Indeed, President Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted as a result of impeachment. The trial was conducted by the House Managers in the Senate and ultimately the Senate found him not guilty.
It's not just me that says Clinton was impeached, Wikipedia agrees. Had the impeachment not been legal, the Clinton administration would have likely contested it. However, Clinton rode it out and probably gained popularity for it.
Almost impeached and impeached are sort of like almost pregnant and pregnant--one either is or isn't. Although impeachment against Nixon was a foregone conclusion had he remained in office, the fact is that he was not impeached, while Clinton and Andrew Johnson were. The result was that Nixon is the only president to resign from office which puts him in a league by himself.
I was responding to the implication that Nixon and Clinton are in the same category of having been impeached while they are not.
I agree that Nixon did fit the reason impeachment should be used while in the cases of Andrew Johnson and Clinton they faced impeachment more from a position of idealogical opposition than for an actual high crime or misdemeanor which is exactly how it should not be used.
You're correct. I did forget the commas and I'm usually quite pedantic with myself. That's what I get for not previewing.
Nixon is the only president to have resigned his presidency. Several have died while in office which have allowed several vice-presidents to be sworn in as president. To date we have not had the situation where both president and vice-president have been incapacitated at the same time to allow the Speaker of the House to be sworn in as president.
Only Clinton and A. Johnson have actually been impeached and each was found not guilty. I don't know how many, if any other, presidents have had articles of impeachment proposed but not actually drawn against them.
Nixon? I'm not here to defend the guy, but he was never impeached. He resigned in the face of a likely impeachment proceeding.
You may have Nixon confused with Andrew Johnson the 17th president who was impeached. In fact impeachment proceedings failed to make it out of committee in 1867 and then impeachment was successful in 1868. Johnson was acquitted by one vote in the Senate by Edmund G. Ross of Kansas.
At Denver they are tearing out the Arrivals boards and only the Departures boards are working, at least in the Concourse B area. I guess the logic is that everyone waiting is departing, so why bother with unneeded information.
The new regs keep the tear jerking confined to the baggage area which is fine by me as I fly solo with no one waiting for me anywhere and the gate areas are hectic enough already just with the passengers that need to be there.
Holding the current administration accountable is well and good, but the warning signs didn't just magically appear after January 20, 2001, they had to have been there prior to that date so the previous administration shares accountability and blame as well. In fact, the blame can be laid at the doorstep of every administration going back at least 40 years. The signs were there all along, but we in the USA chose to ignore them, apparently hoping Islamic fundamentalists/extremists would get bored and go do something else.
So long as they can only hijack the occasional plane or detonate the occasional car/truck bomb, we can place their activities in the category of an ongoing nuisance. However, once they acquire a nuclear device and demonstrate their willingness and ability to detonate it, the rules of the game will change markedly. I prefer the civilized nations of the world do everything they can to prevent that from happening.
Speaking of which, on Sunday while sitting at Denver International waiting for my second delayed flight, I saw a United plane with the tail number N666UA. Today on my way back, I saw it again.
While accountability would be a nice touch, I do like the current regs for one simple reason, it keeps people without tickets out of the terminal/gate areas. Maybe I'm just a sour puss, but I just got back from Salt Lake City via Denver a couple of hours ago and the terminals are crowded enough without all the extra people as it used to be.
No matter what happens in the future, I hope that one aspect of the current regs remains in place.
If memory serves. I first started visiting Slashdot in late '97, probably no earlier than late November or early December. As i recall registration occured sometime in early '98 and, yes, I hesitated a day or two.
I remember when the actual karma value was shown.
What a ride it has been. Congrats on the first decade, Rob.
And by far the flirtatious comments such as you ended with are the worst. I don't expect a kiss or a date or a nice romp between the sheets out of something dumb like carrying a big box... but for the love of god, don't PUT ideas like that in my head! THAT is why women are infuriating. >_ Well... no, that's not why, but it's a part of it.
Exactly. That's why women have the power in this world. A toss of the hair, a hint of a smile, and they'll have us moving mountains for them. But, if the guy thinks there was anything more to it than the manual task she wanted done at that point in time, EEO will quickly step in and set him right. If he's lucky, he'll just be subjected to remedial training, if he's not, he'll be out in the parking lot kicking rocks and wondering what the heck just happened. It's not a two-way street.
To those of you who work in a company that has yet to adopt a draconian EEO policy, consider yourselves blessed. The rest of us are biding our time knowing the pendulum will swing back to a more sane environment sometime in the future. Meanwhile, our testicles are in a lock box held by EEO.
I wasn't offended at all (it takes quite a bit to offend me and trivial matters like this barely raise my eyebrows). I just had to point out that physical rewards, as suggested by snowgirl, are prohibited in many workplaces, no matter how innocent the intent. Even any implication of such an offer is grounds for discipline in my workplace if not outright dismissal.
I just pointed out that kissing a male co-worker would be sexual harassment. I made no comment on whether it was sexist or not.
Turn the tables and there is a lawsuit brewing, or at the very least the guy can count on getting fired when HR finds out about his attempted kiss of a female co-worker.
While few single men would complain about receiving a kiss from a female co-worker, in very few cases would the reverse be true. Working for a Fortune 500 company, I know very well what the HR policy is regarding sexual harassment as I have to sign the policy agreement every year.
I personally know a woman that was threatened with discipline because of things she said even in a male dominated work place (she is the typical person that is fun to work with and enjoyed bantering with the guys in their own environment). HR is serious about sexual harassment even when it really doesn't exist. I'm certain she never intended any sexual harassment and was likely just teasing but apparently someone else took her comments the wrong way. All it takes is a perception of sexual harassment by the other party to land in hot water very quickly.
The linked article above states the presumed "No" vote to be unofficial and according to unamed "sources". This could well go the other way and in fact be approved. Any celebration should wait until ISO offically releases the voting results.
I no longer presume "sources" to have any credibility.
That was my first thought upon reading the original article last week.
I would almost bet that this was a concession to RIAA during Vista's design phase. I would also bet that they were counting on this particular "feature" going unnoticed until XP was cleared out of the sales channels and Vista had gained acceptance as the OS of choice amongst MS' vendors.
And there are people that want to accept MS into the FOSS community with open arms? MS apparently no longer regards its customers as its first priority. How then could they be trusted to put playing fair a priority in the FOSS community?
I work for a fortune 500 company and am union in IT. I don't have many complaints and the money pays my bills and I have enough left over for toys.
Each Christmas my immediate supervisor has gotten everyone in my workgroup something, either jackets, small tools, gift certificates, or something useful. For a few years I worked at a division office and the main department management never gave us anything, but they didn't owe us anything either. Since moving home the local manager of the main department sees to it that we get one of the same things they give the members of their department. Again, he doesn't have to do it, but it definitely makes a person feel appreciated.
However, we don't have anything like Christmas parties and such, though, we do get plenty of paid holiday time this time of the year which is nice. Being union means that their are no performance bonuses for anyone unless everyone gets them and then it would be the same amount. While a sizable bonus would be nice, I'll take steady work and sane hours and good pay throughout the year instead.
Re:Radio Is Older... And NOT Invented By Marconi
on
Broadcast Radio Turns 100
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You do understand that TFA is about radio broadcasting and not just about the invention of radio itself, right?
This celebration is spot on since neither Tesla nor Marconi had anyone "listening" outside of their respective labs or work groups. Conversely, Fessenden did have an audience of listeners as documented by the various shipboard operators that did hear his broadcast. Fessenden's acheivement in no way dimishes the work of Tesla, Marconi, or others, rather he built upon their work and in turn broke new ground.
This is the centennial of broadcasting where speech and music were transmitted to an unspecified number of listeners. Prior transmissions were primarily telegraphy and intended for a specific receiver. This is the crucial difference we are celebrating.
I wonder if the the radio pioneers (Marconi, Fessenden, Sarnoff, et. al.) would be impressed or disappointed by the progress we've made in communications technology over the past century. I'm sure we can point to areas where advances could/should have been made sooner. The upcoming digital TV cutover date in just over two years is a prime example. Its adoption is being hindered by the inertia of a huge installed base of working analog TV sets.
Will the second century of broadcasting bring as much change as the first?
Isn't it interesting that when people started experimenting with networking computers over radio that they rejuvenated "wireless" to describe networking without wires? Just as in the early days wireless was used to describe telegraphy without wires. What was old is new again.
Did anyone else discover that any song that had "radio" in its title (Queen's Radio Ga-Ga) or discussed radio (Rush's Spirit of Radio) to be an instant personal favorite?
Even microwaves are radio waves as it is a part of the electromagnetic spectrum--it is just much higher in frequency than the traditional broadcast bands. The same can be said of light which is also at a much higher frequency (shorter wavelength) of the electromagnetic spectrum.
The advantage of the microwave region is that a signal can occupy a larger range of frequencies and the wavelength from the low to the high end of the bandwidth doesn't change much due to the inverse relationship of frequency and wavelength. Calling it "satellite radio" is not deceptive except that it is a completely digital stream and the receiver's tuner doesn't necessarily tune to a different frequency for each "channel".
Ham radio to celebrate 100 years of broadcasting
on
Broadcast Radio Turns 100
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The ARRL is sponsoring an on-the-air celebration of the centennial of broadcasting. The Hello Radio campaign has been celebrating the upcoming event throughout most of 2006.
How many broadcasters will let this event go unremarked? That is sad indeed.
People ask why there was a Morse code test to begin with. What I was told at one time was that it was to allow the US Navy, the group that issued Amateur radio licenses way way back when, wanted to be able to order Amateurs off the air if they needed a frequency. This was because while the Amateurs could build what ever radio they liked the Navy had a large number of CW radios which could not be replaced on a whim. I was then repeatedly berated to stop spreading such a myth but was rarely given the real reason that Morse code testing was put into place.
It has been a long time since I read 200 Meters and Down which is a good history of the early days of amateur radio. Your speculation that the code requirement was pushed by the Navy is probably right on the mark. A century ago the Navy wanted regulate wireless, but civilian interests persuaded the government to put the Dept. of Commerce in charge of wireless regulation. Since voice wasn't in common use, the government had to make sure that radio amateurs could be proficient enough in Morse Code to be able to recognize emergencies and possible shut down orders.
It certainly became a requirement for a more legitimate reason than as some licensing filter.
BTW, the Navy was still using spark by the time a lot of hams were using CW (which means Continuous Wave and now includes such modes as AM, SSB, FM, RTTY, etc. and not just Morse Code) based telegraphy. However, the Navy and the hams were by that time segregated as the hams were banned to wavelengths 200 meters and shorter (1.5 MHz and higher) while the Navy had the long thought desirable longwave frequencies for their long distance work. However, the hams would have the last laugh as being banned to the shorter wavelengths meant that they were forced to develop CW based telegraphy as King Spark just didn't work very well on the "short waves". They also discovered that CW meant much lower power was required as the bandwidth was narrower and that the shorter wavelengths actually propagated farther! More research resulted in an understanding of the ionosphere and the effect that sun spots have on it.
It was widely believed back in the day that banning amateur radio to 200 meters and down would be the death of the service. Certainly there were many interests that hoped so. Instead it turned out to be a boon to science and worldwide communications. It is quite difficult to project what the future holds for amateur radio today, but remember, this is a service that has been pronounced dead many times before over the past century.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed, President Clinton was impeached. He was not convicted as a result of impeachment. The trial was conducted by the House Managers in the Senate and ultimately the Senate found him not guilty.
It's not just me that says Clinton was impeached, Wikipedia agrees. Had the impeachment not been legal, the Clinton administration would have likely contested it. However, Clinton rode it out and probably gained popularity for it.
Almost impeached and impeached are sort of like almost pregnant and pregnant--one either is or isn't. Although impeachment against Nixon was a foregone conclusion had he remained in office, the fact is that he was not impeached, while Clinton and Andrew Johnson were. The result was that Nixon is the only president to resign from office which puts him in a league by himself.
I was responding to the implication that Nixon and Clinton are in the same category of having been impeached while they are not.
I agree that Nixon did fit the reason impeachment should be used while in the cases of Andrew Johnson and Clinton they faced impeachment more from a position of idealogical opposition than for an actual high crime or misdemeanor which is exactly how it should not be used.
You're correct. I did forget the commas and I'm usually quite pedantic with myself. That's what I get for not previewing.
Nixon is the only president to have resigned his presidency. Several have died while in office which have allowed several vice-presidents to be sworn in as president. To date we have not had the situation where both president and vice-president have been incapacitated at the same time to allow the Speaker of the House to be sworn in as president.
Only Clinton and A. Johnson have actually been impeached and each was found not guilty. I don't know how many, if any other, presidents have had articles of impeachment proposed but not actually drawn against them.
Clinton was impeached and he receives his pension. Impeached != conviction, and I suppose that a conviction would disqualify one from any pension.
Nixon? I'm not here to defend the guy, but he was never impeached. He resigned in the face of a likely impeachment proceeding.
You may have Nixon confused with Andrew Johnson the 17th president who was impeached. In fact impeachment proceedings failed to make it out of committee in 1867 and then impeachment was successful in 1868. Johnson was acquitted by one vote in the Senate by
Edmund G. Ross of Kansas.
At Denver they are tearing out the Arrivals boards and only the Departures boards are working, at least in the Concourse B area. I guess the logic is that everyone waiting is departing, so why bother with unneeded information.
The new regs keep the tear jerking confined to the baggage area which is fine by me as I fly solo with no one waiting for me anywhere and the gate areas are hectic enough already just with the passengers that need to be there.
Holding the current administration accountable is well and good, but the warning signs didn't just magically appear after January 20, 2001, they had to have been there prior to that date so the previous administration shares accountability and blame as well. In fact, the blame can be laid at the doorstep of every administration going back at least 40 years. The signs were there all along, but we in the USA chose to ignore them, apparently hoping Islamic fundamentalists/extremists would get bored and go do something else.
So long as they can only hijack the occasional plane or detonate the occasional car/truck bomb, we can place their activities in the category of an ongoing nuisance. However, once they acquire a nuclear device and demonstrate their willingness and ability to detonate it, the rules of the game will change markedly. I prefer the civilized nations of the world do everything they can to prevent that from happening.
Speaking of which, on Sunday while sitting at Denver International waiting for my second delayed flight, I saw a United plane with the tail number N666UA. Today on my way back, I saw it again.
Shudder.
While accountability would be a nice touch, I do like the current regs for one simple reason, it keeps people without tickets out of the terminal/gate areas. Maybe I'm just a sour puss, but I just got back from Salt Lake City via Denver a couple of hours ago and the terminals are crowded enough without all the extra people as it used to be.
No matter what happens in the future, I hope that one aspect of the current regs remains in place.
If memory serves. I first started visiting Slashdot in late '97, probably no earlier than late November or early December. As i recall registration occured sometime in early '98 and, yes, I hesitated a day or two.
I remember when the actual karma value was shown.
What a ride it has been. Congrats on the first decade, Rob.
Exactly. That's why women have the power in this world. A toss of the hair, a hint of a smile, and they'll have us moving mountains for them. But, if the guy thinks there was anything more to it than the manual task she wanted done at that point in time, EEO will quickly step in and set him right. If he's lucky, he'll just be subjected to remedial training, if he's not, he'll be out in the parking lot kicking rocks and wondering what the heck just happened. It's not a two-way street.
To those of you who work in a company that has yet to adopt a draconian EEO policy, consider yourselves blessed. The rest of us are biding our time knowing the pendulum will swing back to a more sane environment sometime in the future. Meanwhile, our testicles are in a lock box held by EEO.
I wasn't offended at all (it takes quite a bit to offend me and trivial matters like this barely raise my eyebrows). I just had to point out that physical rewards, as suggested by snowgirl, are prohibited in many workplaces, no matter how innocent the intent. Even any implication of such an offer is grounds for discipline in my workplace if not outright dismissal.
I just pointed out that kissing a male co-worker would be sexual harassment. I made no comment on whether it was sexist or not.
Turn the tables and there is a lawsuit brewing, or at the very least the guy can count on getting fired when HR finds out about his attempted kiss of a female co-worker.
While few single men would complain about receiving a kiss from a female co-worker, in very few cases would the reverse be true. Working for a Fortune 500 company, I know very well what the HR policy is regarding sexual harassment as I have to sign the policy agreement every year.
I personally know a woman that was threatened with discipline because of things she said even in a male dominated work place (she is the typical person that is fun to work with and enjoyed bantering with the guys in their own environment). HR is serious about sexual harassment even when it really doesn't exist. I'm certain she never intended any sexual harassment and was likely just teasing but apparently someone else took her comments the wrong way. All it takes is a perception of sexual harassment by the other party to land in hot water very quickly.
That's sexual harrassment right there.
Exactly.
/. couldn't wait for the official announcement but had to choose an article that was making presumptions.
It's unfortunate that
Let the celebrations begin!
The linked article above states the presumed "No" vote to be unofficial and according to unamed "sources". This could well go the other way and in fact be approved. Any celebration should wait until ISO offically releases the voting results.
I no longer presume "sources" to have any credibility.
That was my first thought upon reading the original article last week.
I would almost bet that this was a concession to RIAA during Vista's design phase. I would also bet that they were counting on this particular "feature" going unnoticed until XP was cleared out of the sales channels and Vista had gained acceptance as the OS of choice amongst MS' vendors.
And there are people that want to accept MS into the FOSS community with open arms? MS apparently no longer regards its customers as its first priority. How then could they be trusted to put playing fair a priority in the FOSS community?
The proper ZIP code is 66655
51248 is nowhere close to KS.
I work for a fortune 500 company and am union in IT. I don't have many complaints and the money pays my bills and I have enough left over for toys.
Each Christmas my immediate supervisor has gotten everyone in my workgroup something, either jackets, small tools, gift certificates, or something useful. For a few years I worked at a division office and the main department management never gave us anything, but they didn't owe us anything either. Since moving home the local manager of the main department sees to it that we get one of the same things they give the members of their department. Again, he doesn't have to do it, but it definitely makes a person feel appreciated.
However, we don't have anything like Christmas parties and such, though, we do get plenty of paid holiday time this time of the year which is nice. Being union means that their are no performance bonuses for anyone unless everyone gets them and then it would be the same amount. While a sizable bonus would be nice, I'll take steady work and sane hours and good pay throughout the year instead.
You do understand that TFA is about radio broadcasting and not just about the invention of radio itself, right?
This celebration is spot on since neither Tesla nor Marconi had anyone "listening" outside of their respective labs or work groups. Conversely, Fessenden did have an audience of listeners as documented by the various shipboard operators that did hear his broadcast. Fessenden's acheivement in no way dimishes the work of Tesla, Marconi, or others, rather he built upon their work and in turn broke new ground.
This is the centennial of broadcasting where speech and music were transmitted to an unspecified number of listeners. Prior transmissions were primarily telegraphy and intended for a specific receiver. This is the crucial difference we are celebrating.
I wonder if the the radio pioneers (Marconi, Fessenden, Sarnoff, et. al.) would be impressed or disappointed by the progress we've made in communications technology over the past century. I'm sure we can point to areas where advances could/should have been made sooner. The upcoming digital TV cutover date in just over two years is a prime example. Its adoption is being hindered by the inertia of a huge installed base of working analog TV sets.
Will the second century of broadcasting bring as much change as the first?
Isn't it interesting that when people started experimenting with networking computers over radio that they rejuvenated "wireless" to describe networking without wires? Just as in the early days wireless was used to describe telegraphy without wires. What was old is new again.
Did anyone else discover that any song that had "radio" in its title (Queen's Radio Ga-Ga) or discussed radio (Rush's Spirit of Radio) to be an instant personal favorite?
Even microwaves are radio waves as it is a part of the electromagnetic spectrum--it is just much higher in frequency than the traditional broadcast bands. The same can be said of light which is also at a much higher frequency (shorter wavelength) of the electromagnetic spectrum.
The advantage of the microwave region is that a signal can occupy a larger range of frequencies and the wavelength from the low to the high end of the bandwidth doesn't change much due to the inverse relationship of frequency and wavelength. Calling it "satellite radio" is not deceptive except that it is a completely digital stream and the receiver's tuner doesn't necessarily tune to a different frequency for each "channel".
The ARRL is sponsoring an on-the-air celebration of the centennial of broadcasting. The Hello Radio campaign has been celebrating the upcoming event throughout most of 2006.
How many broadcasters will let this event go unremarked? That is sad indeed.
It has been a long time since I read 200 Meters and Down which is a good history of the early days of amateur radio. Your speculation that the code requirement was pushed by the Navy is probably right on the mark. A century ago the Navy wanted regulate wireless, but civilian interests persuaded the government to put the Dept. of Commerce in charge of wireless regulation. Since voice wasn't in common use, the government had to make sure that radio amateurs could be proficient enough in Morse Code to be able to recognize emergencies and possible shut down orders.
It certainly became a requirement for a more legitimate reason than as some licensing filter.
BTW, the Navy was still using spark by the time a lot of hams were using CW (which means Continuous Wave and now includes such modes as AM, SSB, FM, RTTY, etc. and not just Morse Code) based telegraphy. However, the Navy and the hams were by that time segregated as the hams were banned to wavelengths 200 meters and shorter (1.5 MHz and higher) while the Navy had the long thought desirable longwave frequencies for their long distance work. However, the hams would have the last laugh as being banned to the shorter wavelengths meant that they were forced to develop CW based telegraphy as King Spark just didn't work very well on the "short waves". They also discovered that CW meant much lower power was required as the bandwidth was narrower and that the shorter wavelengths actually propagated farther! More research resulted in an understanding of the ionosphere and the effect that sun spots have on it.
It was widely believed back in the day that banning amateur radio to 200 meters and down would be the death of the service. Certainly there were many interests that hoped so. Instead it turned out to be a boon to science and worldwide communications. It is quite difficult to project what the future holds for amateur radio today, but remember, this is a service that has been pronounced dead many times before over the past century.