A while ago, I was trying to go over to the newsgroups semi-weekly and answer 5 or so questions. Sure... most of them had been asked before, and a quick check of dejanews might find the answers... but I thought I'd be friendly, and try to help the obvious newbies.
You know, it's kinda fun. Sometimes you get an idiot who doesn't know which way to insert a floppy, and you can just ignore them.:) But for the most part, people are really appreciative.
You gurus want to give it a shot, and gain some penguin-karma.
On the other hand, places like Helix Code are making installs (or at least upgrades) awfully easy...
Overall, violent crime is down, but there are cases where rapists get furloughed because there's no room left in the jails, which have filled up with drug busts.
I think violent crime is probably down because the economy has been booming. People are less desperate, IMHO.
My question is, do you believe the War on Drugs has been an unqualified success, and if not, what would you change about it if elected president?
Bush's answer: We gotta do what's right, we gotta do what's fair. And that means that ex-cokeheads like mahself should stay out of prison at all costs, while we fuel the prison industry by locking up minorities at a rate that surpasses most other countries in the world. Ah have trust in our joodishul systum, because that's what governors do when they're not giving out hugs.
In fact, ah don't think the war has gone far enough - ah mean, in a real war, you have casualties, right? It's time to start killing drug users! We have a mighty-fine death chamber down here in texas, and ah gotta tell you, hard as we try, there are still a few days when it goes unused.
If ah could sign a law that made people love each other, ah would, and we'd do what's prudent, on the right timetable - but until then, ah think it's time to step up the war on drugs with mandatory death penalties for first time abusers. ah'd mandate that from the federal level, to keep those liberal judges from legislating from the bench. It's up to the congress to control the legislative branch, tie their hands in any way we can. That's not big government, that's tough on crime!
Query from the audience: Mr. Bush, do you really think that locking up small-time users is a cost-effective way to approach this problem? How much is all this costing us?
Mr Bush: Ooh, look at the time, gotta go... Did you know Al Gore claimed he invented the internet?
Bzzzt. Why would I vote for the weak, centrist Bush? Buchanan is the man we need to get this country headed off in the right direction!
Re: the electoral college, why, exactly, should small states have big voices? Why not just one person, one vote? Sounds like big government getting in the way of the natural order of things.
If you read the article, how do you figure that "swapping" is "wasting" your vote? Show me how, if you follow their advice, your vote counts for _less_ after the swap.
You know, if you don't include all of the information about your hobbies, annual household income, & buying habits, your warranty will be null and void...
You seem happy to do as you're told, so just wanted to give you another tip there.:)
Seriously, though -
but with this new "vote-swapping", all you're doing is voicing someone else's opinion.
You didn't read the article, did you? Your opinion is still there (if everyone is honest), and it counts more - it beats the rigged electoral college system.
What happens when all the Nader voters sit out, and the pollsters extrapolate that Gore will win, based on average voting activity to during the day? They make that prediction based on expected patterns.
When thousands of Nader voters show up in the end, met only by Bush voters, and no Gore voters, it's an upset at the end of the day, and Bush wins.
Assuming that a large amount of people follow the "vote late" plan, that is.
(2) Literary works, including computer programs and databases, protected by access control mechanisms that fail to permit access because of malfunction, damage or obsoleteness.
...[they] should only be concerned if they are storing private information on their PC's
Oh, gee, that puts my mind at ease... I was really worried that some evil hacker might break in and steal all of my public information. Apparently my fears were unfounded... I only need to be concerned if I have private information on my PC... These fears really are overblown... I mean, who puts private information on their PC, anyway?
Often, you can just use something like junkbuster to report that you have the "desired" browser, and things will go well.
This becomes a problem if the check is on a secure page, though, because I don't think junkbuster can proxy the SSL stuff... but I'm not sure. I ran into a similar problem at my previous employer.
(I now work for linux-friendly SGI, so I don't have to worry about that silliness anymore!):)
"An open operating system does not only have advantages."
"An open operating system can mutate many times. With Windows 2000, however, all services are available from a single hand.(?) That can really save you time and money."
Down, but Google has the cache on nader's page her e.
"Secret Luxury House" is worth $100,000 (ok, in 1972, but still - dissing the guy because he owns a house?)
Supposedly damning quote:
"Big business never pays a nickel in taxes, according to Ralph Nader, who represents a big consumer organization that never pays a nickel in taxes." -- Dave Barry
Um... ok, but it's a nonprofit organization... the laws allow him to not pay taxes. I don't see the inconsistency.
"Information is the currency of democracy. It's denial must always be suspect." -- Ralph Nader
What's the problem here?
Also, claims that he works his staffers really hard. Well, ok.
Complaints that his nonprofits has amassed funds. Fine, that's legal, and I wouldn't even say immoral. As long as he's not embezzling it...
Oh, and apparently he's a hypochondriac, too.
If that's the best they can do, he's still my man.:)
(read the page for yourself, there are a few other perhaps more damning allegations, but the majority sound like rumors and innuendo to me...)
Granted, his own press release isn't the best unbiased source of information, but it says:
The suit charges that the Commission on Presidential Debates, by using state police power to exclude Nader from entering a separate viewing auditorium at UMass for which he had a transferable ticket of admittance, and by preventing him from appearing at a pre-scheduled interview with Fox News at the debate site, violated federal law and the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act.
Hm... well that's a good point... but I think it's at least possible that some other tickets were swapped among the Joe Average Viewers as well, but they were obviously singling out Nader.
Nader is suing over this... I'm not sure of the details, but I saw it on his site...
Also, did you know he was denied access to the debates, not only as a debater, but as a viewer? Twice, he had valid tickets to enter the premises, and twice, he was denied access by the debate commission, with police threatening arrest. Tell me there was any reason other than his political affiliation... I imagine that will go to court as well.
I mean, I guess I'd probably say that pornography should be blocked from our schools' computers, too. But there's a gap in logic to decide that you should therefore install Net Nanny, since it has been demonstrated that it doesn't work well.
If they wanted to poll on filters, the question should not have been "Do you think porn should be blocked on school computers?" - it should have been
"Do you think school computers should randomly block internet material, including chicken breast recipies and Superbowl XXX information, in an effort to keep out some undisclosed fraction of the pornography on the internet?
For good Linux info, you should check out Jean Tourrilhes' Wireless LAN HOWTO. It's got a good overview of the technology, the standards, the cards, and the Linux drivers.
Lately, there have been a couple of 802.11b cards come out that are pretty cheap - check out the Linksys WPC11 , which can be found for around $120 a pop (if you can find it in stock...) and also Addtron's AWP100 card - no info on their site, but they told me it has the PrismII chipset, which is what the AbsoVal guys are working on, I believe. It, too, is around $120.
Well, it's because here in America we really do have only two parties. It's 100% guaranteed that in this election, either Bush or Gore will win. There will be no other outcome.
Many people vote for one candidate out of fear of the other winning. If I voted for Gore, that would be my reasoning: "I'm not excited about Gore, but I'm terrified of Bush, so I'll vote for Gore."
Now, if your main reason for voting is to defeat "the other candidate," then voting for a third party candidate does not further that cause... hence, voting third party hurts your chances of obtaining the most favorable likely outcome.
"The Queen's" response is right on, I'll also add that if you're in a state that Bush has locked up, then by all means, vote for Nader if you want to.
I too would be a little nervous voting Nader in a hotly contested state... I still think you should vote your concsience, but it's tougher in that scenario.
But if you're in a state where Bush has an easy win, voting for Gore is an ultimate waste of your vote.
As Nader says, you really should vote your conscience. If you wish he could win, vote for him.
I know he's not going to win, but I'm tired of the political "discussion" that goes on now between the 2 parties.
If we can get a real third party, or maybe even 4th or 5th, perhaps we could actually talk about issues, rather than "fuzzy math" and "lockboxes."
If Nader & the Green party can get 5% of the popular vote, they get Federal funds next time around. 5% gets their foot in the door.
If you wish he could win, vote for him. The lesser of two evils is still an evil.
I do have some concerns about Nader hurting Gore, and I'm not sure where I stand on that... but if you're in a state where Bush has no chance of losing (say... Texas, for example) and you like what Nader has to say, then by all means, vote for Nader! (Or any 3rd party candidate, for that matter). A vote for Gore in Texas is more of a throw-away vote than a vote for Nader...
Representative (or Senator):
It has been brought to my attention that
hr4577, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and
Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001, TITLE
VI--Children's Internet Protection, contains language which
would require schools to use filtering/blocking software on their
systems.
While I applaud efforts to prevent children from accessing
inappropriate material on the internet, I strongly feel that
automated filters and blocking software is not the way to do it.
This software is often haphazard, at best, letting through much
material that would certainly be deemed "inappropriate," and at the
same time blocking legitimate material.
For instance, most filters will block sites containing information
about chicken breast recipes, breast cancer information, Anne
Sexton, or "Superbowl XXX" simply because words or subwords
may contain characters on the "blocklist."
For more real-world examples, please see
http://www.dfn.org/Alerts/contest.htm
In addition, most of these filters can be disabled by
computer-savvy children in the schools.
Filtering software may seem like an easy solution to this problem,
but it's too easy - it just doesn't work.
I urge you to oppose this part of HR4577, and educate your
colleagues about the unintended side effects of filtering software.
For more information, you may wish to read
http://www.peacefire.org/info/blocking-software-fa q.html
Slashdot Mirror
You know, it's kinda fun. Sometimes you get an idiot who doesn't know which way to insert a floppy, and you can just ignore them.
You gurus want to give it a shot, and gain some penguin-karma.
On the other hand, places like Helix Code are making installs (or at least upgrades) awfully easy...
---
http://www.ifs.univie.ac.at/uncjin/mosaic/wcs.h
---
I think violent crime is probably down because the economy has been booming. People are less desperate, IMHO.
---
Bush's answer:
We gotta do what's right, we gotta do what's fair. And that means that ex-cokeheads like mahself should stay out of prison at all costs, while we fuel the prison industry by locking up minorities at a rate that surpasses most other countries in the world. Ah have trust in our joodishul systum, because that's what governors do when they're not giving out hugs.
In fact, ah don't think the war has gone far enough - ah mean, in a real war, you have casualties, right? It's time to start killing drug users! We have a mighty-fine death chamber down here in texas, and ah gotta tell you, hard as we try, there are still a few days when it goes unused.
If ah could sign a law that made people love each other, ah would, and we'd do what's prudent, on the right timetable - but until then, ah think it's time to step up the war on drugs with mandatory death penalties for first time abusers. ah'd mandate that from the federal level, to keep those liberal judges from legislating from the bench. It's up to the congress to control the legislative branch, tie their hands in any way we can. That's not big government, that's tough on crime!
Query from the audience:
Mr. Bush, do you really think that locking up small-time users is a cost-effective way to approach this problem? How much is all this costing us?
Mr Bush:
Ooh, look at the time, gotta go... Did you know Al Gore claimed he invented the internet?
---
Re: the electoral college, why, exactly, should small states have big voices? Why not just one person, one vote? Sounds like big government getting in the way of the natural order of things.
If you read the article, how do you figure that "swapping" is "wasting" your vote? Show me how, if you follow their advice, your vote counts for _less_ after the swap.
---
You seem happy to do as you're told, so just wanted to give you another tip there.
Seriously, though -
but with this new "vote-swapping", all you're doing is voicing someone else's opinion.
You didn't read the article, did you? Your opinion is still there (if everyone is honest), and it counts more - it beats the rigged electoral college system.
---
What happens when all the Nader voters sit out, and the pollsters extrapolate that Gore will win, based on average voting activity to during the day? They make that prediction based on expected patterns.
When thousands of Nader voters show up in the end, met only by Bush voters, and no Gore voters, it's an upset at the end of the day, and Bush wins.
Assuming that a large amount of people follow the "vote late" plan, that is.
---
Hm...
[sandeen@Porter sandeen]$ chmod +x winDVD.exe
[sandeen@Porter sandeen]$
bash:
[sandeen@Porter sandeen]$
Obviously malfunctioning... certainly failed to permit access...
[sandeen@Porter sandeen]$ oms
---
Oh, gee, that puts my mind at ease... I was really worried that some evil hacker might break in and steal all of my public information. Apparently my fears were unfounded... I only need to be concerned if I have private information on my PC... These fears really are overblown... I mean, who puts private information on their PC, anyway?
*wipes brow in relief*
---
Interesting angle on some things, too -
Ok... so what is this, a proprietary help format? Is something like that gonna catch on?
Also, their own distro - "tightly integrated with our products" - does that mean the browser will be built into the kernel?
---
This becomes a problem if the check is on a secure page, though, because I don't think junkbuster can proxy the SSL stuff... but I'm not sure. I ran into a similar problem at my previous employer.
(I now work for linux-friendly SGI, so I don't have to worry about that silliness anymore!)
---
"An open operating system does not only have advantages."
"An open operating system can mutate many times. With Windows 2000, however, all services are available from a single hand.(?) That can really save you time and money."
Or something like that...
---
---
It could probably play Beethoven in square waves WHILE it acted as a WAP client!
---
Down, but Google has the cache on nader's page her e.
"Secret Luxury House" is worth $100,000 (ok, in 1972, but still - dissing the guy because he owns a house?)
Supposedly damning quote:
Um... ok, but it's a nonprofit organization... the laws allow him to not pay taxes. I don't see the inconsistency.
What's the problem here?
Also, claims that he works his staffers really hard. Well, ok.
Complaints that his nonprofits has amassed funds. Fine, that's legal, and I wouldn't even say immoral. As long as he's not embezzling it...
Oh, and apparently he's a hypochondriac, too.
If that's the best they can do, he's still my man.
(read the page for yourself, there are a few other perhaps more damning allegations, but the majority sound like rumors and innuendo to me...)
---
---
---
Also, did you know he was denied access to the debates, not only as a debater, but as a viewer? Twice, he had valid tickets to enter the premises, and twice, he was denied access by the debate commission, with police threatening arrest. Tell me there was any reason other than his political affiliation... I imagine that will go to court as well.
Oh, and get your Nader Funky Beats here.
---
If they wanted to poll on filters, the question should not have been "Do you think porn should be blocked on school computers?" - it should have been
"Do you think school computers should randomly block internet material, including chicken breast recipies and Superbowl XXX information, in an effort to keep out some undisclosed fraction of the pornography on the internet?
---
Lately, there have been a couple of 802.11b cards come out that are pretty cheap - check out the Linksys WPC11 , which can be found for around $120 a pop (if you can find it in stock...) and also Addtron's AWP100 card - no info on their site, but they told me it has the PrismII chipset, which is what the AbsoVal guys are working on, I believe. It, too, is around $120.
---
Many people vote for one candidate out of fear of the other winning. If I voted for Gore, that would be my reasoning: "I'm not excited about Gore, but I'm terrified of Bush, so I'll vote for Gore."
Now, if your main reason for voting is to defeat "the other candidate," then voting for a third party candidate does not further that cause... hence, voting third party hurts your chances of obtaining the most favorable likely outcome.
Twisted, isn't it?
---
I too would be a little nervous voting Nader in a hotly contested state... I still think you should vote your concsience, but it's tougher in that scenario.
But if you're in a state where Bush has an easy win, voting for Gore is an ultimate waste of your vote.
---
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-jun
Not a word about Communism.
Now, I'm not saying you're wrong, but can you point to anything that backs up your information? Especially concerning the Greens in America?
Oh, and pointing to Buchanan's site doesn't count.
---
I know he's not going to win, but I'm tired of the political "discussion" that goes on now between the 2 parties.
If we can get a real third party, or maybe even 4th or 5th, perhaps we could actually talk about issues, rather than "fuzzy math" and "lockboxes."
If Nader & the Green party can get 5% of the popular vote, they get Federal funds next time around. 5% gets their foot in the door.
If you wish he could win, vote for him. The lesser of two evils is still an evil.
I do have some concerns about Nader hurting Gore, and I'm not sure where I stand on that... but if you're in a state where Bush has no chance of losing (say... Texas, for example) and you like what Nader has to say, then by all means, vote for Nader! (Or any 3rd party candidate, for that matter). A vote for Gore in Texas is more of a throw-away vote than a vote for Nader...
---
Representative (or Senator):
It has been brought to my attention that hr4577, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001, TITLE VI--Children's Internet Protection, contains language which would require schools to use filtering/blocking software on their systems.
While I applaud efforts to prevent children from accessing inappropriate material on the internet, I strongly feel that automated filters and blocking software is not the way to do it.
This software is often haphazard, at best, letting through much material that would certainly be deemed "inappropriate," and at the same time blocking legitimate material.
For instance, most filters will block sites containing information about chicken breast recipes, breast cancer information, Anne Sexton, or "Superbowl XXX" simply because words or subwords may contain characters on the "blocklist."
For more real-world examples, please see http://www.dfn.org/Alerts/contest.htm
In addition, most of these filters can be disabled by computer-savvy children in the schools.
Filtering software may seem like an easy solution to this problem, but it's too easy - it just doesn't work.
I urge you to oppose this part of HR4577, and educate your colleagues about the unintended side effects of filtering software.
For more information, you may wish to read http://www.peacefire.org/info/blocking-software-fa q.html
Sincerely,
-Eric Sandeen
---