The best way for the average guy to protest this is to vote Third Party across the board on Election Day and deny the people responsible for this any perceived mandate they may have for this course of action.
Any vote cast for Kerry or Bush is interpreted as support, no matter the voter's actual reason for doing so - to stop one or the other from winning, etc. A vote for either of them is a vote legitimizing these policies.
I am voting Libertarian, but I hope you will vote Green, Constitution, Libertarian, or Socialist according to your beliefs. It is a great day and the time is now to "waste" your vote protesting these big brother policies from the duopoly.
The only "wasted vote" is a vote for either Bush or Kerry. It's wasted becuase they dont give a shit what you think, and it shows.
Commission on Presidential Debates ( from Disinfo.com )
The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) is a "private, nonprofit corporation -- [which] represents the interests of the Republican and Democratic parties." The Commission was established in 1987 following the 1986 agreement by the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee "to take over the presidential debates." Previously, "from 1976 to 1984, the presidential debates were sponsored by the League of Women Voters." The Commission [1]
The CPD has come under attack from democracy advocates, third parties and independent candidates for the presidency. They claim the CPD is little more than a front for the two dominant parties that allows them to maintain control over debate participants, formats, and moderators. This absolute control over the form also gives them indirect control over the range of issues that may be discussed, excluding many of the most critical issues on which there is either bi-partisan agreement or disinterest in discussion. All the while, the dominant parties maintain plausible deniability for the anti-democratic practices via the CPD.
Criticisms of the CPD
The commission describes itself as nonpartisan, but it is actually bipartisan: its co-chairmen are Frank Fahrenkopf and Paul Kirk, former chairmen of the Republican and Democratic parties, respectively. Questions concerning third-party participation and debate formats are ultimately resolved behind closed doors among Republican and Democratic negotiators. The commission, posing as an independent sponsor, then enforces these rules, shielding the major-party candidates from public criticism.
In 1996, Bob Dole and President Bill Clinton maneuvered to keep Ross Perot from the presidential debates, even though Mr. Perot had received 19% of the popular vote after being allowed into the 1992 debates, posessed almost $30 million in federal matching funds, and a substantial majority of likely voters wanted him included.
Open Debates points out that "most board members of the CPD have close ties to multinational corporations. Five are partners of corporate law firms, and collectively, the directors serve on the boards of more than 30 companies, ranging from gambling to pharmaceutical to agricultural to insurance companies.
According to Open Debates, Fahrenkopf and Kirk still control the CPD. They don't just profit from corporate America as partners of corporate law firms and directors of corporations. They are also registered lobbyists for transnational corporations. Kirk has collected $120,000 for lobbying on behalf of Hoechst Marion Roussel, a German pharmaceutical company.
"As president of the American Gaming Association (AGA), Frank Fahrenkopf is the lead advocate for the nation's $54 billion gambling industry. He earns $800,000 a year lobbying on behalf of 18 corporations directly involved in the hotel/casino industry -- ITT, Hilton -- as well as most of the major investment banking firms -- Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch.
The debates are now primarily funded through corporate contributions. Phillip Morris was a sponsor in 1992 and 1996. Anheuser-Busch sponsored debates in its hometown of St. Louis in 1992 and 2000.
"When the League of Women Voters ran the debates, things were a bit different. 'One of the big differences between us and the commission was that the commission could easily raise hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions,' Nancy Neuman, former president of the League of Women Voters told Open Debates. 'They did it very quickly in 1988. Even though I would go to some corporations, I would be lucky to get $5,000. Why? Because under the commission's sponsorship, this is another soft money deal. It is a way to show your support for the parties because, of course, it is a bipartisan commission and a bipartisan contribution. There was nothing in it for corporations when they made a contribution to the League. Not a quid pro quo. That's not the case with the commission.'"
In 2000, ReclaimDemocracy.org initiated calls to cease lobbying the CPD to "o
Michael Badnarik is going to be there and attempt to cross the line with Cobb at the same time. It's not a Green Party protest, it's going to be done jointly by Badnarik and Cobb together at the same time.
I smell a rat in that The Green Party seems to be getting the publicity for this when the Libertarians have opnely made it a joint deal and mentioned the Greens in their press release, but there's no mention of the Libertarians or Badnarik in the story or on the Green website right now.
If they are smart they will have plenty of video cams to record the action independently of the press.
Slightly out of the libertarian's purview, me thinks. That would better be handled by one of the many groups that specialize in that aspect of educational funding issues.
The parallel you seek to connect is in fact a angle. You're trying too hard to make a point that's not really there in the first place.
Unfortunatly, you're quite right. Most of them would do just that. Some of us are trying to change the mindset in what small ways we can.
Click on my blog link above and read the article written by a past PA State LP Chair. She's right on, and the best explanation I heard yet for why Libertarians dont do better.
The main problem is exactly what you state. Libertarians dont know how to actually run for office the same way R's and D's do, and they consider doing so as selling out. I dont know what it will take.
But be aware some of us dont get our libertarian cues from Ayn Rand or Rothbard. I got mine from Peter McWilliams' book on consensual crimes.
Why would you need to emulate a op system when you can just run the real thing on one core at full speed? The announcement didnt give many details, but it expressly said "different op system on each core"
which would make not much sense to crow about if they were, like, talking about freaking FreeBSD on one and OS X on the other?
I dont. Put 9 fans in a PC and it would be - hell, knock it down to 4 fans, and it's still 3X louder. I own both, and my PC with a Aeroflow and 3 fans is.
My point is: You dont own a G5, so dont make assumptions about it. You dont know. Nobody that owns one would ever make that statement.
My best OC with my 2500+ system is 2366 Actual Mhz.
That's a 533 Mhz OC, raising the core voltage 5% and using a Vantec Aeroflow HSF with AS3. It's been running that way for over a year now. Temps max @ 41C @ 100%.
At this rate I wont need to go buy another Wintel system until Doom 4 for 64 bit Windows comes out:D
-1, Troll. You cant possibly own one. My Dual G5 does not get hot under any load, and I can barely hear the fans spinning 90% of the time. Any similar PC with 9 fans would be earsplitting.
I found the tidbit contained in the recent paper launch of the Freescale multicore G4 chip very interesting: that each core can and will be able to run it's own operating system.
Can you say "Death to Virtual PC" and "OS X and Windows on the same computer", boys and girls?
How about : "Apple will jump on this like a big dog?"
They are holding the debate there becuase the two major party debates are quite literally about 1500 ft away across the street, on the same night, later on. So every media player in the world is gonna be there, and now they have something else to do beside sit on their hands waiting for the major party with two heads to come on.
Nader is invited to ANOTHER debate, one not held by the CPD. Like this one is that Badnarik and Cobb are going to be across the street from. In other words, Nader isnt invited to that one either.
Nader currently is the only candidate thats in the Open Debate Commission debate - so there's only one candidate currently in the only debate he's qualified for - himself. A debate starring Ralph Nader! HOORAH!
you pay more for it if the owner does it too. Or do you think those wonderful laser cut chrome grey alien head fan grills and tri color fans just fall from the sky like manna? I would submit that any Dell, modified into such a beast, would still look like a office computer with christmas tree lights added to it.
I paid a lot for my G5, and it's been worth every penny. I wouldnt even think of trading it for 4 Dells, even with Xmas tree lights and Grey Alien Head Fan Grillz.
When the day comes that our Federal agencys have better things to do than raid record stores, America will be a better place. This IP Property bullshit has got to go - the laws have to be updated to reflect current realities.
Why, you ask? Good Question. The degree by which the United States *is* the USA we know depends to a great deal on one thing: the current law vs. the standard norm in society. When the Soviet Union fell, it fell for two reasons: it was broke, and the laws did not have nay correlation to actual day to day life in the country. This made those laws irrelevant.
The day is coming when we will haul down our flag too, just like they did. We are only about 15 years behind them. When everyone knows the country is a joke and the laws protect no one but the connected and the rich, what do you think will happen?
The Statement of Principles affirms that philosophy upon which the Libertarian Party is founded, by which it shall be sustained, and through which liberty shall prevail. The enduring importance of the Statement of Principles requires that it may be amended only by a vote of 7/8 of all registered delegates at a Regular Convention.
OK.....so there were around 430 Delegates or so at the last National Convention in Atlanta. So that means a huge number, like what, 380+ people would have to vote in favor of changing the Statement of Principles in order to change it. Why is this bar set so high, and is it possible that it's too high for the Party to attract a wider share of members?
I know they used to. I had to sign that very pledge in 1988 when I joined, and I thought it was stupid then. When did they get rid of it?
Oh, and whoever modded me off topic, how can it be offtopic when it is a question for Badnarik, like what was asked for?
When you join the LP they make you sign a pledge thing stating that you dont agree with the initiation of force or something. Is'nt this pretty weird making people sign a pledge stating you dont approve of the initiation of force by forcing them to sign a pledge stating that they are against forcing people to do things?
I'd like to know how electing Nader is going to restore the power of the individual citizen. Nader believes in big government just as much as any Democrat does, he just wants it tilted his way, like any politician does.
If you want to restore the power of the individual, you have to look in the right place. I would suggest Michael Badnarik and the Libertarian Party. Some of them are kooks, but at least they are constiutional kooks. He's also anti-war and anti DMCA as well as anti Patriot Act.
www.badnarik.org
and yes, obviously I'm gonna vote for the guy. I'm allowed to shill for my candidate the same way you can shill for Nader, right?
As long as they continue to support and sell kick ass machines like my dual G5 and a better operating system than Microsoft to boot, why should be concerned if they become more successful in another area?
A more successful Apple is good for me and my G5, not bad. According to your philosophy Sony should have gone tits up a few years ago.
How about you stop with the FUD instead of that other guy?
There only one PC in the world I know of that can boot from a external USB floppy or USB CD ROM - Datalux makes mobile computers for cop cars and such and they have a BIOS that can boot via USB.
If this little tiny company can have a bios that allows USB booting why cant Intel? Maybe not a high priority but it sure is nice on occasion. Just set the usb device to be the first boot device and blammmo it's booted.
Damn, Motley Cluster is a hell of a name for a band....
Go with the G5's - your work is the important item
on
Renderfarm Setup Tips?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Personally I'd go with the G5 Xserve with a few diskless cluster nodes tossed in.
Thats only if you desire maximum ease of use with minimum setup and running hassles. The same ease of use the regular G5's have is built into all their server stuff too. I'm sure the linux dudes will have something to say about that.....
I would take a really hard look at the ready made bio-information cluster they have all setup, and just load yer software as needed and off you go. But that's me. Some people seem to like futzing with computers.....After 20+ years doing that at work, I just wanna do what I wanna do when I wanna do it. Apple makes that easy.
I get paid to deal with headaches, I'm not gonna deal with them at home too.
Slashdot Mirror
Any vote cast for Kerry or Bush is interpreted as support, no matter the voter's actual reason for doing so - to stop one or the other from winning, etc. A vote for either of them is a vote legitimizing these policies.
I am voting Libertarian, but I hope you will vote Green, Constitution, Libertarian, or Socialist according to your beliefs. It is a great day and the time is now to "waste" your vote protesting these big brother policies from the duopoly.
The only "wasted vote" is a vote for either Bush or Kerry. It's wasted becuase they dont give a shit what you think, and it shows.
Commission on Presidential Debates ( from Disinfo.com ) The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) is a "private, nonprofit corporation -- [which] represents the interests of the Republican and Democratic parties." The Commission was established in 1987 following the 1986 agreement by the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee "to take over the presidential debates." Previously, "from 1976 to 1984, the presidential debates were sponsored by the League of Women Voters." The Commission [1] The CPD has come under attack from democracy advocates, third parties and independent candidates for the presidency. They claim the CPD is little more than a front for the two dominant parties that allows them to maintain control over debate participants, formats, and moderators. This absolute control over the form also gives them indirect control over the range of issues that may be discussed, excluding many of the most critical issues on which there is either bi-partisan agreement or disinterest in discussion. All the while, the dominant parties maintain plausible deniability for the anti-democratic practices via the CPD. Criticisms of the CPD The commission describes itself as nonpartisan, but it is actually bipartisan: its co-chairmen are Frank Fahrenkopf and Paul Kirk, former chairmen of the Republican and Democratic parties, respectively. Questions concerning third-party participation and debate formats are ultimately resolved behind closed doors among Republican and Democratic negotiators. The commission, posing as an independent sponsor, then enforces these rules, shielding the major-party candidates from public criticism. In 1996, Bob Dole and President Bill Clinton maneuvered to keep Ross Perot from the presidential debates, even though Mr. Perot had received 19% of the popular vote after being allowed into the 1992 debates, posessed almost $30 million in federal matching funds, and a substantial majority of likely voters wanted him included. Open Debates points out that "most board members of the CPD have close ties to multinational corporations. Five are partners of corporate law firms, and collectively, the directors serve on the boards of more than 30 companies, ranging from gambling to pharmaceutical to agricultural to insurance companies. According to Open Debates, Fahrenkopf and Kirk still control the CPD. They don't just profit from corporate America as partners of corporate law firms and directors of corporations. They are also registered lobbyists for transnational corporations. Kirk has collected $120,000 for lobbying on behalf of Hoechst Marion Roussel, a German pharmaceutical company. "As president of the American Gaming Association (AGA), Frank Fahrenkopf is the lead advocate for the nation's $54 billion gambling industry. He earns $800,000 a year lobbying on behalf of 18 corporations directly involved in the hotel/casino industry -- ITT, Hilton -- as well as most of the major investment banking firms -- Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch. The debates are now primarily funded through corporate contributions. Phillip Morris was a sponsor in 1992 and 1996. Anheuser-Busch sponsored debates in its hometown of St. Louis in 1992 and 2000. "When the League of Women Voters ran the debates, things were a bit different. 'One of the big differences between us and the commission was that the commission could easily raise hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions,' Nancy Neuman, former president of the League of Women Voters told Open Debates. 'They did it very quickly in 1988. Even though I would go to some corporations, I would be lucky to get $5,000. Why? Because under the commission's sponsorship, this is another soft money deal. It is a way to show your support for the parties because, of course, it is a bipartisan commission and a bipartisan contribution. There was nothing in it for corporations when they made a contribution to the League. Not a quid pro quo. That's not the case with the commission.'" In 2000, ReclaimDemocracy.org initiated calls to cease lobbying the CPD to "o
Yeah, they were not all that friendly to Martin Luther King when he started doing that sort of thing, either.
I smell a rat in that The Green Party seems to be getting the publicity for this when the Libertarians have opnely made it a joint deal and mentioned the Greens in their press release, but there's no mention of the Libertarians or Badnarik in the story or on the Green website right now.
If they are smart they will have plenty of video cams to record the action independently of the press.
The parallel you seek to connect is in fact a angle. You're trying too hard to make a point that's not really there in the first place.
Click on my blog link above and read the article written by a past PA State LP Chair. She's right on, and the best explanation I heard yet for why Libertarians dont do better.
The main problem is exactly what you state. Libertarians dont know how to actually run for office the same way R's and D's do, and they consider doing so as selling out. I dont know what it will take.
But be aware some of us dont get our libertarian cues from Ayn Rand or Rothbard. I got mine from Peter McWilliams' book on consensual crimes.
Listen to it live here live on WEOS. http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/weos/ppr/weos.as x
Why would you need to emulate a op system when you can just run the real thing on one core at full speed? The announcement didnt give many details, but it expressly said "different op system on each core" which would make not much sense to crow about if they were, like, talking about freaking FreeBSD on one and OS X on the other?
My point is: You dont own a G5, so dont make assumptions about it. You dont know. Nobody that owns one would ever make that statement.
That's a 533 Mhz OC, raising the core voltage 5% and using a Vantec Aeroflow HSF with AS3. It's been running that way for over a year now. Temps max @ 41C @ 100%.
At this rate I wont need to go buy another Wintel system until Doom 4 for 64 bit Windows comes out :D
-1, Troll. You cant possibly own one. My Dual G5 does not get hot under any load, and I can barely hear the fans spinning 90% of the time. Any similar PC with 9 fans would be earsplitting.
Can you say "Death to Virtual PC" and "OS X and Windows on the same computer", boys and girls?
How about : "Apple will jump on this like a big dog?"
tnxknewucouldbi
Sir, that is a damn good observation. I have no mod points to give you. Kudos anyways.
Nader is invited to ANOTHER debate, one not held by the CPD. Like this one is that Badnarik and Cobb are going to be across the street from. In other words, Nader isnt invited to that one either.
Nader currently is the only candidate thats in the Open Debate Commission debate - so there's only one candidate currently in the only debate he's qualified for - himself. A debate starring Ralph Nader! HOORAH!
I paid a lot for my G5, and it's been worth every penny. I wouldnt even think of trading it for 4 Dells, even with Xmas tree lights and Grey Alien Head Fan Grillz.
When the day comes that our Federal agencys have better things to do than raid record stores, America will be a better place. This IP Property bullshit has got to go - the laws have to be updated to reflect current realities.
Why, you ask? Good Question. The degree by which the United States *is* the USA we know depends to a great deal on one thing: the current law vs. the standard norm in society. When the Soviet Union fell, it fell for two reasons: it was broke, and the laws did not have nay correlation to actual day to day life in the country. This made those laws irrelevant.
The day is coming when we will haul down our flag too, just like they did. We are only about 15 years behind them. When everyone knows the country is a joke and the laws protect no one but the connected and the rich, what do you think will happen?
The Statement of Principles affirms that philosophy upon which the Libertarian Party is founded, by which it shall be sustained, and through which liberty shall prevail. The enduring importance of the Statement of Principles requires that it may be amended only by a vote of 7/8 of all registered delegates at a Regular Convention.
OK.....so there were around 430 Delegates or so at the last National Convention in Atlanta. So that means a huge number, like what, 380+ people would have to vote in favor of changing the Statement of Principles in order to change it. Why is this bar set so high, and is it possible that it's too high for the Party to attract a wider share of members?
I know they used to. I had to sign that very pledge in 1988 when I joined, and I thought it was stupid then. When did they get rid of it? Oh, and whoever modded me off topic, how can it be offtopic when it is a question for Badnarik, like what was asked for?
When you join the LP they make you sign a pledge thing stating that you dont agree with the initiation of force or something. Is'nt this pretty weird making people sign a pledge stating you dont approve of the initiation of force by forcing them to sign a pledge stating that they are against forcing people to do things?
If you want to restore the power of the individual, you have to look in the right place. I would suggest Michael Badnarik and the Libertarian Party. Some of them are kooks, but at least they are constiutional kooks. He's also anti-war and anti DMCA as well as anti Patriot Act.
www.badnarik.org
and yes, obviously I'm gonna vote for the guy. I'm allowed to shill for my candidate the same way you can shill for Nader, right?
meta mod +1, calling a spade a spade.
A more successful Apple is good for me and my G5, not bad. According to your philosophy Sony should have gone tits up a few years ago.
How about you stop with the FUD instead of that other guy?
If this little tiny company can have a bios that allows USB booting why cant Intel? Maybe not a high priority but it sure is nice on occasion. Just set the usb device to be the first boot device and blammmo it's booted.
Thats only if you desire maximum ease of use with minimum setup and running hassles. The same ease of use the regular G5's have is built into all their server stuff too. I'm sure the linux dudes will have something to say about that.....
I would take a really hard look at the ready made bio-information cluster they have all setup, and just load yer software as needed and off you go. But that's me. Some people seem to like futzing with computers.....After 20+ years doing that at work, I just wanna do what I wanna do when I wanna do it. Apple makes that easy.
I get paid to deal with headaches, I'm not gonna deal with them at home too.