Indeed. Every time I decide that the talking heads on TV are the only ones who really believe themselves mentally superior to Republicans, some jackass like this comes along and makes me want to choke a Democrat.
On behalf of annoyed conservatives everywhere, thank you for your strong and quick response; it's reassuring to hear that those condescending beliefs aren't universal. I'll cheerfully debate ideas with a peer, but I have nothing but contempt for people who call me an idiot because of my political stance.
Re:What's the problem with Java on FreeBSD/AMD64?
on
Sun-isms Debunked
·
· Score: 1
Sure, you cannot distribute modified versions, but the typical operation of BSD ports is to download original + patches anyway (so the modified version is created locally).
But FreeBSD wants to distribute packages, not just ports. The java/jdk14 port takes almost 2GB of drive space (and a lot of memory and cylces) to build. Worse, it's not self-bootstrapping, so if don't have access to a locally-built package and want to install JDK1.4 on a FreeBSD machine for the first time, then you have to install the Linux version (and the Linux compatibility layer that it depends on) before you can even start building the native version!
This is not a good situation. Even though my servers are reasonably fast, this is one of the situations where I'd much rather download a pre-built package than have to make one myself. Granted, you can (and I do) make local packages so that you only have to build it once locally and then distribute that to all of the machines on your network, but why? What is the compelling reason for making the whole blasted process so difficult?
I'm in my 30s and I still call my best friend "Asscrack". I'm sure that "Cape Boy" (and its many variants), on the other hand, will be respectfully discarded when he turns 18.
Yeah.
In reality, he'll be "Cape Boy" until his wife quits letting him hang around with that group of friends.
That's great unless you're the car the legally entered the intersection to perform a left turn, and are still in the intersection when the opposite lights turn green.
Wow - someone else who knows the law! In every place I've lived, it is perfectly legal (and expected) for cars in the left turn lane to pull into the intersection a safe distance to wait their turn. Even when their light turns red, they still have the legal right of way to procede with their turn.
The idea is that this way at least one car can get through the light, regardless of whether that lane's signal is an arrow or regular light and how heavy oncoming traffic may be.
Read your local laws. Chances are that you, too, have the legal right to "park" in the intersection to make your left-hand turns. If you do but don't take advantage of it, then you're actually contributing to the traffic jams that everyone's universally bitching about.
Aggressive left turns. They're not just a good idea - they're the law.
Sure, planes have "autopilots" but there's very little stuff in the air to avoid, and lots of air traffic controllers and rules to basically make flying in a straight line in your own empty area of airspace possible.
...except in the case of modern military jets with terrain-following radar that cruise at high speed at a certain altitude above the ground. They have to handle unplanned obstacles, bad weather, and rapid, critical velocity changes much faster than any human possibly could. Still, we don't hear too many reports of the military losing multi-million dollar aircraft due to TFR failures.
If an F-111 can cruise at 100 feet above the treeline, surely a car could manage to drive a nearly-straight line on a freeway, couldn't it?
I haven't personally tried it. Actually, I was trying to be a smartass earlier (and probably unsuccessfully since the coffee hadn't kicked in yet), so that may not've been the best example.
And the Rational marketsprach seems to only hint at whether you can just compile your diagrams to source, then object, then executable, (in Java and C++) in one command.
Again, I haven't used it myself. However, I know one of the programmers on the Rose team and he seemed pretty happy about the results. As I understood it, it was an "eat ones own dogfood" project where they used early versions of Rose to design and code the newer versions. Apparently it's also pretty good about round-trip engineering, so that if you make changes to the resulting code at the source level then the UML diagrams will be automatically updated to reflect them.
YMMV widely, of course, but it seems like people are using it in real projects.
You're not "old school", you are just obsessed with premature optimization.
I disagree vehemently. I'm talking about a fundamental understanding of algorithms, which is required for efficient design and implementation. Put another way, if you don't understand that a certain operation is O(n) instead of O(1) (even if you don't know the formal terminology), then your programs will be inefficient. Some notations hide the complexity of their operations from the casual observer, and that can (and does) cause problems. Note that the languages aren't to blame, because providing expressive idioms to seasoned programmers is a good thing.
Conversely, I'm not particularly interested in whether "i++" or "i = i + 1" or "i += 1" executes in less cycles at a given optimization level.:)
Their other example was that most languages make people think in loops, when they really want to operate on a group.
There's a pretty strong reason for that, though: computers themselves operate in loops. With the exception of specialized vector operations, most computer code involves repeating an operation across a list of values or executing a list of commands. It's sometimes convenient to think of abstractions that don't directly correspond to iterating across lists, but their probably implemented that way at the lowest levels anyway.
For example, in Python you could implement your operation like so:
x = [value + 10 for value in x]
which creates a new list of all the values in x with 10 added to them. The dangerous part is that new programmers see non-obviously-looping structures and think that by using them instead of explicit loops they're writing faster code. After all, my example is one single instruction, right?
Adding that kind of expressiveness to a language is useful, but primarily for people who already know how computers work. To the uninitiated, it represents a leaky abstraction that can cause unexpected operation.
I guess I'm old-school, but I truly think new programmers would be better off learning a very low-level language to gain an understanding of the logic structures before they migrate to higher level systems. If you don't know how the silicon works, then it's going to be very difficult to design algorithms that execute efficiently on it.
I gotta ask: was waiting for "free" worth an extra six years of suffering?
You could pretty much say the same thing about any open source project. Why use OpenOffice when you could buy Office? Why use Kmail when you could buy Outlook? Why use Linux when you could buy Windows?
The answer, for me, is always the same: Freedom has a value to me. The loss of Freedom that Opera represents is much greater than the $30 pittance that they're asking for it. If you want to pay for it, fine - that's your decision. I have a different set of values and you can't judge my actions by your own set.
BTW, Freedom has tangible benefits in this case. I'm presenting a proposal to my boss to write new client-side software in XUL to provide our customers with access to our web application server's backend. I don't know (and frankly don't care) if Opera, MSIE, or any other browser has equivalent technology, since none of them (excluding text browsers) are as cross-platform as Mozilla. There are no license fees at all, and our customers will be able to use our application under MacOS or Linux as easily as Windows. That's not just a happy-fluffy "I'm Free!" feeling - it's the real ability to provide a valuable service to our clients, which gives our company a competitive advantage.
Neither does IE, Netscape, Opera, Lynx, or any other browser. How do I know? Because Slashdot doesn't generate valid HTML, and therefore has no deterministically correct rendering.
This is a dead horse; please find some other issue to dwell on.
The current crop of computers is based on series of logical operations, and there is little in common between discrete logic and the Real World. Most programming languages bear a strong resemblance to mathematical notation, and that's not just coincidental.
The real problem is a lack of strong domain models for most real world situations. That is, if you're starting a project to emulate something happening outside of a computer, then there's a very large likelihood that you're going to have to build your own object model to describe the situation to the desired level of accuracy. Once you have that model, it's easy enough to say "do this until that happens", but there's a world of difference between that point and staring at a blank screen at the beginning of a project.
There's been some progress (depending on who you ask) to make this easier for those who aren't full-time programmers, such as UML and related design tools, but even these are mainly limited to building a high-level template of the final result so that a human can manually implement all of the details.
This may or may not be avoidable. Vernon Vinge (author and CompSci professor) refers to the "Age of Failed Dreams" where humans eventually concede that some things just aren't possible. Expecting a current deterministic Turing device to be programmable at the level where people interact with each other may very likely be one of those areas.
As far as they can see, and as far as my friend's dad can see, we're just playing with toys.
My mom worked as Wire Chief (read: senior technician with some management responsibilities) for the Burlington Northern Railroad in the '80s when they installed a Xerox Star network. It was the first GUI I'd ever seen. Well, actually, it was the first GUI that pretty much anyone had ever seen. Anyway, there she was back at the start of the Reagan era using a graphical networked workstation with remote file storage.
I caught myself using the "dumb it down for the old folks" voice with her one day when I was explaining that I'd made/home an NFS mount on a fileserver on my home LAN. She'd just kind of assumed that's how everyone did things, since that's what she'd been using for the last 20 years or so.
You want to tax me on network bandwidth?!? What the hell are you thinking?
What part of me having access to the Internet (sorry if that offends you - that's its name) gives the government the right or obligation to make me pay an extra percentage to them? I'm already paying taxes on the phone line that carries my DSL, so whose business is it what I pass over that circuit?
First, this would be a regulatory fiasco. Do I get credit for failed downloads? Is porn tax-deductable at the same rate as ISOs? Can I depreciate my webdav calendars, since their value decreases with time? If you're only talking about connections to the public Internet and not just intra-LAN traffic, then how do you tax caching proxy servers (did I just download one copy of SP2, or one for each of the 30 machines on our LAN)? Does sneakernet count? IP-over-avian?
Second, WHAT FREAKIN' BUSINESS IS IT OF THE GOVERNMENT if I decide to trade packets with a peer? If I set up a WLAN to play Half-Life with my neighbor, how the hell do you justify me paying extra to run it? Do I have to have a Federally approved meter on my AP to make sure I'm not under-reporting my bandwidth?
You want to pay extra money to the government without receiving anything whatsoever out of the deal? Fine - just mail them a $100 bill every time you start to feel guilty. But leave me and my network out of it, thank you very much.
I'm sorry, but that's a stupid idea all the way around. It should be taken out back and shot before it can reproduce.
While I sympathize, isn't that exaggerating a bit much?
At home, I have a FreeBSD web/mail/DNS server that I use for personal domains and other lightweight purposes. I also had a Debian desktop that I used on the rare occasion that the wife and kids would let me play with it. Over the weekend, I decided that it made far more sense to consolidate the two than to maintain and power two similar underused computers.
It would've been a complete nightmare to move all the services over to Debian (since there were a few jail environments involved), so I decided to yank the memory, GeForce graphics, and SB Live! card from the Debian machine to the FreeBSD server and make that into my new combination server/desktop. I did so, then typed "portinstall kde mozilla-firefox jdk14 openoffice-1.1". A while later (Gentoo folks can appreciate this), the resulting system was virtually identical to the desktop I was enjoying under Linux.
I would not want to manually compile all of those programs and libraries, but I'm more than happy to let a nameless FreeBSD ports maintainer (I have a few myself) do the hard work for me. Installing almost any modern program should be as easy as "portinstall foo" for 99% of users.
I think this point is critically important. We've heard time and time again about the massive Democratic get-out-the-vote campaigns. If you were going to operate a shuttle to take likely voters for your party to and from the polling place, would you start the instant the polls open or wait until 30 minutes before closing? The former, of course; you wouldn't want to risk an unforeseen delay keeping your passengers from voting.
The exit polls I saw that leaned toward Kerry were all from early in the day. Isn't it at least conceivable that many of those "extra" votes in the morning were due to the local Democratic parties doing an efficient job of getting their people to the polls, and thereby showing an early (and short-lived) bump in the numbers?
Alternatively, maybe it was easier for the Kerry-leaning college demographic to vote during the day (ie between classes) than for older groups that were less skewed in his direction?
I'd definitely think that early-hour exit polls would be a poor predictor of the actual results. Has anyone supported or refuted this idea?
If you use KDE, point Kate at webdav://myzopeserver.example.com:1980/ and view the ZODB just like a directory on your local filesystem. If you need to do some command-line work (grepping, etc.) then open that URL in Konqueror and drag the interesting folder to your desktop and work on your local version.
I hated working with Zope through the textarea, but editing it through webdav via my normal editor without having to install any plugins like the ExternalEditor setup is extremely nice.
See my other post; I'm afraid I worded that part poorly. What I meant was that most rural residents work hard at self-reliance, and don't expect others to help them. For (a poor) example, if you're working on your tractor then you take extra precautions, knowing that the nearest help may be miles away. The flip side is that they'll do everything they can to help their friends and neighbors who are down on their luck, as long as those people are at least trying to help themselves. There is an enormous amount of support for those who work hard, but not much for the unmotivated.
When I lived in San Diego, I was at a party when the battery in my car ran too low to start the engine. I asked literally more than 20 people if they could give me a jump, but noone could or would help me. I know that if the same thing happened in my hometown in Missouri or my new residence in Nebraska, that by the time I'd asked 3 people I'd either have my car started or someone would be on an errand to buy some cables so that they could come back and help me.
Unfortunately I see way too many Republicans saying "it's those sore loser Democrats trying to cause trouble".
I haven't heard any such thing. As a Republican, let me give you a different response:
My guy won. If there are any doubts about the accuracy of the vote, then I want them straightened out now so that everyone (discounting the conspiracy theorists [0]) will know that he was legitimately elected. The last thing I want is to hear another four years of "selected, not elected". I give my full support to groups investigating these matters for the purpose of getting accurate results, and everyone I've talked to feels the same way.
[0] By that, I mean the black helicopter types, not the average skeptical Joe on the street.
No! No! No! Have you looked around and seen a farmer recently?
I live in a town of 25,000 in Nebraska; I passed about 100 of 'em on the way to work this morning.:-)
How many actual farmers do you really think exist in the US today. It's probably like 2 percent. If you don't live in a town that is all one-story that doesn't make you a farmer.
You're right, sure. I used "farmer" as a kind of proxy for "rural dweller" that city residents could picture. I think everything I said applies to pretty much all non-city residents, but I didn't want to dilute the issue too much.
Huh? It's just exactly opposite. People who live in more rural areas are the first to step up and help someone in need. City people seem to want to write a check and walk away.
I agree completely with what you said, while sticking with my original statement. If you want help around here, just ask for it and people will trample each other to get in line to assist you - if they can. However, you're expected to take care of yourself to the best of your ability so that your neighbors are helping you instead of carrying you.
In my case, wrong, after seeing some of the lunatics in the Bay Area I'm even more commited to promoting traditional lifestyles choices.
I spent time in SoCal when I was younger. Trust me: I understand. I meant to speak in general terms, though. There are plenty of counterexamples of everything I've said, but I think my statements hold up as overall trends.
when I feel it is totally legitimate to ask. Has anyone ever looked at intelligence/education as a factor for party affiliation? Are the more educated people in the Bush or Kerry camp? I'm just wondering here.
I'll go out on a limb and say that Kerry got the more educated vote, but that it's correlative instead of causative.
Basically, city dwellers tend to be more liberal than rural residents, who are famously conservative. This probably has more to do with the facts of life in the respective locations than anything else. That is, densely populated environments tend to foster an atmosphere of mutual dependence (because if they didn't, the 10,000,000 people packed into a small area would probably melt down), whereas farmers pretty much have to be self-reliant. In harvest season, you'll help your neighbor if you can, but your first priority is getting your own work done first because that's what's going to feed your family for the next year.
I don't think that either of these ways of living is inherently better; each is well-suited for its own niche. So, I think it's perfectly rational for rural populations to be more conservative than city populations.
If you buy that so far, then consider where educated people tend to go after they graduate. You just got a PhD in particle physics. Are you likely to move to a Midwestern town of 15,000? No. You're going to go where there are jobs for people with your qualifications, and that pretty much exclusively means a largish city. And when you get there, you'll probably find your politics sliding to the left to match those of your colleagues and neighbors that were already there.
I don't think intelligence directly maps to political leanings at all. I've personally known plenty of smart (and dumb) people on either end of the spectrum (or corner of the graph if you're a 2d-map fan). I do think, though, that your intelligence has an effect on where you'll live, and you're place of residence has a large effect on your political beliefs.
So, I'll stick with my original statement that educated people tend to vote for Kerry.
PS. My wife and I are both educated (her: DPM, me: BS) conservatives. If you interpret my message to say that Kerry supporters are smarter, then you missed the entire point.
Slashdot Mirror
On behalf of annoyed conservatives everywhere, thank you for your strong and quick response; it's reassuring to hear that those condescending beliefs aren't universal. I'll cheerfully debate ideas with a peer, but I have nothing but contempt for people who call me an idiot because of my political stance.
But FreeBSD wants to distribute packages, not just ports. The java/jdk14 port takes almost 2GB of drive space (and a lot of memory and cylces) to build. Worse, it's not self-bootstrapping, so if don't have access to a locally-built package and want to install JDK1.4 on a FreeBSD machine for the first time, then you have to install the Linux version (and the Linux compatibility layer that it depends on) before you can even start building the native version!
This is not a good situation. Even though my servers are reasonably fast, this is one of the situations where I'd much rather download a pre-built package than have to make one myself. Granted, you can (and I do) make local packages so that you only have to build it once locally and then distribute that to all of the machines on your network, but why? What is the compelling reason for making the whole blasted process so difficult?
Yeah.
In reality, he'll be "Cape Boy" until his wife quits letting him hang around with that group of friends.
Wow - someone else who knows the law! In every place I've lived, it is perfectly legal (and expected) for cars in the left turn lane to pull into the intersection a safe distance to wait their turn. Even when their light turns red, they still have the legal right of way to procede with their turn.
The idea is that this way at least one car can get through the light, regardless of whether that lane's signal is an arrow or regular light and how heavy oncoming traffic may be.
Read your local laws. Chances are that you, too, have the legal right to "park" in the intersection to make your left-hand turns. If you do but don't take advantage of it, then you're actually contributing to the traffic jams that everyone's universally bitching about.
Aggressive left turns. They're not just a good idea - they're the law.
...except in the case of modern military jets with terrain-following radar that cruise at high speed at a certain altitude above the ground. They have to handle unplanned obstacles, bad weather, and rapid, critical velocity changes much faster than any human possibly could. Still, we don't hear too many reports of the military losing multi-million dollar aircraft due to TFR failures.
If an F-111 can cruise at 100 feet above the treeline, surely a car could manage to drive a nearly-straight line on a freeway, couldn't it?
No kidding, especially since XMMS, Rhythmbox, Amarok and Juk all natively support the DRMed AAC files that you buy from iTMS. Oh, wait...
I couldn't care less about Yet Another Music Player. I could get interested in a working client for the world's largest online music store, though.
I haven't personally tried it. Actually, I was trying to be a smartass earlier (and probably unsuccessfully since the coffee hadn't kicked in yet), so that may not've been the best example.
And the Rational marketsprach seems to only hint at whether you can just compile your diagrams to source, then object, then executable, (in Java and C++) in one command.
Again, I haven't used it myself. However, I know one of the programmers on the Rose team and he seemed pretty happy about the results. As I understood it, it was an "eat ones own dogfood" project where they used early versions of Rose to design and code the newer versions. Apparently it's also pretty good about round-trip engineering, so that if you make changes to the resulting code at the source level then the UML diagrams will be automatically updated to reflect them.
YMMV widely, of course, but it seems like people are using it in real projects.
Here and here. Hint: these days, we call it "UML".
I disagree vehemently. I'm talking about a fundamental understanding of algorithms, which is required for efficient design and implementation. Put another way, if you don't understand that a certain operation is O(n) instead of O(1) (even if you don't know the formal terminology), then your programs will be inefficient. Some notations hide the complexity of their operations from the casual observer, and that can (and does) cause problems. Note that the languages aren't to blame, because providing expressive idioms to seasoned programmers is a good thing.
Conversely, I'm not particularly interested in whether "i++" or "i = i + 1" or "i += 1" executes in less cycles at a given optimization level. :)
There's a pretty strong reason for that, though: computers themselves operate in loops. With the exception of specialized vector operations, most computer code involves repeating an operation across a list of values or executing a list of commands. It's sometimes convenient to think of abstractions that don't directly correspond to iterating across lists, but their probably implemented that way at the lowest levels anyway.
For example, in Python you could implement your operation like so:
which creates a new list of all the values in x with 10 added to them. The dangerous part is that new programmers see non-obviously-looping structures and think that by using them instead of explicit loops they're writing faster code. After all, my example is one single instruction, right?Adding that kind of expressiveness to a language is useful, but primarily for people who already know how computers work. To the uninitiated, it represents a leaky abstraction that can cause unexpected operation.
I guess I'm old-school, but I truly think new programmers would be better off learning a very low-level language to gain an understanding of the logic structures before they migrate to higher level systems. If you don't know how the silicon works, then it's going to be very difficult to design algorithms that execute efficiently on it.
You could pretty much say the same thing about any open source project. Why use OpenOffice when you could buy Office? Why use Kmail when you could buy Outlook? Why use Linux when you could buy Windows?
The answer, for me, is always the same: Freedom has a value to me. The loss of Freedom that Opera represents is much greater than the $30 pittance that they're asking for it. If you want to pay for it, fine - that's your decision. I have a different set of values and you can't judge my actions by your own set.
BTW, Freedom has tangible benefits in this case. I'm presenting a proposal to my boss to write new client-side software in XUL to provide our customers with access to our web application server's backend. I don't know (and frankly don't care) if Opera, MSIE, or any other browser has equivalent technology, since none of them (excluding text browsers) are as cross-platform as Mozilla. There are no license fees at all, and our customers will be able to use our application under MacOS or Linux as easily as Windows. That's not just a happy-fluffy "I'm Free!" feeling - it's the real ability to provide a valuable service to our clients, which gives our company a competitive advantage.
This is a dead horse; please find some other issue to dwell on.
The real problem is a lack of strong domain models for most real world situations. That is, if you're starting a project to emulate something happening outside of a computer, then there's a very large likelihood that you're going to have to build your own object model to describe the situation to the desired level of accuracy. Once you have that model, it's easy enough to say "do this until that happens", but there's a world of difference between that point and staring at a blank screen at the beginning of a project.
There's been some progress (depending on who you ask) to make this easier for those who aren't full-time programmers, such as UML and related design tools, but even these are mainly limited to building a high-level template of the final result so that a human can manually implement all of the details.
This may or may not be avoidable. Vernon Vinge (author and CompSci professor) refers to the "Age of Failed Dreams" where humans eventually concede that some things just aren't possible. Expecting a current deterministic Turing device to be programmable at the level where people interact with each other may very likely be one of those areas.
My mom worked as Wire Chief (read: senior technician with some management responsibilities) for the Burlington Northern Railroad in the '80s when they installed a Xerox Star network. It was the first GUI I'd ever seen. Well, actually, it was the first GUI that pretty much anyone had ever seen. Anyway, there she was back at the start of the Reagan era using a graphical networked workstation with remote file storage.
I caught myself using the "dumb it down for the old folks" voice with her one day when I was explaining that I'd made /home an NFS mount on a fileserver on my home LAN. She'd just kind of assumed that's how everyone did things, since that's what she'd been using for the last 20 years or so.
I'm not listening to you!
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA
</fingers in ears>
Honestly, I think they're still in the denial phase. When do they start laughing at us?
Rumor has it that people used to write entire books this way before we invented typewriters.
Safari.
Anyone else wanna complain about OSS application names while I still have a fresh set of non-Free counterexamples in my head?
What part of me having access to the Internet (sorry if that offends you - that's its name) gives the government the right or obligation to make me pay an extra percentage to them? I'm already paying taxes on the phone line that carries my DSL, so whose business is it what I pass over that circuit?
First, this would be a regulatory fiasco. Do I get credit for failed downloads? Is porn tax-deductable at the same rate as ISOs? Can I depreciate my webdav calendars, since their value decreases with time? If you're only talking about connections to the public Internet and not just intra-LAN traffic, then how do you tax caching proxy servers (did I just download one copy of SP2, or one for each of the 30 machines on our LAN)? Does sneakernet count? IP-over-avian?
Second, WHAT FREAKIN' BUSINESS IS IT OF THE GOVERNMENT if I decide to trade packets with a peer? If I set up a WLAN to play Half-Life with my neighbor, how the hell do you justify me paying extra to run it? Do I have to have a Federally approved meter on my AP to make sure I'm not under-reporting my bandwidth?
You want to pay extra money to the government without receiving anything whatsoever out of the deal? Fine - just mail them a $100 bill every time you start to feel guilty. But leave me and my network out of it, thank you very much.
I'm sorry, but that's a stupid idea all the way around. It should be taken out back and shot before it can reproduce.
At home, I have a FreeBSD web/mail/DNS server that I use for personal domains and other lightweight purposes. I also had a Debian desktop that I used on the rare occasion that the wife and kids would let me play with it. Over the weekend, I decided that it made far more sense to consolidate the two than to maintain and power two similar underused computers.
It would've been a complete nightmare to move all the services over to Debian (since there were a few jail environments involved), so I decided to yank the memory, GeForce graphics, and SB Live! card from the Debian machine to the FreeBSD server and make that into my new combination server/desktop. I did so, then typed "portinstall kde mozilla-firefox jdk14 openoffice-1.1". A while later (Gentoo folks can appreciate this), the resulting system was virtually identical to the desktop I was enjoying under Linux.
I would not want to manually compile all of those programs and libraries, but I'm more than happy to let a nameless FreeBSD ports maintainer (I have a few myself) do the hard work for me. Installing almost any modern program should be as easy as "portinstall foo" for 99% of users.
The exit polls I saw that leaned toward Kerry were all from early in the day. Isn't it at least conceivable that many of those "extra" votes in the morning were due to the local Democratic parties doing an efficient job of getting their people to the polls, and thereby showing an early (and short-lived) bump in the numbers?
Alternatively, maybe it was easier for the Kerry-leaning college demographic to vote during the day (ie between classes) than for older groups that were less skewed in his direction?
I'd definitely think that early-hour exit polls would be a poor predictor of the actual results. Has anyone supported or refuted this idea?
If you use KDE, point Kate at webdav://myzopeserver.example.com:1980/ and view the ZODB just like a directory on your local filesystem. If you need to do some command-line work (grepping, etc.) then open that URL in Konqueror and drag the interesting folder to your desktop and work on your local version.
I hated working with Zope through the textarea, but editing it through webdav via my normal editor without having to install any plugins like the ExternalEditor setup is extremely nice.
When I lived in San Diego, I was at a party when the battery in my car ran too low to start the engine. I asked literally more than 20 people if they could give me a jump, but noone could or would help me. I know that if the same thing happened in my hometown in Missouri or my new residence in Nebraska, that by the time I'd asked 3 people I'd either have my car started or someone would be on an errand to buy some cables so that they could come back and help me.
I haven't heard any such thing. As a Republican, let me give you a different response:
My guy won. If there are any doubts about the accuracy of the vote, then I want them straightened out now so that everyone (discounting the conspiracy theorists [0]) will know that he was legitimately elected. The last thing I want is to hear another four years of "selected, not elected". I give my full support to groups investigating these matters for the purpose of getting accurate results, and everyone I've talked to feels the same way.
[0] By that, I mean the black helicopter types, not the average skeptical Joe on the street.
I live in a town of 25,000 in Nebraska; I passed about 100 of 'em on the way to work this morning. :-)
How many actual farmers do you really think exist in the US today. It's probably like 2 percent. If you don't live in a town that is all one-story that doesn't make you a farmer.
You're right, sure. I used "farmer" as a kind of proxy for "rural dweller" that city residents could picture. I think everything I said applies to pretty much all non-city residents, but I didn't want to dilute the issue too much.
Huh? It's just exactly opposite. People who live in more rural areas are the first to step up and help someone in need. City people seem to want to write a check and walk away.
I agree completely with what you said, while sticking with my original statement. If you want help around here, just ask for it and people will trample each other to get in line to assist you - if they can. However, you're expected to take care of yourself to the best of your ability so that your neighbors are helping you instead of carrying you.
In my case, wrong, after seeing some of the lunatics in the Bay Area I'm even more commited to promoting traditional lifestyles choices.
I spent time in SoCal when I was younger. Trust me: I understand. I meant to speak in general terms, though. There are plenty of counterexamples of everything I've said, but I think my statements hold up as overall trends.
I'll go out on a limb and say that Kerry got the more educated vote, but that it's correlative instead of causative.
Basically, city dwellers tend to be more liberal than rural residents, who are famously conservative. This probably has more to do with the facts of life in the respective locations than anything else. That is, densely populated environments tend to foster an atmosphere of mutual dependence (because if they didn't, the 10,000,000 people packed into a small area would probably melt down), whereas farmers pretty much have to be self-reliant. In harvest season, you'll help your neighbor if you can, but your first priority is getting your own work done first because that's what's going to feed your family for the next year.
I don't think that either of these ways of living is inherently better; each is well-suited for its own niche. So, I think it's perfectly rational for rural populations to be more conservative than city populations.
If you buy that so far, then consider where educated people tend to go after they graduate. You just got a PhD in particle physics. Are you likely to move to a Midwestern town of 15,000? No. You're going to go where there are jobs for people with your qualifications, and that pretty much exclusively means a largish city. And when you get there, you'll probably find your politics sliding to the left to match those of your colleagues and neighbors that were already there.
I don't think intelligence directly maps to political leanings at all. I've personally known plenty of smart (and dumb) people on either end of the spectrum (or corner of the graph if you're a 2d-map fan). I do think, though, that your intelligence has an effect on where you'll live, and you're place of residence has a large effect on your political beliefs.
So, I'll stick with my original statement that educated people tend to vote for Kerry.
PS. My wife and I are both educated (her: DPM, me: BS) conservatives. If you interpret my message to say that Kerry supporters are smarter, then you missed the entire point.