W's kicking butt in the polls and in the electoral college. You know gore is loosing when he can barely hang onto his home state. The people there know Gore and they don't like what they see. W for prez!
Uhh the election hasn't started yet so electors can't even begin to cast their designated votes.
Does it really matter which dictator you elect? Both candidates are identical in pretty much every respect, and we can be sure that whoever wins, the US will still continue to be as arrogant and insular as it always is.
Please enlighten me how you can correlate presidnetial candiates with dictators that's for Russia.
The fact that/. is bothering to provide "coverage" of such a non-event is quite sad really, all it does is provide a forum for the slashbot hordes to propound their particular dogma to people who'd rather use Windows than
admit that someone else's politcal views might have validity.
The election is not a non event. Wheather you care about government dosn't matter it still has far reaching consequences for anything you do almost in any way. Foreign policy will effect the people out of the US as well so it does matter vitally.
Re:Like USENET, what DNS needs is an ".alt" TLD.
on
The Battle for .Web
·
· Score: 1
Every city, no matter how orderly and clean, needs a DUMP and similarly DNS needs.alt to store all the garbage. Why should you support a domain name wasteland? Simple. If you don't, the crap doesn't go away, it
seeps into the other TLD heirarchies.
everyone just get the fuck over TLDs already and get on with your lives. in five years, TLDs will be as ubiquitous as snot. you'll just go to 'compaq', not compaq.com or any of that other dumb, poorly implemented and
not-at-all-thought-out heirachcal nonsense.
Ahh but what about other names.
What if I want to go to say different groups who have the same ideas. Say a nonprofit organization has a.org and anther has a.com and another group of people have a.net now supose they all have the same name? What then? Do the other people have to give up their name?
Also what about international sites. Suppose I want to deal with the german division of compaq or maybe the british or how about sony's japanese division? That's where you idea fails.
Open 'em up, lose the regulation and force the TLD controllers to change their business model. Now it's a striking similarity to the US area code system running only a dozen or so area codes.
How exactly are area codes handled badly? I mean growth of area codes needs to be controlled or you get really weird patterns of growth and the like. One good example of good regulated growth is the 1-800-* numbers that had to be added. Because a similar area code block was found (888) it's easier for the consumer. One of the reasons why people don't go hilly nilly with area codes is that is usually how long distance is calculated (meaning if you call outside you area code you are charged long distance charges from your carrier and most people don't want to pay long distance talking to someone from say across the street).
What does that have to do with the current election? Do you see any factionalism? How could you - its a two party system in the US. Always has been. Any strikes? Direct democracy? Street violence? Etc? No. Just
another boring US election with little to distinguish the two parties.
Namely that there are assertions that massive party factionalism and such leads to unstable governments based on coalitions and that the current system should not be massively changed becuase of these causal factors of instability.
I feel that the two parties are both at least different in their policies and their aims otherwise cooperation would be more widespread.
Also, have you made a survey of the historical literature or just read that single book? Is it possible that a similiar political environment in a different country and or time had different consequences. A little knowledge is
a dangerous thing, mr terminal. Its nice that you read a book and that you believe that book applies to everything but forgive me if I remain unimpressed.
Of course I have read more books than that. What should be noted is that this is the most recent read (actually siting on my desk at this moment). I can find others that back up similar claims. Needless to say it traces many interesting things which you should be made aware in regards to multiparty dynamics and such.
It was because of part factionalism that hitler was appointed to the post of chancelor during the breakaway of the Weimar republic and that they actually thought that they could contain him. There is a quote from the prime minister who could a post as vice chancelor during the early Hitler years(~1933) that basically thought he could restrain him.
Now of course we don't have any large faciast organizations now but it helps to keep a mix of militant parties and direct democracy away from people otherwise you get really bad things that usually result in the long term ruin of the country for anywhere from 20-50 years as Germany, Italy, and Spain/Portugal found out later.
Reference the following title (might be avaible from amazon.com or similar a bit old but good for this type of thing).
"Europe in the 20th Century: a history" by Andreas Dorpalen
published by Macmillian publishing in 1968.
The politics of the French were extremely chaotic and not extremely stable. Direct democracy and the inclusion of various factionalist elements mixed in with periodic strikes, street violence, etc. All of these attributes made France a good example of having massive factionalism.
So now what about being misinformed were you talking about?
I can cite chapter paragraph if need be.
Re:That violates what the founders intended
on
Should You Vote?
·
· Score: 1
Seems to me that the minorities in today's U.S. might think then that some of the founder's intentions didn't turn out the results quite as they wanted to...or what ?
True that some minorities seem to have problems but it's like that almost anywhere because of prejudice, hate, fear, etc. People stigmatize what they either hate or fear sometimes both.
Not everything was perfect witht he constitution but those changes have been ammendments which have been added since.
Is it possible that Americans start to be able to see their founding fathers' intentions as human ones, with the potential of having some flaws with regards to their applicability to our modern times ?
Of course they were human and they thought they might make mistakes hence the ammendment process that makes sure that if something is really, really important it will be changed. Also the Supreme Court does this as well.
The constitution is man-made and not God-given and I would say you are allowed to make changes to it if needed be. But who knows...I am not American. Anyway, it looks like as if you can kill any political
arguement by referring to your founding fathers, because apparently they did everything right and that's it. Period. End of discussion.:-)
The country had a vision initially. That vision has some minor flaws like people spending big bucks to get elected and screwing people over I grant you that it has happened. However that dosn't mean the entire system is flawed. That's like saying that TCP/IP is flawed and should be replaced because people spam others, DoS attacks happen, and some people have slow connections.
I don't blandly follow the founding fathers but I do believe that they sensed that direct democratic rule was dangerous. And when I look at the body of evidence for this over the past few thousand years I tend to agree.
The only real true direct democracy was ancient Athens and that eventually ended when they suffered the great Athenian plague and various conflicts with Sparta, etc. Even their idyllic system froze because it didn't work. Since representative democracy has lasted 200+ years in America and elsewhere and even that outlasted the Athenians I would hazard a guess that representative democracy works better over a long haul; and it keeps all people happy for a while longer.
Actually no that's why I can read and respond your post. Humans don't have telepathy.
How would you diagram that sentence? That's right. You would take the pencil and SHOVE IT IN YOUR FUCKING EYE.
Now why does that have any relation to what my point was? Of course if I took enough time and either did a postscript map or scanned a handwritten image I could diagram that sentence.
I don't consider all the vagaries of grammar really all that important.
*sarcasm*
Thanks for the well thought out reply and from a +1 bonus man as well.
*/sarcasm*
That violates what the founders intended
on
Should You Vote?
·
· Score: 5
The founders did not intend to have people voting directly on issues as far as that goes. They had seen what happens when you have the people in control (really nasty little problems in France, Oliver Cromwell in England, persecution of Puritans, Protestants, etc). They knew about the rights of the minority. The rights of the minority cannot be held in lower esteem than the rights of the majority.
So we can have an unstable government
on
Should You Vote?
·
· Score: 1
Looking carefully at the history of Europe around the WWII period I can say that having a changing government that would be produced from such a constantly shifting coalition would be a bad idea. Take a look a French history for a good illustration of this.
One of the funniest things I saw on slashdot was some poster who say basically that if you voted at all you are supporting bad policy but then goes on to say that we have a crappy government.
It is precisely because of the lack of voting that the world is in such bad shape. Apathy never solves anything.
That's the reason why we don't have any real soil samples from Mars. The ammount of fuel to get to/from the planet and pick up all your little tin can probes would be massive probably several million tons in propellent. Also you have to time the arrival and departure of the probes very carefully to match the orbits of Earth and Mars.
Rejected: the story about Artisan Entertainment creating a fake web site that claims mass murders are being committed in a public park in maryland, attempting to create massive public histeria.
So do you believe everything that people say on the web? It's really not all that impressive unless you whole world is the web.
We want our story moderation priveleges now!
That's all well and good for yourself but please remember that not everyone likes the concept of moderation applied to what content is seen on slashdot. If that happens expect to see some trash about natalie portman make the front page.
don't think the Feds should get involved with filters at all. I believe the decision rests in the hands of the cities and counties alone. What is offensive in one county may not be so in another county. Forcing everyone to
the same "standard" od morality is rediculus.
First off I believe firmly in the principle of Federalism and do not believe that my local officials are any more capable than homeless bums on a street corner.
That being said I believe that I don't want to have a group of people who are fanataics calling all the shots (ie. Mormons, fundamentalist Christian groups like Southern Babtists,etc).
The Federal government does a better job than a bunch of lazy, stupid, crass incompetent people on the local level. To even get into the federal government you have to pass a civil service exam mandated by the Pendeleton Civil Service Act after the assassination of James A. Garfield by Charles Geateau.
There are no such qualifications at any city or county level at all. In fact you get a better chance to get fools and idiots there than anywhere else.
My community is in no way in control of me and never will be because I don't agree with their policies and don't really consider them representative of what I think.
People have been getting tax refunds because of their ecconomic scale for much longer than that (think dependents and such). Believe me I am much older than 16.
The Socviet Union is gone now largely because of Regan's stance towards it and their attempt to keep up with our military spending broke their ability to spend.
Particularly interesting about the dietetic requirements of the average man/woman. The differences in nutritinion aren't that great.
NASA knows this, and the male patriarchy knows this, which is why there aren't very many female astronauts. If there were enough female astronauts, they could flee earth and start their own amazon empire (not the on
click kind) on Mars.
I can't really say. The best thing to do is to make sure that you have you money in a safe place and not take inordinate risk. The bulk should be in savings/certificates of deposit and the remainder should be in low risk investments that have good returns over the long haul.
First of all, moron, the national dept is the result of huge government programs that communists like you and the Democrats support. We wouldn't have a national dept if it weren't for the billion Bureaucracies that exist
because of all the pc garbage that's become so popular in our political culture.
Ok quiz time. This one is easy who makes the beauracracy? Answer? It's *YOU* and every American who lives in this country asking for things. It's like a big line at the Kwick-E-Mart and you are waiting for service. What happens is that many different people ask the government for things and those people are supposed to be represented as the founders intended. To do that you have to make sure that people are served well and not repressed. Hence the size of government.
Slashdot Mirror
It's that simple don't vote have other people change things and then you have no right to complain. Not voting is *not* an intelligent choice.
I myself have submitted over 5000 articles that contain excellent info on Slashdot Cruiser. We will not be held down by the man!
Show us some examples of these "insightful" articles.
Don't be too suprised that write in candiates don't get much press when you invent them.
W's kicking butt in the polls and in the electoral college. You know gore is loosing when he can barely hang onto his home state. The people there know Gore and they don't like what they see. W for prez!
Uhh the election hasn't started yet so electors can't even begin to cast their designated votes.
Does it really matter which dictator you elect? Both candidates are identical in pretty much every respect, and we can be sure that whoever wins, the US will still continue to be as arrogant and insular as it always is.
Please enlighten me how you can correlate presidnetial candiates with dictators that's for Russia.
The fact that
admit that someone else's politcal views might have validity.
The election is not a non event. Wheather you care about government dosn't matter it still has far reaching consequences for anything you do almost in any way. Foreign policy will effect the people out of the US as well so it does matter vitally.
Every city, no matter how orderly and clean, needs a DUMP and similarly DNS needs
seeps into the other TLD heirarchies.
One man/woman's trash is another's treasure.
everyone just get the fuck over TLDs already and get on with your lives. in five years, TLDs will be as ubiquitous as snot. you'll just go to 'compaq', not compaq.com or any of that other dumb, poorly implemented and
not-at-all-thought-out heirachcal nonsense.
Ahh but what about other names.
What if I want to go to say different groups who have the same ideas. Say a nonprofit organization has a
Also what about international sites. Suppose I want to deal with the german division of compaq or maybe the british or how about sony's japanese division? That's where you idea fails.
Just easier to remember I guess.
Open 'em up, lose the regulation and force the TLD controllers to change their business model. Now it's a striking similarity to the US area code system running only a dozen or so area codes.
How exactly are area codes handled badly? I mean growth of area codes needs to be controlled or you get really weird patterns of growth and the like. One good example of good regulated growth is the 1-800-* numbers that had to be added. Because a similar area code block was found (888) it's easier for the consumer. One of the reasons why people don't go hilly nilly with area codes is that is usually how long distance is calculated (meaning if you call outside you area code you are charged long distance charges from your carrier and most people don't want to pay long distance talking to someone from say across the street).
What does that have to do with the current election? Do you see any factionalism? How could you - its a two party system in the US. Always has been. Any strikes? Direct democracy? Street violence? Etc? No. Just
another boring US election with little to distinguish the two parties.
Namely that there are assertions that massive party factionalism and such leads to unstable governments based on coalitions and that the current system should not be massively changed becuase of these causal factors of instability.
I feel that the two parties are both at least different in their policies and their aims otherwise cooperation would be more widespread.
Also, have you made a survey of the historical literature or just read that single book? Is it possible that a similiar political environment in a different country and or time had different consequences. A little knowledge is
a dangerous thing, mr terminal. Its nice that you read a book and that you believe that book applies to everything but forgive me if I remain unimpressed.
Of course I have read more books than that. What should be noted is that this is the most recent read (actually siting on my desk at this moment). I can find others that back up similar claims. Needless to say it traces many interesting things which you should be made aware in regards to multiparty dynamics and such.
It was because of part factionalism that hitler was appointed to the post of chancelor during the breakaway of the Weimar republic and that they actually thought that they could contain him. There is a quote from the prime minister who could a post as vice chancelor during the early Hitler years(~1933) that basically thought he could restrain him.
Now of course we don't have any large faciast organizations now but it helps to keep a mix of militant parties and direct democracy away from people otherwise you get really bad things that usually result in the long term ruin of the country for anywhere from 20-50 years as Germany, Italy, and Spain/Portugal found out later.
Reference the following title (might be avaible from amazon.com or similar a bit old but good for this type of thing).
"Europe in the 20th Century: a history" by Andreas Dorpalen
published by Macmillian publishing in 1968.
The politics of the French were extremely chaotic and not extremely stable. Direct democracy and the inclusion of various factionalist elements mixed in with periodic strikes, street violence, etc. All of these attributes made France a good example of having massive factionalism.
So now what about being misinformed were you talking about?
I can cite chapter paragraph if need be.
Seems to me that the minorities in today's U.S. might think then that some of the founder's intentions didn't turn out the results quite as they wanted to...or what ?
True that some minorities seem to have problems but it's like that almost anywhere because of prejudice, hate, fear, etc. People stigmatize what they either hate or fear sometimes both.
Not everything was perfect witht he constitution but those changes have been ammendments which have been added since.
Is it possible that Americans start to be able to see their founding fathers' intentions as human ones, with the potential of having some flaws with regards to their applicability to our modern times ?
Of course they were human and they thought they might make mistakes hence the ammendment process that makes sure that if something is really, really important it will be changed. Also the Supreme Court does this as well.
The constitution is man-made and not God-given and I would say you are allowed to make changes to it if needed be. But who knows...I am not American. Anyway, it looks like as if you can kill any political
arguement by referring to your founding fathers, because apparently they did everything right and that's it. Period. End of discussion.
The country had a vision initially. That vision has some minor flaws like people spending big bucks to get elected and screwing people over I grant you that it has happened. However that dosn't mean the entire system is flawed. That's like saying that TCP/IP is flawed and should be replaced because people spam others, DoS attacks happen, and some people have slow connections.
I don't blandly follow the founding fathers but I do believe that they sensed that direct democratic rule was dangerous. And when I look at the body of evidence for this over the past few thousand years I tend to agree.
The only real true direct democracy was ancient Athens and that eventually ended when they suffered the great Athenian plague and various conflicts with Sparta, etc. Even their idyllic system froze because it didn't work. Since representative democracy has lasted 200+ years in America and elsewhere and even that outlasted the Athenians I would hazard a guess that representative democracy works better over a long haul; and it keeps all people happy for a while longer.
What are you illiterate?
Actually no that's why I can read and respond your post. Humans don't have telepathy.
How would you diagram that sentence? That's right. You would take the pencil and SHOVE IT IN YOUR FUCKING EYE.
Now why does that have any relation to what my point was? Of course if I took enough time and either did a postscript map or scanned a handwritten image I could diagram that sentence.
I don't consider all the vagaries of grammar really all that important.
*sarcasm*
Thanks for the well thought out reply and from a +1 bonus man as well.
*/sarcasm*
The founders did not intend to have people voting directly on issues as far as that goes. They had seen what happens when you have the people in control (really nasty little problems in France, Oliver Cromwell in England, persecution of Puritans, Protestants, etc). They knew about the rights of the minority. The rights of the minority cannot be held in lower esteem than the rights of the majority.
Looking carefully at the history of Europe around the WWII period I can say that having a changing government that would be produced from such a constantly shifting coalition would be a bad idea. Take a look a French history for a good illustration of this.
One of the funniest things I saw on slashdot was some poster who say basically that if you voted at all you are supporting bad policy but then goes on to say that we have a crappy government.
It is precisely because of the lack of voting that the world is in such bad shape. Apathy never solves anything.
That might tell us a good answer
That's the reason why we don't have any real soil samples from Mars. The ammount of fuel to get to/from the planet and pick up all your little tin can probes would be massive probably several million tons in propellent. Also you have to time the arrival and departure of the probes very carefully to match the orbits of Earth and Mars.
I mean if you want a simple look at the terrain it's ok but if you insist on doing this it just seems like more of the same.
Rejected: the story about Artisan Entertainment creating a fake web site that claims mass murders are being committed in a public park in maryland, attempting to create massive public histeria.
So do you believe everything that people say on the web? It's really not all that impressive unless you whole world is the web.
We want our story moderation priveleges now!
That's all well and good for yourself but please remember that not everyone likes the concept of moderation applied to what content is seen on slashdot. If that happens expect to see some trash about natalie portman make the front page.
don't think the Feds should get involved with filters at all. I believe the decision rests in the hands of the cities and counties alone. What is offensive in one county may not be so in another county. Forcing everyone to
the same "standard" od morality is rediculus.
First off I believe firmly in the principle of Federalism and do not believe that my local officials are any more capable than homeless bums on a street corner.
That being said I believe that I don't want to have a group of people who are fanataics calling all the shots (ie. Mormons, fundamentalist Christian groups like Southern Babtists,etc).
The Federal government does a better job than a bunch of lazy, stupid, crass incompetent people on the local level. To even get into the federal government you have to pass a civil service exam mandated by the Pendeleton Civil Service Act after the assassination of James A. Garfield by Charles Geateau.
There are no such qualifications at any city or county level at all. In fact you get a better chance to get fools and idiots there than anywhere else.
My community is in no way in control of me and never will be because I don't agree with their policies and don't really consider them representative of what I think.
People have been getting tax refunds because of their ecconomic scale for much longer than that (think dependents and such). Believe me I am much older than 16.
The Socviet Union is gone now largely because of Regan's stance towards it and their attempt to keep up with our military spending broke their ability to spend.
NASA knows this, and the male patriarchy knows this, which is why there aren't very many female astronauts. If there were enough female astronauts, they could flee earth and start their own amazon empire (not the on
click kind) on Mars.
Yeah sure, and pigs fly.
I can't really say. The best thing to do is to make sure that you have you money in a safe place and not take inordinate risk. The bulk should be in savings/certificates of deposit and the remainder should be in low risk investments that have good returns over the long haul.
First of all, moron, the national dept is the result of huge government programs that communists like you and the Democrats support. We wouldn't have a national dept if it weren't for the billion Bureaucracies that exist
because of all the pc garbage that's become so popular in our political culture.
Ok quiz time. This one is easy who makes the beauracracy? Answer? It's *YOU* and every American who lives in this country asking for things. It's like a big line at the Kwick-E-Mart and you are waiting for service. What happens is that many different people ask the government for things and those people are supposed to be represented as the founders intended. To do that you have to make sure that people are served well and not repressed. Hence the size of government.