Bulletin: On instructions from the US Dept of Homeland Security, AOL has agreed to rename its AOL Europe unit. In accordance with Bush Administration Policy, the unit will now be known as EOL (for the foreigners).
What happened to the guys who had a CS degree in 1996? They could have (a) moved to California and joined a start-up or (b) gone to law school for 3 years. Road (a) leads to being either rich or broke by 2000. Road (b) leads to being massive ly in debt in 1999, but more predicatble prospects afterwards.
Now, you're considering starting lawschool in fall 2005. California is still flooded with ex-startup people looking for the next rush. Where do you want to be in 2008?
(BTW, CS is actually excellent preparation for getting into law school -- you'll rock the entrance exams).
More like 48%. Lets count the numbers correctly. If you consider non-voters as not caring either way, then it's probably a sad day for 28% of the country.
By that method, 28% are sad, 30% are happy, and 52% are missing something.
However, give the Americans what credit they deserve. Voter turn out yesterday was higher than it's been in about 30 years. In Ohio alone, 5.6 million people cast ballots, 121% of the turnout in 2000.
He was down 136,221 votes. Kerry's single best county in Ohio was Cuyahoga (City of Cleveland), where he scored 67%. The most favorable assumption one could realistically offer would be that the as-yet uncounted provisionals would be as good as Kerry's best county. There are 135,149 known provisional ballots + perhaps 10% more that may yet be reported. So, 135149*(110%) provisionals *67% margin = 99605 votes possibly gained.
That's 136,221 - 99,605 = 36,616 votes too few.
I feel like going door to door and yelling at my neighbors. I feel worse that I didn't do it last week.
Right. Because if the US had direct popular presidential elections, that would have fixed this mess. [Bush 51%, Kerry 48%]
Face it, Americans have voted to deny their shame. Bush told them that the US had done right. Kerry told them it had done wrong. They drank the koolaid. It's going to take another full Vietnam-sytle awfulness for Americans to change course; they're incapable of seeing disaster until after it's happened.
pmuse: "Hypocrisy, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that... I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning... Ya know, that gasoline smell... It smells like... victory."
Seriously folks, in battleground states like Florida and Ohio, the results might depend on: * provisional ballots cast due to challenges on election day. * absentee ballots trickling in over the rest of the month.
It's worse than that. The outcome of the election could depend on something like it was rainy and 15 degrees colder in Ohio today than yesterday.
Democracy is the worst possible system of government -- except for all the others.
The electoral college is useful for allowing state politicians to extract favors from presidential candidates in exchange for campaign support. However, any voter in a minority in her state sees her vote discarded partway through the president-picking algorithm. It's not exactly "disenfranchisement", since her vote does get used for part of the algorithm. However, it doesn't contribute to the final result because it gets dropped like an outlying data point.
Has anyone stopped to think about how much money "10,000 lawyers" means? If they do no more than sit down for an hour to have a planning meeting, that's 10000 x $200/hr = $2 MILLION before even one case is filed.
If all 10000 go an hang around at the polls all day troubleshooting for their teams, thats 10000 x $200/hr x ~10 hours = $20 MILLION.
Panislamic radicalism will not go away on its own.... We are trying to kill off a movement to construct a radical theocratic Islamic empire in the whole of the mideast, which desires to be the seat of government for the world, and anyone who does not subscribe to their twisted beliefs will be brutally slaughtered or subjugated. This is a real threat... we aim to kill it off in a generation. (Anyone who thinks the US is on a religious crusade... is deluded.).
Isn't it a religious crusade? If Islam is an honorable religion and "Panislamic radicalism" is a "twisted belief[]", doesn't that begin to make panislamic radicalism sound like a heresy? Killing off such a heresy in a generation sounds like a goal Pope Urban II could have gotten behind. To be sure, it's unlikely that even a born-again evangelical president would lead the United States into war in the middle east because he feels a calling as a christian to rid the region of muslims. However, there seems little distinction between a mission to "kill [panislamic radicalism] off in a generation" and a crusade.
...the US is in "Iraq" because it was an easy target in the region, period....The US never went to Iraq for WMD (though we were justified in doing so for that reason alone, and probably expected to find quite a bit). Yes, in a way, it went for "oil".
Interesting. Now, consider that the Bush administration used the supposed presence of WMD as its primary justification of the invasion of Iraq to the nation and the world. Unless you dispute that (and it's pretty tough to dispute after reading the transcripts of President Bush's speeches between Jan 2003 and May 2003), then we come to an interesting conclusion. Apparently, you are less concerned about what a candidate/president _says_ his reasons are for doing a thing than you are concerned about what those reasons actually are. If you are correct that the U.S. invaded Iraq because it was a target of opportunity that would provide a platform for countering panislamic fundamentalism, then the WMD justification must have been both a smokescreen and a false statement.
I call this conclusion "interesting" because many who support Bush (perhaps not including you) spend much of their time spouting about "character" and "lies". It's refreshing to see a true pragmatist abandon that tired moral rhetoric and attempt to justify support of Bush's policies and actions based on facts, self-interest, and logic. I happen to disagree with your eventual conclusion (that Bush's methods are sound), but I admire the process by which you reach it.
Kerry's stance on nuclear nonproliferation all but essentially kills off any possibility of further meaningful investments into nuclear power.
How, exactly? Do you contend that it is impossible (or impractical) to use nuclear energy to generate electrical power without building facilities that can (and eventually will) be misued to create nuclear weapons?
To clear things up, consider removing the wiggle words in the cryptic phrase: "all but essentially kills off any possibility of further meaningful".
Slashdot Mirror
Bulletin: On instructions from the US Dept of Homeland Security, AOL has agreed to rename its AOL Europe unit. In accordance with Bush Administration Policy, the unit will now be known as EOL (for the foreigners).
See you on the game grid,
MCP
What happened to the guys who had a CS degree in 1996? They could have (a) moved to California and joined a start-up or (b) gone to law school for 3 years. Road (a) leads to being either rich or broke by 2000. Road (b) leads to being massive ly in debt in 1999, but more predicatble prospects afterwards.
Now, you're considering starting lawschool in fall 2005. California is still flooded with ex-startup people looking for the next rush. Where do you want to be in 2008?
(BTW, CS is actually excellent preparation for getting into law school -- you'll rock the entrance exams).
You know, I think the Lawyers are on our side FOR ONCE. They are milking SCO dry. Anyway I could contact them so they would have to bill SCO?
. well, then again, no -- not really.
That's silly. The lawyers are on their own side. Kind of like the Ents, actually . .
Why bother to go? Just blog from the previews.
Swim?
Ohio shares only a water border with Canada -- Lake Erie. ~50-90 km wide, ~300 km long
Wait, it's an illegal escalation to premptively nuke the US before the US nukes . . .
. . . Oh. Never mind.
Oops. Too right. Thanks.
Do you by any chance know what the difference between a hateful Liberal and a hateful Conservative are?
No, but it sounds like there's a good punchline coming.
At ~11AM EST, November 3, 2004, the /. effect slashdotted Slashdot.org.
More like 48%. Lets count the numbers correctly. If you consider non-voters as not caring either way, then it's probably a sad day for 28% of the country.
By that method, 28% are sad, 30% are happy, and 52% are missing something.
However, give the Americans what credit they deserve. Voter turn out yesterday was higher than it's been in about 30 years. In Ohio alone, 5.6 million people cast ballots, 121% of the turnout in 2000.
Kerry did the math, that's all.
He was down 136,221 votes. Kerry's single best county in Ohio was Cuyahoga (City of Cleveland), where he scored 67%. The most favorable assumption one could realistically offer would be that the as-yet uncounted provisionals would be as good as Kerry's best county. There are 135,149 known provisional ballots + perhaps 10% more that may yet be reported. So, 135149*(110%) provisionals *67% margin = 99605 votes possibly gained.
That's 136,221 - 99,605 = 36,616 votes too few.
I feel like going door to door and yelling at my neighbors. I feel worse that I didn't do it last week.
I understand the sentiment, but wouldn't moving to Ohio be slightly more effective?
Move to Canada for 3.75 years, then swim south in fall 2008.
That's the reason America is the way it is today.
Right. Because if the US had direct popular presidential elections, that would have fixed this mess. [Bush 51%, Kerry 48%]
Face it, Americans have voted to deny their shame. Bush told them that the US had done right. Kerry told them it had done wrong. They drank the koolaid. It's going to take another full Vietnam-sytle awfulness for Americans to change course; they're incapable of seeing disaster until after it's happened.
There are very, very many 'intelligent' people with little to no wisdom.
Clinton (Int 13, Wis 8, Chr 18)
Gore (Int 17, Wis 12, Chr 6)
Bush (Int 10, Wis 10, Chr 14)
Kerry (Int 15, Wis 15, Chr 10)
pmuse: "Smell that?... Do you smell that?"
AC: "What."
pmuse: "Hypocrisy, son. Nothing else in the world smells like that... I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning... Ya know, that gasoline smell... It smells like... victory."
Seriously folks, in battleground states like Florida and Ohio, the results might depend on:
* provisional ballots cast due to challenges on election day.
* absentee ballots trickling in over the rest of the month.
It's worse than that. The outcome of the election could depend on something like it was rainy and 15 degrees colder in Ohio today than yesterday.
Democracy is the worst possible system of government -- except for all the others.
Corollary 1: If they one you vote for loses, bitch continually for the next four years.
Why stop at 4 years? My Don't-Blame-Me-I-Voted-for-Gore sticker will stay on my Suburban until the U.S. ratifies Kyoto.
You nailed it. Apparently SCO is still listening to their own lawyers every once in a while.
Yes, Your Honor, that's our site by PMuse (320639) on 02:31 PM -- Wednesday October 13 2004 (#10516256)
You've gotta be kidding me! SCO is going to open up a whole site mouthing off while they're still in the middle of a court case?
Quick! Some one start an egg timer to see how long it takes before the Judge sees something SCO wrote on there and takes their heads off for it.
The electoral college is useful for allowing state politicians to extract favors from presidential candidates in exchange for campaign support. However, any voter in a minority in her state sees her vote discarded partway through the president-picking algorithm. It's not exactly "disenfranchisement", since her vote does get used for part of the algorithm. However, it doesn't contribute to the final result because it gets dropped like an outlying data point.
He has changed his methodology several times over the past few months but is always consistent, ...
I'm not sure that word ("consistent") means what you think it means.
Perhaps you meant that he consistently explained his methodology? Or that he refined his methodology to better implement a consistent design?
...whenever another country has elected a leader that Americans happened to dislike, you always went in and removed them.
;)
Oddly enough, Jacques Chirac is still in office.
I actually hope there are thousands of lawsuits.
Has anyone stopped to think about how much money "10,000 lawyers" means? If they do no more than sit down for an hour to have a planning meeting, that's 10000 x $200/hr = $2 MILLION before even one case is filed.
If all 10000 go an hang around at the polls all day troubleshooting for their teams, thats 10000 x $200/hr x ~10 hours = $20 MILLION.
Panislamic radicalism will not go away on its own. ... We are trying to kill off a movement to construct a radical theocratic Islamic empire in the whole of the mideast, which desires to be the seat of government for the world, and anyone who does not subscribe to their twisted beliefs will be brutally slaughtered or subjugated. This is a real threat ... we aim to kill it off in a generation. (Anyone who thinks the US is on a religious crusade ... is deluded.).
Isn't it a religious crusade? If Islam is an honorable religion and "Panislamic radicalism" is a "twisted belief[]", doesn't that begin to make panislamic radicalism sound like a heresy? Killing off such a heresy in a generation sounds like a goal Pope Urban II could have gotten behind. To be sure, it's unlikely that even a born-again evangelical president would lead the United States into war in the middle east because he feels a calling as a christian to rid the region of muslims. However, there seems little distinction between a mission to "kill [panislamic radicalism] off in a generation" and a crusade.
...the US is in "Iraq" because it was an easy target in the region, period. ...The US never went to Iraq for WMD (though we were justified in doing so for that reason alone, and probably expected to find quite a bit). Yes, in a way, it went for "oil".
Interesting. Now, consider that the Bush administration used the supposed presence of WMD as its primary justification of the invasion of Iraq to the nation and the world. Unless you dispute that (and it's pretty tough to dispute after reading the transcripts of President Bush's speeches between Jan 2003 and May 2003), then we come to an interesting conclusion. Apparently, you are less concerned about what a candidate/president _says_ his reasons are for doing a thing than you are concerned about what those reasons actually are. If you are correct that the U.S. invaded Iraq because it was a target of opportunity that would provide a platform for countering panislamic fundamentalism, then the WMD justification must have been both a smokescreen and a false statement.
I call this conclusion "interesting" because many who support Bush (perhaps not including you) spend much of their time spouting about "character" and "lies". It's refreshing to see a true pragmatist abandon that tired moral rhetoric and attempt to justify support of Bush's policies and actions based on facts, self-interest, and logic. I happen to disagree with your eventual conclusion (that Bush's methods are sound), but I admire the process by which you reach it.
Kerry's stance on nuclear nonproliferation all but essentially kills off any possibility of further meaningful investments into nuclear power.
How, exactly? Do you contend that it is impossible (or impractical) to use nuclear energy to generate electrical power without building facilities that can (and eventually will) be misued to create nuclear weapons?
To clear things up, consider removing the wiggle words in the cryptic phrase: "all but essentially kills off any possibility of further meaningful".