True, Gore lost Tennesee...But then again just under 2 million voted, as opposed to the comparable States that had over 5 million. It doesn't help if you don't vote...
The country isn't ready for Nader. Same way the country isn't ready for a female president, or a black president, or an openly gay one.
Do not misconstrue, I am by no means a bigot or racist...As modern as society claims to be, our political futures are still heavily swayed by the baby boomers and the elderly. To consider some of Nader's platforms still seems very radical to most Americans.
So maybe we should vote for Nader. If not to elect him, to make a point. It's better than those who decided not to vote because they hated Bush and Gore and didn't see the point.
But again, it ultimately depends on who you really want to see in the White House. And if you can stomach at least 4 years of Bush.
Nope, it has nothing to do with fear of Bush or Gore. At this point, Nader will not win the election. So, by voting for him this time around, you've taken a vote from the lesser of two evils (In my opinion) Gore....and given it to Bush.
Personally I just hope that Nader will get his 5% in.
Thanks to Nader, there's at least two or three states that Gore could have, but probably won't.
I would have voted for Nader, but seeing that it's highly unlikely that he'd win it would have been just the same as voting for Bush. In a perfect world, Politicians wouldn't be liars and the geeks would rule the world. Heh heh.
At my company, each individual employee has space on the network to save important e-mails and text files they may have received from supervisors/admnistrators. e-mails that were sent through the company's server that were questionable in nature were forwarded to that person's supervisor, and that supervisor made the decision on what to do.
We also requested that if a technician had available time (We are an inbound call center) that they could use web-based e-mail programs to compose and check personal e-mail.
I suppose that it's each company's preference. In my line of work the employees aren't always required to stay glued to their monitors, when there's nothing to do. We don't, however allow them to use messaging services like AIM or ICQ (even java based) or even allow them to use telnet for any reason (Strange, huh?) They're afraid that the techs would use it for (and I quote from our handbook) "Hacking, menacing, or other fraudulent use". Go fig. If my company is that paranoid about messaging, what are other companies so worried about? Not to mention that when the "I love you" virus was rampant, it was an upper Admin that opened the attachment, thinking it was from his wife...infecting the entire callcenter (10 network drives for supervisors) and 1,400 employee's individual paritions. Smooth.
I agree. To eliminate any and all "sharing" the RIAA would have to shut down everyone's FTP sites, eliminate Windows file sharing (Windows 98 Third Edition??). Too much cleanup if you ask me.
My theory is that Napster is like the boy in high school who bragged about stealing the girl's clothes in the locker room. Too many people found out...and everything went down from there.:)
Napster is popular because it's for a Windows platform (Windows is very mainstream, I wouldn't say it's the best but I digress...) and as a result it got a lot of attention. File Sharing (I guess) isn't seen as that big of a threat. Why, I don't know. It's all the same to me.
Maybe we'll never know the ulterior motives (if any) of the RIAA.
Slashdot Mirror
I bet if Bush loses...They'll find him dead at the Govenor's mansion after binging on coke...
-Kat
"Tonight has got to be one of the most surreal nights I have ever lived through"
No doubt...I was at work for most of it and it was like people were watching the Superbowl...or a suspenseful movie...Sheesh...
Kat
True, Gore lost Tennesee...But then again just under 2 million voted, as opposed to the comparable States that had over 5 million. It doesn't help if you don't vote...
Kat
Here here!
The country isn't ready for Nader. Same way the country isn't ready for a female president, or a black president, or an openly gay one.
Do not misconstrue, I am by no means a bigot or racist...As modern as society claims to be, our political futures are still heavily swayed by the baby boomers and the elderly. To consider some of Nader's platforms still seems very radical to most Americans.
So maybe we should vote for Nader. If not to elect him, to make a point. It's better than those who decided not to vote because they hated Bush and Gore and didn't see the point.
But again, it ultimately depends on who you really want to see in the White House. And if you can stomach at least 4 years of Bush.
Kat
Nope, it has nothing to do with fear of Bush or Gore. At this point, Nader will not win the election. So, by voting for him this time around, you've taken a vote from the lesser of two evils (In my opinion) Gore....and given it to Bush.
Personally I just hope that Nader will get his 5% in.
Kat
He did not. 6% of the votes are in. They recalled Florida because cnn.com assumed. See what happens when we assume?
-Kat
Thanks to Nader, there's at least two or three states that Gore could have, but probably won't.
I would have voted for Nader, but seeing that it's highly unlikely that he'd win it would have been just the same as voting for Bush. In a perfect world, Politicians wouldn't be liars and the geeks would rule the world. Heh heh.
So that's my two cents. -Kat
At my company, each individual employee has space on the network to save important e-mails and text files they may have received from supervisors/admnistrators. e-mails that were sent through the company's server that were questionable in nature were forwarded to that person's supervisor, and that supervisor made the decision on what to do.
We also requested that if a technician had available time (We are an inbound call center) that they could use web-based e-mail programs to compose and check personal e-mail.
I suppose that it's each company's preference. In my line of work the employees aren't always required to stay glued to their monitors, when there's nothing to do. We don't, however allow them to use messaging services like AIM or ICQ (even java based) or even allow them to use telnet for any reason (Strange, huh?) They're afraid that the techs would use it for (and I quote from our handbook) "Hacking, menacing, or other fraudulent use". Go fig. If my company is that paranoid about messaging, what are other companies so worried about? Not to mention that when the "I love you" virus was rampant, it was an upper Admin that opened the attachment, thinking it was from his wife...infecting the entire callcenter (10 network drives for supervisors) and 1,400 employee's individual paritions. Smooth.
I agree. To eliminate any and all "sharing" the RIAA would have to shut down everyone's FTP sites, eliminate Windows file sharing (Windows 98 Third Edition??). Too much cleanup if you ask me.
:)
My theory is that Napster is like the boy in high school who bragged about stealing the girl's clothes in the locker room. Too many people found out...and everything went down from there.
Napster is popular because it's for a Windows platform (Windows is very mainstream, I wouldn't say it's the best but I digress...) and as a result it got a lot of attention. File Sharing (I guess) isn't seen as that big of a threat. Why, I don't know. It's all the same to me.
Maybe we'll never know the ulterior motives (if any) of the RIAA.