I voted on Tuesday with a marker and a scan tron sheet, it would have been easy to spoil my ballot if I hadn't paid attention).
About that 10 waiting period
on
eLection '04
·
· Score: 1
Have you ever gotten mail from/to an APO box?? It is a bit slow and not always dependable since- DUH
it depends on wether not tonight's cargo plane came to the base to drop off supplies or not.
Think about it also, if whatever entity had primaries in September (before the general) then the finalized ballots probably weren't even ready to go to voters until mid-Sept.
These ballots have to be POSTMARKED on election day though.
I'm one of those people who are staying home with my toddler during the day and do the kiddie hand off at 5pm to my spouse. I enjoy parenting, and I *know* it has benefited my toddler, but its clear that my professional life has suffered...
For instance, there's currently only so many jobs I could do on a part time night/weekend basis since I'm a tech rather than a programmer. I teach now, and make good money doing it, but if I was working full time, I should be a network/sys admin at least...
The other issue is a lack of professional interaction and support. The Internet aside, there aren't many others I can talk shop with, and I accomplish my personal continuing education on my own (and that's expensive coming out of your own pocket!)
Cyberspace, writes Wertheim, is a completely new kind of space, a New Jerusalem, potentially welcoming male and female, First World and Third, "...is open to anyone who can afford a personal computer and a monthly Internet access fee... many cyber-enthusiasts would have us believe that that the Net dissolves the very barriers of
race and gender, elevating everybody equally to a disembodied digital stream."
No, the Internet requires more than just a computer and a monthly access fee. It requires technological knowledge and most women today don't posess enough of it. (And as a side note, I hate that recent AAUW study which claimed that women/girls don't wan't to be techs because it's boring/nerdy/antisocial, etc. What crap.)
The net *is* discriminatory because the majority of Internet movers, shakers and doers are male. How many women techs/hacks do you know today? Not many I'd assume.
60 Minutes (the news show) did a great piece on females on the Net a few months ago. Lesley Stahl interviewed the founders of Ivillage and a popular gift registry site, and made a point to note that there WAS NOT ONE FEMALE working in the back with the heavy technology-the servers, routers, etc.
I have to note that I witness this phenomena everyday. In the "welcome to the world of computers" classes I teach, the ratio is around 3 males out of a class of 18 or so. The first time I walk into a class to teach I *always* see a few jaws drop and am asked incredulously "Are YOU the teacher?", because, guess what, I'm in my mid-twenties, female, and love working with technology.
Am I male bashing? Definitely not. Am I saying that females who are on the net are idiots? NO. I'm just trying to make the point that the Wertheim's claims of the net being gender neutral is a great fantasy, but far from the truth.
"The truth is, technology and politics are no longer separable. Almost every citizen, from the hapless buyer trying to get tech support to the parent eliminating a potentially retarded embryo has to deal with technology, even though we don't have any national philosophy of technology and it almost never surfaces directly as an issue in our political system."
Jon, what a poor choice of words in the above statement. In fact, technology does surface in political discourse, but the example that you used about reproductive choice is driven mostly about ideas about morality (God, embryo/fetus viability) not technology per se.
If we, as the people are divided, then how CAN our legislators be united on this issue?
I have been told (by the parent of a three year old) that the Tigger Movie DVD has 12 minutes of trailers and commercials at the beginning. This is similar to various Disney videos we own. I have dismantled the cassette and removed the offending sections of these tapes. The unfortunate 3 year old with the DVD has no such recourse."
You're overlooking a critical point --- which is no one can FORCE the three year old to watch those Tigger trailers. Like the underlying ideas in the arguement for free speech, the village idiot can yell all he wants, but the audience has the right to cover their ears if they wish to.
In this application, it just means that the user has no right to remove (alter) the "offending" material from the media in question. However, you have the right to ignore it all you want or take Junior out of the room.
In Vermont, towns across the state set aside a whole day each March to specifically allow the community as a whole to discuss and vote on local issues. News outlets cover the all day meetings. This year's town meeting day was March 7th.
I am writing this as a creature of politics. I have been interested in politics since I was a kid discussing it at the dinner table with my parents. I read about politics everyday. I watch The Capitol Gang, McLaughlin, Meet the Press, etc for enjoyment. I majored in political science in college. Heck, I even have a political campaign sign in my front yard this year.
From reading your epistle, I have come to believe that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the American political process. Politics 101 teaches us that "government" is formed when the whole of the citizenry gives up a few rights in order to benefit the whole.
In the States, we have a representative democracy, in which we elect representatives to protect our interests for us. (The Founding Fathers believed that the individual citizen would not have have enough time to govern and that the process would become unwieldy, so they chose to use representatives to work in the actual machinations of governance). As I and many others have commented before, the system isn't perfect, especially since we have moved away from the original model and have devolved to a place where we expect representatives to follow their own agendas and not ours.
But please remember that in "the system", "the process" or whatever you want to call it, was designed for CITIZEN INPUT, we are supposed to be involved in politics on days other than Election Day. For example, I personally believe that voter apathy results not from a "broken system" but from the fact that our kids aren't being taught about the civic duty of being involved in politics. We don't teach it in schools and it certainly isn't being taught by most parents. We have come to think of politics as dirty, and as fodder for late night comedians.
Politics is not an elitist endeavor. Politics is not only national concern, but state and local. Politics is honorable. Political involvement by every citizen is critical for a democracy to survive.
So to answer your charge that the coporate republic is running both political parties, the reason is frustratingly simple, because there's a vacuum of power, and someone has to fill it. That's why.
Is the two party system broken? I don't necessarily believe so. Does anyone remember the '92 election? I do. I was excited. I went to a political rally, had a campaign sign in my dorm room. I was excited to vote. Although this year is different for me and alot of others (I was more excited about voting in the primaries than I am about the general election). This year's election seems to be more about personalities than about issues, with a certain flawed but politically brilliant figure in the background.
But Jon, I have to say before I end this, I believe in the process and I know that I will be in the booth on election day with my toddler by my side.
I must admit I am quite bemused that Slashdot is taking a turn towards the political during this quadrennial election year. While this is a *GOOD TREND*, however, there's this idea being mistakenly promulgated that only November 7th counts in the "big picture".
Folks, if you don't take the time to follow up on or gasp! even take proactive stance towards politics and politicians (especially the ones that represent YOU), then don't shake your heads when [insert whatever infuriates you...] gets passed in Congress or even in your local legislature.
Stated in another fashion, a democracy (even a representative democracy) is a system designed with the expectation that citizens are SUPPOSED TO be involved with political decisions (not just elections). In fact, some would say that it is YOUR DUTY to be involved in "the process". After all, aren't political decisions (the good and the bad) supposed to be made to the benefit of, for and by the cititzery?
I don't how we've (as a nation) have come to the point that we now expect our representatives to follow his/her's own agenda after they're elected. No wonder the tradition of the career politician keeps on. No wonder that the big two political parties are running this year's show. No wonder the electorate is, as a whole, apathetic. No wonder that we've got tweedle dee and tweedle dum running for the Presidency this year.
You're wrong on this one. Taco lives in Michigan, which is one of those so called battleground states. Since the race is close there, it would be a risk for Taco to vote for a 3rd party candidate.
That's BS. While there have been a notable group of high school and college students who have become successful through starting web sites (e.g.
Slashdot), there's very little reason to trot out terms like "guru" and "visionary."
Well duh, Katz just HAD to say something nice about his boss...
Doug Davis, the president of the Technology Group at DC, is interviewed and he refers to the developer's license as "mostly open source" because of the restrictions about any scans going through DC servers.
In other words, you can pay $20 for a developer's license to be creative with the Cue:Cat, but DC wants to be able to profit from your efforts by making your software use their servers.
And I thought the allure of open source was the ability to create software for the good of the community...
"Warning: This is heavy-handed academic writing but with a fascinating premise."
"This is an academic work published by a university press, and as such, is riddled with some dense jargon about representation, space, time, interpretation, structuralism and identity."
"...Technromanticism a worthwhile, if
not particularly entertaining or universally accessible book."
After reading these quotes, isn't it not surprising (due to his attitude towards academia) that Katz gets ripped by/. (nearly universally) for HIS writing style?
but for those of you who haven't been following the Republican convention in Philadelphia, at least two state Republican parties have officially announced their opposition the DOJ action.
Both Iowa and Washington state have been noted to include this in their party plank. As a FYI, Rep. Jennifer Dunn gave Washington's delegate count during last night's rolling roll call at the convention and it was she who pointedly referred to the Microsoft case.
considering that ABC is the network that brings us such gems in television programming as 'Making the Band' and considers George Stephanopolous a unbiased political reporter?
If you want to hear another view on linux, why don't you hop on over to Fox News which has some superior tech reporting. (Warning: site is java intensive)
Slashdot Mirror
What's so wrong about serving your country? Oh, wait, some folks apparently think it is an evil concept.
Gimme a break! To assert that folks in the South have a monopoly on "religious high mindedness", is a bit of a stretch, even for a movie review. I can understand how shocking it may be for those of you from big metropolitan areas to see that in much of rural America (Southern or Northern), religion is a huge influence for many people.
And OH MY GOODNESS religion could influence their politics! We're doomed! But why is it so alarming to some of you that religion MAY color someone's worldview??? It is fine to disagree politically with these people, but please restrain yourself from ATTACKING them. When you attack them, it is like shooting fish in a barrel.
BTW {OT}, from the Mamet review, for the record there are no hicks in Vermont (hicks are indeed from the South, which includes anyplace beyond Massachusetts), natives are known as "woodchucks".
Those "most frequently played games" Solitaire, Free Cell, Harts and Mindsweeper are bundled with Windows so even your middle aged, balding with a spare tire in the middle, boss can find them under Start>Programs>Accessories>Games.
That isn't insightful Jon, just reality.
Now, I don't game, so I can't really say much about this. But I sure as hell don't know any women who look like Lara or Johanna Dark in real life. And I am not sure that adult fantasy figures are a good thing for young minds. Just a thought.
Being the devil's advocate on this issue, I just wanted to bring up the case about Burlington, Vermont. Burlington recently voted for a bond issue to fund the building of fiber optic network in the city. If I remember correctly, the city voted to not only build the fiber, but to also provide access services. And as can be predicted, since the bond vote, the city hasn't even begun to string wire yet. A few questions arose in my mind about this.
First, do I really want my municipality to be responsible for a fiber network? Given the glacial pace of bureaucratic decision making and budget constraints in most municipalities, it seems quite possible that by the time a municipality BUILDS a network, it could rightly be outdated. Not to mention the idea of maintenance. Or the idea of folks screaming about their taxes being raised to fund these projects.
Second, what about issues like security and censorship? Think about the trouble AT&T is getting because of the mere availability of adult content on their cable network. Or the issues swirling around Internet access in public schools and libraries. I could just imagine the policy implications....
I think the notion of transferring the responsiblity of Internet access to the public sector is admirable, and of course we want everyone to have "fair access" to the Net, but I question the viability of public projects like these.
Like this guy has the chance to change the world. I don't think he even has a chance at procreation.
I'm not stereotyping all gamers, just those who subsitute gaming for real life experiences.
Here's a look at Graham from a different perspective.
hmmmm.....all pressing issues? Not!
If you recall Jon, in the States we don't hold federal elections but instead elections run primarily by the state apparatus. Each state has laws-different laws-I might add, about balloting, voter registration guidelines, office holder eligibility, etc. Even though I might disagree with some of these laws (like the one that allowed a convict in a Massachusetts prison to run for governor of Vermont), I'm completely wary of increasing federal intervention in this instance. Plus, I'd even argue that making this a federal responsibility would disenfranchise the smaller/less populated/rural states like mine. (We don't have as much influence in Congress other states, etc.)
And about those 19K ballots that were thrown out of the election in PBC, I just have to wonder what are the statistics for spoilt ballots in other states....(I voted on Tuesday with a marker and a scan tron sheet, it would have been easy to spoil my ballot if I hadn't paid attention).
Think about it also, if whatever entity had primaries in September (before the general) then the finalized ballots probably weren't even ready to go to voters until mid-Sept.
These ballots have to be POSTMARKED on election day though.
Take a look at today's headline of my local newspaper. I think I might have a collector's item here.
For instance, there's currently only so many jobs I could do on a part time night/weekend basis since I'm a tech rather than a programmer. I teach now, and make good money doing it, but if I was working full time, I should be a network/sys admin at least...
The other issue is a lack of professional interaction and support. The Internet aside, there aren't many others I can talk shop with, and I accomplish my personal continuing education on my own (and that's expensive coming out of your own pocket!)
No, the Internet requires more than just a computer and a monthly access fee. It requires technological knowledge and most women today don't posess enough of it. (And as a side note, I hate that recent AAUW study which claimed that women/girls don't wan't to be techs because it's boring/nerdy/antisocial, etc. What crap.)
The net *is* discriminatory because the majority of Internet movers, shakers and doers are male. How many women techs/hacks do you know today? Not many I'd assume.
60 Minutes (the news show) did a great piece on females on the Net a few months ago. Lesley Stahl interviewed the founders of Ivillage and a popular gift registry site, and made a point to note that there WAS NOT ONE FEMALE working in the back with the heavy technology-the servers, routers, etc.
I have to note that I witness this phenomena everyday. In the "welcome to the world of computers" classes I teach, the ratio is around 3 males out of a class of 18 or so. The first time I walk into a class to teach I *always* see a few jaws drop and am asked incredulously "Are YOU the teacher?", because, guess what, I'm in my mid-twenties, female, and love working with technology.
Am I male bashing? Definitely not. Am I saying that females who are on the net are idiots? NO. I'm just trying to make the point that the Wertheim's claims of the net being gender neutral is a great fantasy, but far from the truth.
Jon, what a poor choice of words in the above statement. In fact, technology does surface in political discourse, but the example that you used about reproductive choice is driven mostly about ideas about morality (God, embryo/fetus viability) not technology per se.
If we, as the people are divided, then how CAN our legislators be united on this issue?
You're overlooking a critical point --- which is no one can FORCE the three year old to watch those Tigger trailers. Like the underlying ideas in the arguement for free speech, the village idiot can yell all he wants, but the audience has the right to cover their ears if they wish to.
In this application, it just means that the user has no right to remove (alter) the "offending" material from the media in question. However, you have the right to ignore it all you want or take Junior out of the room.
I don't know how Katz did his research.
I am writing this as a creature of politics. I have been interested in politics since I was a kid discussing it at the dinner table with my parents. I read about politics everyday. I watch The Capitol Gang, McLaughlin, Meet the Press, etc for enjoyment. I majored in political science in college. Heck, I even have a political campaign sign in my front yard this year.
From reading your epistle, I have come to believe that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the American political process. Politics 101 teaches us that "government" is formed when the whole of the citizenry gives up a few rights in order to benefit the whole.
In the States, we have a representative democracy, in which we elect representatives to protect our interests for us. (The Founding Fathers believed that the individual citizen would not have have enough time to govern and that the process would become unwieldy, so they chose to use representatives to work in the actual machinations of governance). As I and many others have commented before, the system isn't perfect, especially since we have moved away from the original model and have devolved to a place where we expect representatives to follow their own agendas and not ours.
But please remember that in "the system", "the process" or whatever you want to call it, was designed for CITIZEN INPUT, we are supposed to be involved in politics on days other than Election Day. For example, I personally believe that voter apathy results not from a "broken system" but from the fact that our kids aren't being taught about the civic duty of being involved in politics. We don't teach it in schools and it certainly isn't being taught by most parents. We have come to think of politics as dirty, and as fodder for late night comedians.
Politics is not an elitist endeavor. Politics is not only national concern, but state and local. Politics is honorable. Political involvement by every citizen is critical for a democracy to survive. So to answer your charge that the coporate republic is running both political parties, the reason is frustratingly simple, because there's a vacuum of power, and someone has to fill it. That's why.
Is the two party system broken? I don't necessarily believe so. Does anyone remember the '92 election? I do. I was excited. I went to a political rally, had a campaign sign in my dorm room. I was excited to vote. Although this year is different for me and alot of others (I was more excited about voting in the primaries than I am about the general election). This year's election seems to be more about personalities than about issues, with a certain flawed but politically brilliant figure in the background.
But Jon, I have to say before I end this, I believe in the process and I know that I will be in the booth on election day with my toddler by my side.
Folks, if you don't take the time to follow up on or gasp! even take proactive stance towards politics and politicians (especially the ones that represent YOU), then don't shake your heads when [insert whatever infuriates you...] gets passed in Congress or even in your local legislature.
Stated in another fashion, a democracy (even a representative democracy) is a system designed with the expectation that citizens are SUPPOSED TO be involved with political decisions (not just elections). In fact, some would say that it is YOUR DUTY to be involved in "the process". After all, aren't political decisions (the good and the bad) supposed to be made to the benefit of, for and by the cititzery?
I don't how we've (as a nation) have come to the point that we now expect our representatives to follow his/her's own agenda after they're elected. No wonder the tradition of the career politician keeps on. No wonder that the big two political parties are running this year's show. No wonder the electorate is, as a whole, apathetic. No wonder that we've got tweedle dee and tweedle dum running for the Presidency this year.
Well duh, Katz just HAD to say something nice about his boss...
So I'm guessing that you aren't expecting many slashdotters to follow the Vice Presidential debates tonight at 9pm EST??? ;-)
Doug Davis, the president of the Technology Group at DC, is interviewed and he refers to the developer's license as "mostly open source" because of the restrictions about any scans going through DC servers.
In other words, you can pay $20 for a developer's license to be creative with the Cue:Cat, but DC wants to be able to profit from your efforts by making your software use their servers.
And I thought the allure of open source was the ability to create software for the good of the community...
"Warning: This is heavy-handed academic writing but with a fascinating premise."
"This is an academic work published by a university press, and as such, is riddled with some dense jargon about representation, space, time, interpretation, structuralism and identity."
"...Technromanticism a worthwhile, if not particularly entertaining or universally accessible book."
After reading these quotes, isn't it not surprising (due to his attitude towards academia) that Katz gets ripped by /. (nearly universally) for HIS writing style?
Both Iowa and Washington state have been noted to include this in their party plank. As a FYI, Rep. Jennifer Dunn gave Washington's delegate count during last night's rolling roll call at the convention and it was she who pointedly referred to the Microsoft case.
If you want to hear another view on linux, why don't you hop on over to Fox News which has some superior tech reporting. (Warning: site is java intensive)