As I understand it, men and women currently are using the Internet in approximately equal numbers. It has been projected that the number of women on-line will outnumber men by a ratio of 3/2 in 2002. Here is a NetSmart America press release from August, 1999, that details Internet usage by sex (for some reason, my local paper ran this story just a couple a days ago).
These sites are also distinctly different from Web sites aimed at older women, like oxygen.com and women.com. The latter are less political, and focus less on pop culture, more on so-called "traditional" women's interests -- food, fashion, lifestyle.
_1984_ sometimes gets a little too much play here in SlashDotLand. A far better choice this time around would have been Sinclair Lewis' 1935 novel, _It_Can't_Happen_Here_, which was inspired by populist Louisiana Governor -- and, had he not been assassinated, likely 1936 presidential candidate -- Huey Long.
Well, Social Security was actually devised by Otto von Bismarck, who was not, I believe, a socialist, nor was he the prime minister of a socialist state. BTW, is everyone who believes in an adequate social safety net a socialist? I wouldn't have thought so.
Consider all the local governments (I believe that Washington, D.C., is one) that tax (they call it a fee, but if it looks like a duck...) the incomes of those who work there but do not reside there, and you will see that the "taxation without representation" argument -- which has no constitutional basis that I am aware of -- is dead.
I'd have been even more impressed had he said he was taking himself up on his own suggestion and would relinquish the patents in no more than 3-5 years, regardless of how patent law changed.
Any MS Linux distribution would have to include the source, making it likely that other distributions could discover and spoof whatever it was that limited Office to running on the MS distro.
I don't know. Every second year, two very-well-funded organizations *not based in my congressional district* come in, throw some cash and rhetoric around, and try to push their morality on me. They are, of course, the Republican and Democratic political parties. How was this ballot initiative any different?
There is not an appreciable difference between ballot initiatives and bills brought up before a legislative body. If one person can say, "That should not be on the ballot, because my friends and I think it's unconstitutional," and have it stick, then anyone can. Unfortunately, you're not always going to agree with the person saying it, which is why it's the responsibility of the judicial branch to determine a measure's constitutionality. All of which is to say, this belonged on the ballot, because enough people believed it belonged on the ballot. Arguments of tyranny by the majority have no legal standing at this point. You can (even should) try to convince people not to sign the petition, but once enough people want to vote on it, it should be voted on. Anything else would leave a hole big enough for a Pinochet or a Pol Pot to get through.
"But they have an alterior motive - squeeze more productivity out of workers by having them work from home." Yeah, they need something to control that assembly line they just put in the bedroom. I seem to recall that this was part of a collective bargaining agreement, rather than something Ford did out of the goodness of their hearts. Also, isn't Jon playing up Henry's virtues a bit much, just to try to make the article flow? Wasn't Ford strongly anti-semitic?
Not every writer who has projected a corporatist future has done so negatively. Ten years before Neuromancer appeared, Jerry Pournelle published "High Justice" and "Exiles to Glory", in which corporatist expansionism allows mankind to escape an Earth otherwise ruled by static welfare states that mean well, but haven't any incentive to go to space.
"PBS is the only TV/Radio station that carries BBC News (or any foreign program) AFAIK."
Public television / public radio, anyway. But that's just for domestic broadcast media. You can get BBC World Service 24x7 and BBC Radio 5 (at least) on the internet. You can get Radio Canada, BBC World Service, Radio Australia, Radio New Zealand, and English programs from Deutsche Welle, Radio Netherlands, Radio France, and who knows what else on a cheap shortwave radio. You can read the major Canadian, Carribean, Australian, British, Irish, Indian, Hong Kong, and another who knows what else newspapers -- in English -- on the web.
If you only hear things from the United States media, even if you only understand English, you've no one to blame but yourself.
It seems to me that I remember a car being demo'd a number of years ago that had a breathalyzer built in -- the car wouldn't start unless you passed the breathalyzer test, in much the same way that many cars now won't start unless you've got the clutch in or the brake on.
Well, under the powdered iron was doped fabric. The hydrogen would have burned with a relatively cool flame, and would have released vertically. Not to mention the fact that spectral analysis of the flames indicate that they were from the burning fabric.
In short, the same thing would have happened, had the Hindenburg's bouyancy been provided by helium.
If I have chosen to be represented by individuals from different parties, you can be sure it was because I believe that they will all vote the way I would on all of the issues most important to me, and that any legislation any of them sponsors concerning any of those issues will reflect my views. Any issues they differ on, therefore, are issues I have already deemed unimportant.
To be sure, their party Whip may try to get them to vote other than I'd like, but if I did not believe they would represent me even under that pressure, I'd not be voting for them.
"Coming from a country where we do have a parliamentary system, I can tell you that it is many times better than the Congressional Republic that is the US."
I'm a bit confused by this. For all intents and purposes, our MCs and your MPs are elected in the the same way: the parties select the candidates to stand in the constituency, and the people choose from those candidates. Both systems are first past the post. The only difference I can see is that you have about 1/15 the population we do, so you can have a lower population/representative ratio than we can, unless we want to have 7500 MCs. We try to make that up through our state legislatures (chosen, of course, in the same way).
There is, of course, an obvious difference in the way the executive is selected, but that did not seem to be your point.
Remember Tip O'Neill's motto (it was his, wasn't it?): "All politics is local." There is some level of government at which you can know all the players and, more importantly, they can know you. Try to make a change at that level. You'll get real feedback, so you'll know you're really a part of the process. Any changes you make there will be visible at the next level of government. There really aren't too many steps required before you're being heard by someone in Washington, and very few indeed until you're heard by the people who hire the cops.
It's worth a try, anyway (now removing Pollyanna hat).
Yes, a simple majority -- 270 of the 538 electors -- must vote for one of the candidates or the election goes to the House. If I am not mistaken, however, there can be more than one canvas of the electors, and a third party candidate can throw in the towel and ask his or her electors to vote for one of the other candidates.
Well, actually, the only Tories we've had in this country were the Loyalists in the Revolutionary War era. The Democrats have always been the Democrats, although at one time they (Jefferson, Madison, et al) did have Republican affixed to the name. The Whigs (the elder Harrison) did precede the Republicans (Lincoln) as the party in opposition to the Democrats, but they had a rather different platform than their successors. And you've left out the Federalists (John Adams) altogether ("and you've left out the Federalists!"). Not to mention the fact that the two current major parties, since the 1850's, have flip-flopped all over the place on critical issues (racial policies, corporatism, interventionism, etc).
I suppose the real point of all this is that the parties can change -- there just has to be the appropriate stimulus.
Slashdot Mirror
As I understand it, men and women currently are using the Internet in approximately equal numbers. It has been projected that the number of women on-line will outnumber men by a ratio of 3/2 in 2002. Here is a NetSmart America press release from August, 1999, that details Internet usage by sex (for some reason, my local paper ran this story just a couple a days ago).
I don't get that impression. From Katz's column:
These sites are also distinctly different from Web sites aimed at older women, like oxygen.com and women.com. The latter are less political, and focus less on pop culture, more on so-called "traditional" women's interests -- food, fashion, lifestyle.Anyone know of a really good source of stimulants?
Penguin mints, of course.
_1984_ sometimes gets a little too much play here in SlashDotLand. A far better choice this time around would have been Sinclair Lewis' 1935 novel, _It_Can't_Happen_Here_, which was inspired by populist Louisiana Governor -- and, had he not been assassinated, likely 1936 presidential candidate -- Huey Long.
...slashdot's turned into this great little place where everybody says the same thing over and over again.
Indeed. Wait a minute, I've got it -- lets take a page from Microsoft's book and implement automatic symlinking of identical comments!
Well, Social Security was actually devised by Otto von Bismarck, who was not, I believe, a socialist, nor was he the prime minister of a socialist state. BTW, is everyone who believes in an adequate social safety net a socialist? I wouldn't have thought so.
Consider all the local governments (I believe that Washington, D.C., is one) that tax (they call it a fee, but if it looks like a duck...) the incomes of those who work there but do not reside there, and you will see that the "taxation without representation" argument -- which has no constitutional basis that I am aware of -- is dead.
- You can pay for the medium, but not for the content
which, of course, is the intent of the GPL. N'est pas?I'd have been even more impressed had he said he was taking himself up on his own suggestion and would relinquish the patents in no more than 3-5 years, regardless of how patent law changed.
Any MS Linux distribution would have to include the source, making it likely that other distributions could discover and spoof whatever it was that limited Office to running on the MS distro.
I don't know. Every second year, two very-well-funded organizations *not based in my congressional district* come in, throw some cash and rhetoric around, and try to push their morality on me. They are, of course, the Republican and Democratic political parties. How was this ballot initiative any different?
There is not an appreciable difference between ballot initiatives and bills brought up before a legislative body. If one person can say, "That should not be on the ballot, because my friends and I think it's unconstitutional," and have it stick, then anyone can. Unfortunately, you're not always going to agree with the person saying it, which is why it's the responsibility of the judicial branch to determine a measure's constitutionality. All of which is to say, this belonged on the ballot, because enough people believed it belonged on the ballot. Arguments of tyranny by the majority have no legal standing at this point. You can (even should) try to convince people not to sign the petition, but once enough people want to vote on it, it should be voted on. Anything else would leave a hole big enough for a Pinochet or a Pol Pot to get through.
"But they have an alterior motive - squeeze more productivity out of workers by having them work from home."
Yeah, they need something to control that assembly line they just put in the bedroom.
I seem to recall that this was part of a collective bargaining agreement, rather than something Ford did out of the goodness of their hearts. Also, isn't Jon playing up Henry's virtues a bit much, just to try to make the article flow? Wasn't Ford strongly anti-semitic?
"Petrified Iron Clad solution: Rob, Jeff - Create the /. API that let's us parse titles and content in articles"
They really are working on this -- it's called NNTP access.
Not to mention the fact that Shakespeare himself ripped off most of his themes, and he still seems to be fairly highly regarded. ;-)
Not every writer who has projected a corporatist future has done so negatively. Ten years before Neuromancer appeared, Jerry Pournelle published "High Justice" and "Exiles to Glory", in which corporatist expansionism allows mankind to escape an Earth otherwise ruled by static welfare states that mean well, but haven't any incentive to go to space.
"maybe if they actually rely on the internet and usenet in particlar"
I hope that they are not really relying on Usenet; NNTP does not guarantee propagation of all posts to all servers, whether there's a UDP on or not.
"PBS is the only TV/Radio station that carries BBC News (or any foreign program) AFAIK."
Public television / public radio, anyway. But that's just for domestic broadcast media. You can get BBC World Service 24x7 and BBC Radio 5 (at least) on the internet. You can get Radio Canada, BBC World Service, Radio Australia, Radio New Zealand, and English programs from Deutsche Welle, Radio Netherlands, Radio France, and who knows what else on a cheap shortwave radio. You can read the major Canadian, Carribean, Australian, British, Irish, Indian, Hong Kong, and another who knows what else newspapers -- in English -- on the web.
If you only hear things from the United States media, even if you only understand English, you've no one to blame but yourself.
"...every car should have a breathalyzer."
It seems to me that I remember a car being demo'd a number of years ago that had a breathalyzer built in -- the car wouldn't start unless you passed the breathalyzer test, in much the same way that many cars now won't start unless you've got the clutch in or the brake on.
Well, under the powdered iron was doped fabric. The hydrogen would have burned with a relatively cool flame, and would have released vertically. Not to mention the fact that spectral analysis of the flames indicate that they were from the burning fabric.
In short, the same thing would have happened, had the Hindenburg's bouyancy been provided by helium.
You've set up a bit of a straw man here.
If I have chosen to be represented by individuals from different parties, you can be sure it was because I believe that they will all vote the way I would on all of the issues most important to me, and that any legislation any of them sponsors concerning any of those issues will reflect my views. Any issues they differ on, therefore, are issues I have already deemed unimportant.
To be sure, their party Whip may try to get them to vote other than I'd like, but if I did not believe they would represent me even under that pressure, I'd not be voting for them.
"Coming from a country where we do have a parliamentary system, I can tell you that it is many times better than the Congressional Republic that is the US."
I'm a bit confused by this. For all intents and purposes, our MCs and your MPs are elected in the the same way: the parties select the candidates to stand in the constituency, and the people choose from those candidates. Both systems are first past the post. The only difference I can see is that you have about 1/15 the population we do, so you can have a lower population/representative ratio than we can, unless we want to have 7500 MCs. We try to make that up through our state legislatures (chosen, of course, in the same way).
There is, of course, an obvious difference in the way the executive is selected, but that did not seem to be your point.
Remember Tip O'Neill's motto (it was his, wasn't it?): "All politics is local." There is some level of government at which you can know all the players and, more importantly, they can know you. Try to make a change at that level. You'll get real feedback, so you'll know you're really a part of the process. Any changes you make there will be visible at the next level of government. There really aren't too many steps required before you're being heard by someone in Washington, and very few indeed until you're heard by the people who hire the cops.
It's worth a try, anyway (now removing Pollyanna hat).
Yes, a simple majority -- 270 of the 538 electors -- must vote for one of the candidates or the election goes to the House. If I am not mistaken, however, there can be more than one canvas of the electors, and a third party candidate can throw in the towel and ask his or her electors to vote for one of the other candidates.
Well, actually, the only Tories we've had in this country were the Loyalists in the Revolutionary War era. The Democrats have always been the Democrats, although at one time they (Jefferson, Madison, et al) did have Republican affixed to the name. The Whigs (the elder Harrison) did precede the Republicans (Lincoln) as the party in opposition to the Democrats, but they had a rather different platform than their successors. And you've left out the Federalists (John Adams) altogether ("and you've left out the Federalists!"). Not to mention the fact that the two current major parties, since the 1850's, have flip-flopped all over the place on critical issues (racial policies, corporatism, interventionism, etc).
I suppose the real point of all this is that the parties can change -- there just has to be the appropriate stimulus.