Reading Bill's message made me realize just how much I'm going to miss that guy. Of course, I'm speaking as a foreign observer who really couldn't care less how badly you yankees screw yourselves internally. (Just don't annex your buddies up here in Canada m'kay? We're all socialists and we'd throw USA's basically right-wing democratic process out of whack).
Anyway, since I don't have a personal stake in the internal policies of ye olde USA, I think I have a more detached view of the whole situation. Main think I've always liked about Mr. Clinton was his charisma and beautifully-crafted public statements. Before Clinton you really hadn't had a good presidential orator in quite some time.
Also, I'll always have a soft spot for Bill because he tried to do the right thing (Socialized Medicine) even though he must have known he'd never pull it off.
I don't know about you but I'd bet that a lot of slashdot readers and linux users in general like to have a few machines kicking around. I know I do -- if I can make a working machine out of the parts bin I'm a happy camper. Lots of "parts bin" style machines are going to have 5 yr old + video cards. My desktop machine may have a Geforce in it, but one of my testbeds (crappy old socket-5 P-60) has an S3 chipset integrated into the mobo. The day that machine has to go in the pile with the PS/2 model 40 and the '386 is not gonna be a happy one for me.
Presumably M$ was "tipped off" that there is abuse going on in this particular case. Still... is this smart business? For this to justify the bad publicity there had better be one hella pile of license abuse going on.
Interesting concept. I tend to bookmark sites that have stuff I may need again and again -- drivers, products I don't currently need (or can't afford), software I want to download. I use bookmarks as a kind of temporary storage for that kind of stuff. I guess I'm not a big bookmarker, but in general I don't bookmark sites like slashdot,planetunreal,etc. that offer real content. From the comments above, I guess this is atypical. However, a search engine based on bookmarks like mine would suck.:)
All of Canada is fibre - no real point, I'm just proud of Canada:-) VOTE LIBERAL!
Isn't our overall network weaker/slower because we have a single fiber backbone?
I'm not an expert (probably obvious..:]) but I know everything seems to have to go through UUNET. Doesn't that mean that our packets have to cross more routers?
Or am I insane?
Why not give them a copy of "The Watchtower"?
I think this kind of prolestysizing is only going to give the community a bad name. Your house would probably be buried under a mountain of t.p. if you gave out Debian CDs.
Another interesting parallel with Canada. We have an appointed Senate. Supposedly the house of "Sober Second Thought", it is a mere rubber-stamp to Parliament and a tool of political patronage (1980s P.M. Brian Mulroney appointed his hairdresser). There are periodic calls for an elected Senate here in Canada, but they have all been beaten back so far, not least because our mechanism for constitutional amendment has conditions that are only slightly less difficult that getting everyone in the country to shout "YEP" at exactly the same moment.
From where I'm sitting an elected Senate doesn't sound too bad.
Interesting ideas.
Proportional representation is an attractive idea but I think that it has turned out to have problems in practice. European countries have experimented with it - I am specifically thinking about Italy - have had trouble forming stable governments.
Maybe too much choice is a bad thing?? I'd hate to believe it.
I'm fascinated by the concept of an 'electoral college' who don't perform any function in the US Government aside from electing a President.
It's almost analagous to the system we have here (in Canada). In Canadian elections, there is no direct vote for our Prime Minister. Instead, we vote for local candidates who represent a particular party. In turn the party that elects a majority of these candidates form a government whose head is that party's chosen leader.
It leads to interesting choices (as the situation in my local district -- does one vote for the excellent local candidate with a terrific track record, at the cost of electing a distasteful national government?)
It seems to me that the Electoral-College U.S. method is a strange shadow of the parliamentary system. I wonder -- what utility does this system have? Maybe an American can enlighten me. If it's straight rep-by-pop, why not just go with the popular vote? Doesn't this pervert the intent of directly electing a head of state?
Despite the complexities, I think I prefer the Canadian-style system. Basically we elect Parliament, analagous to Congress, and they in turn choose a Prime Minister.
It seems to me that the people who designed this experiment had a very definite idea of how they wanted it to turn out. It's social science "research" like this that helps partisans of all political and social stripes grind their various axes.
Does it really teach us anything about human nature that we didn't already know? Who is surprised that children (or anyone) will repeat a behaviour that they have previously seen.
Isn't this just another case of social science research "verifying" common knowledge? I'm pretty sure that the expression "monkey see, monkey do" predates the development of psychology into an "experimental science".
Slashdot Mirror
Reading Bill's message made me realize just how much I'm going to miss that guy. Of course, I'm speaking as a foreign observer who really couldn't care less how badly you yankees screw yourselves internally. (Just don't annex your buddies up here in Canada m'kay? We're all socialists and we'd throw USA's basically right-wing democratic process out of whack).
Anyway, since I don't have a personal stake in the internal policies of ye olde USA, I think I have a more detached view of the whole situation. Main think I've always liked about Mr. Clinton was his charisma and beautifully-crafted public statements. Before Clinton you really hadn't had a good presidential orator in quite some time.
Also, I'll always have a soft spot for Bill because he tried to do the right thing (Socialized Medicine) even though he must have known he'd never pull it off.
I don't know about you but I'd bet that a lot of slashdot readers and linux users in general like to have a few machines kicking around. I know I do -- if I can make a working machine out of the parts bin I'm a happy camper. Lots of "parts bin" style machines are going to have 5 yr old + video cards. My desktop machine may have a Geforce in it, but one of my testbeds (crappy old socket-5 P-60) has an S3 chipset integrated into the mobo. The day that machine has to go in the pile with the PS/2 model 40 and the '386 is not gonna be a happy one for me.
Presumably M$ was "tipped off" that there is abuse going on in this particular case. Still ... is this smart business? For this to justify the bad publicity there had better be one hella pile of license abuse going on.
Interesting concept. I tend to bookmark sites that have stuff I may need again and again -- drivers, products I don't currently need (or can't afford), software I want to download. I use bookmarks as a kind of temporary storage for that kind of stuff. I guess I'm not a big bookmarker, but in general I don't bookmark sites like slashdot,planetunreal,etc. that offer real content. From the comments above, I guess this is atypical. However, a search engine based on bookmarks like mine would suck. :)
Isn't our overall network weaker/slower because we have a single fiber backbone? I'm not an expert (probably obvious..:]) but I know everything seems to have to go through UUNET. Doesn't that mean that our packets have to cross more routers? Or am I insane?
Why not give them a copy of "The Watchtower"? I think this kind of prolestysizing is only going to give the community a bad name. Your house would probably be buried under a mountain of t.p. if you gave out Debian CDs.
Another interesting parallel with Canada. We have an appointed Senate. Supposedly the house of "Sober Second Thought", it is a mere rubber-stamp to Parliament and a tool of political patronage (1980s P.M. Brian Mulroney appointed his hairdresser). There are periodic calls for an elected Senate here in Canada, but they have all been beaten back so far, not least because our mechanism for constitutional amendment has conditions that are only slightly less difficult that getting everyone in the country to shout "YEP" at exactly the same moment. From where I'm sitting an elected Senate doesn't sound too bad.
Interesting ideas. Proportional representation is an attractive idea but I think that it has turned out to have problems in practice. European countries have experimented with it - I am specifically thinking about Italy - have had trouble forming stable governments. Maybe too much choice is a bad thing?? I'd hate to believe it.
I'm fascinated by the concept of an 'electoral college' who don't perform any function in the US Government aside from electing a President. It's almost analagous to the system we have here (in Canada). In Canadian elections, there is no direct vote for our Prime Minister. Instead, we vote for local candidates who represent a particular party. In turn the party that elects a majority of these candidates form a government whose head is that party's chosen leader. It leads to interesting choices (as the situation in my local district -- does one vote for the excellent local candidate with a terrific track record, at the cost of electing a distasteful national government?) It seems to me that the Electoral-College U.S. method is a strange shadow of the parliamentary system. I wonder -- what utility does this system have? Maybe an American can enlighten me. If it's straight rep-by-pop, why not just go with the popular vote? Doesn't this pervert the intent of directly electing a head of state? Despite the complexities, I think I prefer the Canadian-style system. Basically we elect Parliament, analagous to Congress, and they in turn choose a Prime Minister.
It seems to me that the people who designed this experiment had a very definite idea of how they wanted it to turn out. It's social science "research" like this that helps partisans of all political and social stripes grind their various axes. Does it really teach us anything about human nature that we didn't already know? Who is surprised that children (or anyone) will repeat a behaviour that they have previously seen. Isn't this just another case of social science research "verifying" common knowledge? I'm pretty sure that the expression "monkey see, monkey do" predates the development of psychology into an "experimental science".