Well, to be honest, I never got the whole "first post". That, and I never thought I would actually get that "honor".
But thanks for noticing anyway, not that it matters to me much. Now, can we actually dig up suggestions for Top Ten/. stories so that a slasheditor can compile a slashback and poll?
This is not "funny" but actually insightful. Often it takes a reality check before the $$ flows.
I know, Cause I'm the guy that usually forsees the problems months, and sometime years in advance, and utters the famous words "I told you so" (which doesn't go over very well most of the time). I always give the warnings out, and they are always ignored. When the chickens do come home to roost, I have the email trails to show that I saw it coming, and that the people who could have prevented it choose to ignore it, rather than deal with it.
Right now, our company is dealing with the third month in a row where viral outbreak occurred on several campuses. We are just now fully implementing Enterprise AntiVirus Solution, making full patches to the old machines, and getting them all joined to the domain properly. 5 years after I started working and started to make noise about it all.
Oh well. I get paid my salary one way or another, so I don't really care. I'm thankful for the overtime I'm getting these days.
I'm a SuSE guy, and when I heard this, I thought to myslef (and now you can read my thoughts), "I'm going to have to find a new distro"!
That being said, I am not sure what M$ thinks that they can bring to the Linux front that is not already there, except more of the same. Are they going to bring "Office"? I doubt it. Are they going to bring AD? Maybe, but who cares. Are they going to bring M$ SQL?
Oh, I think I just got it. Oracle/Redhat.... M$/SuSE-Novell.
Once you think about it, it makes perfect sense. M$ is a "me too" kinda company without real innovation of anything new. They should change its name to MeToo.
"I don't think it's fair to cite the Monroe Doctrine or TRs reimplementation of it as a legitimate reason to hate Americans."
Doesn't matter if it's fair or not, that is the fact. One can easily establish the idea of "American Imperialism" from these threaded events, and their continued expansion over the years.
"Then why don't people hate the French? "
Many people do, just Google "French Military Victories" (I'm feeling lucky). People don't "hate" the French as much as the US mainly because the French aren't a scary super power, capable of defeating just about any other army in the world.
"Thank you for not putting the "it's all Bush's fault in there""
Your welcome. I am not one of the typical (R) good (D) bad kinda people (or the other way around). The problems of the US view cannot be fully placed on GWB, although he is PART of the problem.
The problems go back WAY further, probably 100-150 years, which is far and above the average attention span of the American Populace (I think its down to slightly above that of a goldfish).
In this case the situation with NK can be traced back to AT LEAST the 1950s.
Actually, Koreans and Japanese do not get along very well.
China and Russia kinda do, kinda don't, leaning towards do.
Japan and USA have decent relations.
Japan and Russia are mixed as well, tending towards not more than do.
China and USA have mixed relations, tending towards not, except for trade.
USA and Russia have mixed relations, tending towards strained.
North Korea is an island. China has the most control, but is reluctant to deal with NK mainly to keep the hordes of refugees from crossing into China. Whatever China does, it is designed to keep NK stable enough to keep NK people in NK.
So, the six party talks are kinda interesting as each of the six parties has a different priority and concern with respect to NK. Also, Six party talks are much harder to claim "misunderstanding" in negotiated treaties.
The biggest problem is that nobody trusts the US, not necissarily because of GWB, but because of the US' status as SuperPower.
Thanks for replying, but I'll have to wait to do that, because your website has made it into one of the filters the proxy server is blocking here at work (FYI it says "SPAM") .
The difference between "religious extremism" that Carl Sagan was against, and Carl Sagan is that the "religious extremists" Carl Sagan didn't like do not preach against Carl Sagan like Carl Sagan preached against "religious extremism".
"Even if and I stress if they would win say the presidency there is no congress to support anything. This person would have no party to help out."
And this is a problem why?
Remember when the budget wasn't passed, and the government shut down for like two weeks? How many people really "noticed"? Government is over rated for the most part. People are self regulating for the most part. Government should only interfere when that breaks down.
"they really have no chance of winning"
Really? Jesse Ventura would argue with that. Besides that, it is that very attitude that keeps third parties, third parties. I'm trying to break the catch-22, why don't you help.
"Now if we had a parliament"
We(USoA) don't, so it doesn't matter.
"The only way a 3rd party makes sense is to elect the president (or governor) and then about 25% of the Senate and HORs"
No it makes sense to send a message to the Republicrats and Demicans that we're not buying what they are trying to sell. The biggest problem is that the current system only paints in Black and White, when the world is really in color AND shades of grey.
"Despite this pessimism I am voting third party and have for quite a long time."
Good for you! Now get as many people as you can to do the same, this election, this time. This is MY "grassroots campaign"! Vote 3rd Party! I don't care which one, just pick one.
"but politicians don't necessarily have a profound grasp of any issue"
Indeed. They don't need a firm grasp of any issue, because their whole goal is to get elected, not have views on any issue. Most of the false Dichotomies the modern western democratic political wars are over, are often over simplification of the issues.
The recent spat between Rush Bimbo and MJ Fox and the senate races in a couple of states is a great example. The issue is more complicated than "stem cell research" (without saying which of three kinds is in dispute). Even if you don't agree with certain viewpoints (right to life, cloning, etc), the whole debate was boiled down to overly simplistic and emotion tugging soundbites, that deny the seriousness of the issue.
The truth lies somewhere in the middle, and a compromise can be found, but only if we ignore the radical edges on both sides, and actually discuss the issue without the partisan passions of (R) bad, (D) good (or the opposite) garbage.
If you want to change the status quo, then vote 3rd party, and break the two party system into pieces. If you aren't happy with the current crop of congress critters, and executive choices, then take the time and find a third party candidate you can support.
Basically you are saying, unless you vote for the winner, you are throwing your vote away, because unless I am mistaken, that is the only case where your vote "really" counts.
The whole idea of "throwing your vote away" is overly simplistic support of the false dichodomy system in place now.
In reality, if the powers that are, realized that they weren't even getting 30% of the vote, they would be forced to deal with people with differing views and address those issues, apart from Party lines that currently is the status quo.
No more claims of "mandate from the voters", for the madate would be clear... "most people don't like you" (Congressional Approval Ratings are less than even Bush's).
"I am afraid that it is you who are mistaken, about a great many things"
Even voting for people who say that they will do _______ don't actually do ________ if they don't have to. Immigration reform is an excellent case. Somewhere in the 2/3 to 3/4 of the US population wants congress to deal with the illegal (undocumented) aliens flooding our southern border, yet there is YET to be any legislation that actually deals with it. (Yes, I know the president just signed the bill to build a fence, but I also know that it won't actually be built because that portion is already being removed in other legislation).
So, who is wasting their vote? People voting for the same old same old, while expecting change, or the people voting for change, while expecting the same old same old? Every vote is "wasted", IMHO
Slashdot Mirror
"Australians, drunk, playing air guitar that makes noise"
Anyone notice, this comment is redundant and an oxymoron at the same time.
Don't you know? The world Shuts down in December and nothing ever happens. Sheesh
Well, to be honest, I never got the whole "first post". That, and I never thought I would actually get that "honor".
/. stories so that a slasheditor can compile a slashback and poll?
But thanks for noticing anyway, not that it matters to me much. Now, can we actually dig up suggestions for Top Ten
Why not have a /. top 10 news stories of 2006, as slashback retrospective of the year 2006? Or something.
Then we can have a poll of the top five, to let the readers decide which one is the top story of 2006.
And I want my 15 min of slashfame for suggesting it.
On behalf of the grateful people of this nation (approx 50%), I salute you in the only way I know how!
May you and your brothers be blessed beyond comprehension.
This is not "funny" but actually insightful. Often it takes a reality check before the $$ flows.
I know, Cause I'm the guy that usually forsees the problems months, and sometime years in advance, and utters the famous words "I told you so" (which doesn't go over very well most of the time). I always give the warnings out, and they are always ignored. When the chickens do come home to roost, I have the email trails to show that I saw it coming, and that the people who could have prevented it choose to ignore it, rather than deal with it.
Right now, our company is dealing with the third month in a row where viral outbreak occurred on several campuses. We are just now fully implementing Enterprise AntiVirus Solution, making full patches to the old machines, and getting them all joined to the domain properly. 5 years after I started working and started to make noise about it all.
Oh well. I get paid my salary one way or another, so I don't really care. I'm thankful for the overtime I'm getting these days.
"Cat dog fish *car*" --- Fish (others are found on land mostly)
"car truck *J-lo* SUV" --- Car (Others have huge rearends)
"*Madonna* J-lo K-fed Ja-rule" ---- J-lo(I hate the others)
Exactly!
.... M$/SuSE-Novell.
I'm a SuSE guy, and when I heard this, I thought to myslef (and now you can read my thoughts), "I'm going to have to find a new distro"!
That being said, I am not sure what M$ thinks that they can bring to the Linux front that is not already there, except more of the same. Are they going to bring "Office"? I doubt it. Are they going to bring AD? Maybe, but who cares. Are they going to bring M$ SQL?
Oh, I think I just got it. Oracle/Redhat
Once you think about it, it makes perfect sense. M$ is a "me too" kinda company without real innovation of anything new. They should change its name to MeToo.
Seriously, its time to drop SuSE. I am truly sad.
"I don't think it's fair to cite the Monroe Doctrine or TRs reimplementation of it as a legitimate reason to hate Americans."
Doesn't matter if it's fair or not, that is the fact. One can easily establish the idea of "American Imperialism" from these threaded events, and their continued expansion over the years.
"Then why don't people hate the French? "
Many people do, just Google "French Military Victories" (I'm feeling lucky). People don't "hate" the French as much as the US mainly because the French aren't a scary super power, capable of defeating just about any other army in the world.
"Explain to me what we did 100 to 150 years ago that pissed off the World?"
.... .... Monroe Doctrine (1820s).
Exactly my point. You don't know, and can't think of anything. I can think of at least TWO events that are part of the trend.
Teddy Roosevelt's "Speak softly, carry a big stick" (1901) which was his take on
And that is off the top of my head.
"Thank you for not putting the "it's all Bush's fault in there""
Your welcome. I am not one of the typical (R) good (D) bad kinda people (or the other way around). The problems of the US view cannot be fully placed on GWB, although he is PART of the problem.
The problems go back WAY further, probably 100-150 years, which is far and above the average attention span of the American Populace (I think its down to slightly above that of a goldfish).
In this case the situation with NK can be traced back to AT LEAST the 1950s.
Actually, Koreans and Japanese do not get along very well.
China and Russia kinda do, kinda don't, leaning towards do.
Japan and USA have decent relations.
Japan and Russia are mixed as well, tending towards not more than do.
China and USA have mixed relations, tending towards not, except for trade.
USA and Russia have mixed relations, tending towards strained.
North Korea is an island. China has the most control, but is reluctant to deal with NK mainly to keep the hordes of refugees from crossing into China. Whatever China does, it is designed to keep NK stable enough to keep NK people in NK.
So, the six party talks are kinda interesting as each of the six parties has a different priority and concern with respect to NK. Also, Six party talks are much harder to claim "misunderstanding" in negotiated treaties.
The biggest problem is that nobody trusts the US, not necissarily because of GWB, but because of the US' status as SuperPower.
That would be IMG tag.
On a side note, I ought to hit "preview" more often . D00H
sounds like the HTML tag would be a violation of this.
Actually, it is 64.84% or so I'm told by someone, somewhere ... I just can't remember where.
Thanks for replying, but I'll have to wait to do that, because your website has made it into one of the filters the proxy server is blocking here at work (FYI it says "SPAM") .
I'll email you after I get home from work.
Actually, I just read your bio. We definitely need to talk. ;-)
Are you involved in the site in your sig? If so, we need to find a way to talk outside of /.
The difference between "religious extremism" that Carl Sagan was against, and Carl Sagan is that the "religious extremists" Carl Sagan didn't like do not preach against Carl Sagan like Carl Sagan preached against "religious extremism".
So, is that Hypocritical or Ironic (or both)?
"The ONLY malady we all share in common is the IRS."
... I can think of two others.
Wrong
Congress
Lawyers
Must resist ..... (voice in back of head ... "Resistance is Futile")
....
Round Four:
Round Five: Profit?????
"Even if and I stress if they would win say the presidency there is no congress to support anything. This person would have no party to help out."
And this is a problem why?
Remember when the budget wasn't passed, and the government shut down for like two weeks? How many people really "noticed"? Government is over rated for the most part. People are self regulating for the most part. Government should only interfere when that breaks down.
"they really have no chance of winning"
Really? Jesse Ventura would argue with that. Besides that, it is that very attitude that keeps third parties, third parties. I'm trying to break the catch-22, why don't you help.
"Now if we had a parliament"
We(USoA) don't, so it doesn't matter.
"The only way a 3rd party makes sense is to elect the president (or governor) and then about 25% of the Senate and HORs"
No it makes sense to send a message to the Republicrats and Demicans that we're not buying what they are trying to sell. The biggest problem is that the current system only paints in Black and White, when the world is really in color AND shades of grey.
"Despite this pessimism I am voting third party and have for quite a long time."
Good for you! Now get as many people as you can to do the same, this election, this time. This is MY "grassroots campaign"! Vote 3rd Party! I don't care which one, just pick one.
"but politicians don't necessarily have a profound grasp of any issue"
Indeed. They don't need a firm grasp of any issue, because their whole goal is to get elected, not have views on any issue. Most of the false Dichotomies the modern western democratic political wars are over, are often over simplification of the issues.
The recent spat between Rush Bimbo and MJ Fox and the senate races in a couple of states is a great example. The issue is more complicated than "stem cell research" (without saying which of three kinds is in dispute). Even if you don't agree with certain viewpoints (right to life, cloning, etc), the whole debate was boiled down to overly simplistic and emotion tugging soundbites, that deny the seriousness of the issue.
The truth lies somewhere in the middle, and a compromise can be found, but only if we ignore the radical edges on both sides, and actually discuss the issue without the partisan passions of (R) bad, (D) good (or the opposite) garbage.
If you want to change the status quo, then vote 3rd party, and break the two party system into pieces. If you aren't happy with the current crop of congress critters, and executive choices, then take the time and find a third party candidate you can support.
Money Grubbing Lawyers?
"Generally, these rules require lawyers to submit their ads to a review board, often with a filing fee paid with each new advertisement."
Basically you are saying, unless you vote for the winner, you are throwing your vote away, because unless I am mistaken, that is the only case where your vote "really" counts.
... "most people don't like you" (Congressional Approval Ratings are less than even Bush's).
The whole idea of "throwing your vote away" is overly simplistic support of the false dichodomy system in place now.
In reality, if the powers that are, realized that they weren't even getting 30% of the vote, they would be forced to deal with people with differing views and address those issues, apart from Party lines that currently is the status quo.
No more claims of "mandate from the voters", for the madate would be clear
"I am afraid that it is you who are mistaken, about a great many things"
Even voting for people who say that they will do _______ don't actually do ________ if they don't have to. Immigration reform is an excellent case. Somewhere in the 2/3 to 3/4 of the US population wants congress to deal with the illegal (undocumented) aliens flooding our southern border, yet there is YET to be any legislation that actually deals with it. (Yes, I know the president just signed the bill to build a fence, but I also know that it won't actually be built because that portion is already being removed in other legislation).
So, who is wasting their vote? People voting for the same old same old, while expecting change, or the people voting for change, while expecting the same old same old? Every vote is "wasted", IMHO