It is censorship. These are big stories that deserve widespread coverage, yet none happened. Why do you think that's the case? Because the news agencies don't want to rock the boat. Saying something against the president would get them labelled "leftist commie pinkos" by the right-wingers out there (who, funnily enough, control the purse strings). Those agencies would receive less advertising money, which is what they need to continue.
If you think the only form of censorship is when the government issues a decree banning speech which could be considered anti-US is just ridiculous. Anything that impedes someone's desire/ability to report a story is censorship. It's that simple. Of course, if you agree with those doing the censorship, it's just "good policy".
This isn't about the government stepping in and punishing people for running a story, but the current political climate that makes it difficult for agencies to run the story. That's the problem. Bush would call it "trickle-down censorship". The Government makes it clear they don't like dissenters. Those who support the government through indoctrination (read: life-long republicans) vehemently defend their leader's position. That means you end up with media agencies scared or unwilling to run a story in case they lose money through advertising sponsorship, or through a rival network saying "LOOK! they're UnAmerican - they admitted it themselves! They hate America!".
Of course it's democratic in orientation - the government is Republican. The right-wing stories are run every minute because they're a safe bet. They don't go against the government (read: FCC), and no-one's going to get fired for running them.
Most media in the US is right-leaning at the moment, to curry favour with the powers that be. They have to, otherwise their controversial standpoint makes them unattractive to sponsors, which means they get pulled. It's that simple. "Don't rock the boat" = "You'll get paid this week". Those stories are "left-leaning" simply because the government is right-leaning, and the main media outlets are pushing their agenda. It's that simple. These lists are trying to get to the truth, not push a specific agenda.
Hell yes. They're heads and shoulders above the rest of the media outlets. They're the only places I'd turn for accurate reporting when I'm in the US (mainly because they use lots of BBC material, and the BBC is pretty cool).
During the last gulf war, PBS had BBC World Service news shows on, most of the time. It was so refreshing watching a less biassed news source actually report on the war, as opposed to faithfully showing viewers what the Pentagon has asked them to. It seems journalistic integrity is dead on most network TV news shows in the US. I mean, you get cooking segments on the news in LA. COOKING! wtf??
You're citing a freerepublic page in your argument. There goes all your credibility.... *poof!*
If you must know, the claims of the "swift boat veterans for pulling stuff out of their asses" claims have been challenged. And guess what? They're about as accurate as bush's grammar. Check out Spinsanity.org and read a little. You'll see the ties between the Republican party and the "Swift" veterans are more than coincidental. Legal aid, financial aid, you name it. As for their claims, most of them were in Vietnam at the same time, not on the same boat.
Kerry actually went to Vietnam. Bush chickened out, and behaved like a complete ass. Now, Republicans are trying to diminish his achievements (and the achievements of every individual who's ever earned a purple heart - not very Military-Friendly, is it?). Even McCain said the tactic was ridiculously underhanded. It's funny, seeing as Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney et al haven't served a day in combat, yet they'll quickly pour all their collective efforts into trying to refute or somehow diminish Kerry's record. It's pathetic.
Here's an idea - why doesn't the Bush campaign focus on actual issues? The War on Terror? Oh, wait - it's fucked. America is more at danger now than on 9/10, has many fewer friends, and lots more enemies. How about the economy? Shit. That nice pre-Bush surplus turned into a massive, humongous defecit, which us and our kids (and most likely their kids) will be bailing out for years to come. Jobs? Nope. Millions upon millions of jobs have been lost under Bush.
This is what it boils down to - Bush has screwed up the US, and a good part of the world, and the only way he can get public support is to attack Kerry's war record, as it's an emotive subject and (even though completely devoid of politics) is something Bush can use to leverage support from military-friendly Americans. If you think that's how a political party should act, you really should read a book or two.
If you get modded down, it's more due to you spouting bullshit than having a controversial view;)
The media is choosing which stories they run, pandering to their network directors and not basing their decisions on how important the story is to the public. It wreeks of unprofessionalism, and is total self-censorship. There is a climate in the US where putting a controversial, anti-establishment point forward ends up in one of two scenarios: The publisher draws attention to an important point, which due to the increased light on the subject, independent action is taken to right whatever wrong was uncovered, or the publisher is drawn over hot coals by their advertisers, and the competing outlets use their controversial stance against them. Unfortunately, the former is a mere pipe-dream at the moment. The cut-throat nature of US media (as in advertising-funded) means the news outlets are more geared towards pleasing their advertisers as opposed to actually having some integrity and reporting on what the public needs to hear. As this list shows, self-censorship is common in the US media. After all, how many US news reports did you hear about the floridian list of 90,000 supposed "felons" during the 2000 election? Or the ridiculously blatant ties between the company that made the list, the person that requested it, the governor of that state and the current president? Of course not. That would make them seem unAmerican, or simply unacceptable, and Carl's Jr. won't advertise their double bacon western cheeseburger on the 8 o'clock news any more.
The stories aren't "pulled" - agencies just don't want the hassle of reporting something that could, and most likely would, result in them being in hot water. They just go with the safe bets of some footage of US soldiers running across a desert looking cool.
These stories are pretty massive. In any country with a decent media, they should have been EVERYWHERE. That sort of crap doesn't stand in most other places (where critical speech of the head of state isn't frowned upon, or somehow inherently "evil"). The fact these stories were only touched upon should be a real eye-opener and at least make you ask yourself why...
How are you going to protect yourself from it? Carry a cellphone jammer with you at all times? Isn't that illegal? What if you were using your phone - you'd have to turn off your jammer, and then the "GPS" phone would call home. I fail to see how that's going to help anyone...
And to them, you look like some tinfoil-hat nutter... I don't see why you're automatically right and they're wrong. I mean, if I'm in public, I accept I'm in public. You can't have privacy in public. When you walk down the street, do you blind anyone who looks at you, in case they all get together and work out where you are? Of course not;)
Where you live, maybe. Most countries on earth are populated by rational people. If someone's killed someone else, is it better to kill them, or show them the pain they caused to the victim's family? Is it better to stoop to their level, or take the moral high ground and try to turn that murderer into a functioning member of society? Oh, it's America. Fire up the chair, boys! We got a sizzler! Yeeee-haw!
Lets put it another way - if a member of your family killed someone else, would you want the government to kill them, or to try and help them? Yeah... it's strange how right-wing views crumble when it's someone you love in need of state help, isn't it?
I understand what you're saying, but this isn't exactly an eye-opener. We all value privacy, we just have differing views on what should be private and what shouldn't. To me, when I'm out in public, I've recinded all rights I have to privacy. After all, it's called being in public, not private;). CCTV, police, whatever. It doesn't matter. People don't have a right to complete privacy outside, as that would entail no-one being able to look at anyone else without prior written consent, which is just stupid. If you want privacy, stay in your private home, and close the windows. Any invasion into that space is truly grounds for concern. Someone being able to tell where you are outside isn't.
Some nutjob actively tracking your car is ridiculous, though.
When you get within 6 inches of their car, you'll get a beep:) RFID isn't that scary. Shit, you can track someone using a license plate better than an RFID chip;)
Avalon is the name given to the window manager, effectively. DirectX (or whatever it'll be called then) will provide the interface for the hardware and drivers to achieve it. So yes, Avalon==Quartz (but not as advanced as Avalon), and OpenGL==DirectX:)
$4,200 isn't $5,000. In fact, it's closer to $3,500 than $5,000, which shows that "Dave420's law" (people always round up/down statistics to prove their point) is still alive and kicking;)
Not by a long shot, as (for example) a 2x500mhz computer won't run as fast as a 1x1000mhz computer. It would be cheaper, but nowhere near as good for gamers (the intended audience)
Water-cooling, which isn't that complicated. Anyway, they're overclocking a 3.2ghz chip to 3.8, which isn't a huge increase.
Seriously, comparing it to heat problems in a notebook is pretty silly, as there simply isn't the same amount of space available for a cooling system. I know what you're saying, but the comparison is pretty shaky;)
If you really need to pay all that money for an education, perhaps you shouldn't do it? I mean, it makes no sense to pay so much for something that's not even essential, just to get a job that pays marginally more than one you can get without a degree/etc. Don't start blaming anyone if you personally make your job so expensive:) I wouldn't be pissed if I ran a sandwich shop, charged $400 per sandwich, and no-one ate there.
I saw your point, fundamentally understood it, and tried to show how you missed my point. From that answer, I can see that you missed it again.
Wages in india, if they were adjusted to the US cost of living, would still be lower. IT jobs in the US are paid more than they are worth, whereas in India they are not. That's my entire point.
If IT workers don't want their jobs going overseas, they should simply make themselves unreplaceable. Do something they simply can't do in India. Something that makes your work far superior.
The jobs are going abroad because it's more expensive for Americans to do them. That is no-one's fault but Americas, so making it illegal to move jobs abroad is just ridiculous. America would be outraged if the shoe was on the other foot...
"Thumb-scratch decorated husband". Right. As opposed to Bush, who was pissing on cars and shouting abuse at policemen while that "husband" was actually fighting in Vietnam. Bush is the pussy, not Kerry. I mean, at least think for yourself here, not some "Swift boat veterans for whatever the whitehouse wants to say" advert. People like you are why other people want to park jetliners in your skyscrapers.
$90k for an IT job is overpaid. If you spent $90k on your education, you paid too much. You can do IT work without that. That's no excuse for expecting a higher-than-market-value salary and expecting your boss to not give your job to someone who'll do it for a more reasonable rate. You really can't have your $90k-cake and eat it. Less vacation? What does that have to do with it? I guess the fact there are 50 stars on your flag means you should get preferential treatment too?:-P
I hear your arguments, but I feel you've missed the big point. American jobs are expensive. Indian ones aren't. The American Dream, capitalism, demands the jobs go abroad. You can't have it both ways.
You've missed the point of my argument. Of course I know the cost of living in India is tiny compared to that in the US. I'd be a fool to ignore such a fact when arguing this point.
My point is, to reiterate: US tech jobs are overpaid. Overpaid compared to other American sectors. Seeing as American Farmers can't code C++ as well as Indian IT-outsourcing companies, the jobs go to India. The jobs aren't intrinsically "American" jobs, but just jobs. They go to whoever can do them best and for the least amount of money, or who can add the most value to their service. Seeing as American IT workers add no value and charge more than Indian workers, the jobs go over there. It's either that, or US IT companies become so woefully underfunded that they all collapse causing even bigger headaches for American IT workers.
Slashdot Mirror
If you think the only form of censorship is when the government issues a decree banning speech which could be considered anti-US is just ridiculous. Anything that impedes someone's desire/ability to report a story is censorship. It's that simple. Of course, if you agree with those doing the censorship, it's just "good policy".
Of course it's democratic in orientation - the government is Republican. The right-wing stories are run every minute because they're a safe bet. They don't go against the government (read: FCC), and no-one's going to get fired for running them.
Beyond CNN like Fox, for example? :-P
During the last gulf war, PBS had BBC World Service news shows on, most of the time. It was so refreshing watching a less biassed news source actually report on the war, as opposed to faithfully showing viewers what the Pentagon has asked them to. It seems journalistic integrity is dead on most network TV news shows in the US. I mean, you get cooking segments on the news in LA. COOKING! wtf??
If you must know, the claims of the "swift boat veterans for pulling stuff out of their asses" claims have been challenged. And guess what? They're about as accurate as bush's grammar. Check out Spinsanity.org and read a little. You'll see the ties between the Republican party and the "Swift" veterans are more than coincidental. Legal aid, financial aid, you name it. As for their claims, most of them were in Vietnam at the same time, not on the same boat.
Anyway, it's all moot, as while Kerry was getting shot at, Bush was in the US doing cocaine, boasting of his drinking and pissing on cars and abusing police officers. Of course, I wait for your response outlining how those are actions befitting the future President of the USA.
Kerry actually went to Vietnam. Bush chickened out, and behaved like a complete ass. Now, Republicans are trying to diminish his achievements (and the achievements of every individual who's ever earned a purple heart - not very Military-Friendly, is it?). Even McCain said the tactic was ridiculously underhanded. It's funny, seeing as Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney et al haven't served a day in combat, yet they'll quickly pour all their collective efforts into trying to refute or somehow diminish Kerry's record. It's pathetic.
Here's an idea - why doesn't the Bush campaign focus on actual issues? The War on Terror? Oh, wait - it's fucked. America is more at danger now than on 9/10, has many fewer friends, and lots more enemies. How about the economy? Shit. That nice pre-Bush surplus turned into a massive, humongous defecit, which us and our kids (and most likely their kids) will be bailing out for years to come. Jobs? Nope. Millions upon millions of jobs have been lost under Bush.
This is what it boils down to - Bush has screwed up the US, and a good part of the world, and the only way he can get public support is to attack Kerry's war record, as it's an emotive subject and (even though completely devoid of politics) is something Bush can use to leverage support from military-friendly Americans. If you think that's how a political party should act, you really should read a book or two.
If you get modded down, it's more due to you spouting bullshit than having a controversial view ;)
The stories aren't "pulled" - agencies just don't want the hassle of reporting something that could, and most likely would, result in them being in hot water. They just go with the safe bets of some footage of US soldiers running across a desert looking cool.
These stories are pretty massive. In any country with a decent media, they should have been EVERYWHERE. That sort of crap doesn't stand in most other places (where critical speech of the head of state isn't frowned upon, or somehow inherently "evil"). The fact these stories were only touched upon should be a real eye-opener and at least make you ask yourself why...
How are you going to protect yourself from it? Carry a cellphone jammer with you at all times? Isn't that illegal? What if you were using your phone - you'd have to turn off your jammer, and then the "GPS" phone would call home. I fail to see how that's going to help anyone...
And to them, you look like some tinfoil-hat nutter... I don't see why you're automatically right and they're wrong. I mean, if I'm in public, I accept I'm in public. You can't have privacy in public. When you walk down the street, do you blind anyone who looks at you, in case they all get together and work out where you are? Of course not ;)
It's "Et voila", not whalla. Why do so many people have problems with that? :-P
Lets put it another way - if a member of your family killed someone else, would you want the government to kill them, or to try and help them? Yeah... it's strange how right-wing views crumble when it's someone you love in need of state help, isn't it?
Some nutjob actively tracking your car is ridiculous, though.
When you get within 6 inches of their car, you'll get a beep :) RFID isn't that scary. Shit, you can track someone using a license plate better than an RFID chip ;)
If you trust your kid enough to drive a killing machine around a road, you should trust them enough to keep you informed of their location...
Only on /. can a perfectly on-topic post be modded off-topic. I love it.
Avalon is the name given to the window manager, effectively. DirectX (or whatever it'll be called then) will provide the interface for the hardware and drivers to achieve it. So yes, Avalon==Quartz (but not as advanced as Avalon), and OpenGL==DirectX :)
It's for gamers. G5s don't have as many games for them, so how would it benefit a gamer? "Here's $1,500 to buy some games that don't exist" ;)
$4,200 isn't $5,000. In fact, it's closer to $3,500 than $5,000, which shows that "Dave420's law" (people always round up/down statistics to prove their point) is still alive and kicking ;)
Not by a long shot, as (for example) a 2x500mhz computer won't run as fast as a 1x1000mhz computer. It would be cheaper, but nowhere near as good for gamers (the intended audience)
Seriously, comparing it to heat problems in a notebook is pretty silly, as there simply isn't the same amount of space available for a cooling system. I know what you're saying, but the comparison is pretty shaky ;)
If you really need to pay all that money for an education, perhaps you shouldn't do it? I mean, it makes no sense to pay so much for something that's not even essential, just to get a job that pays marginally more than one you can get without a degree/etc. Don't start blaming anyone if you personally make your job so expensive :) I wouldn't be pissed if I ran a sandwich shop, charged $400 per sandwich, and no-one ate there.
Wages in india, if they were adjusted to the US cost of living, would still be lower. IT jobs in the US are paid more than they are worth, whereas in India they are not. That's my entire point.
If IT workers don't want their jobs going overseas, they should simply make themselves unreplaceable. Do something they simply can't do in India. Something that makes your work far superior.
The jobs are going abroad because it's more expensive for Americans to do them. That is no-one's fault but Americas, so making it illegal to move jobs abroad is just ridiculous. America would be outraged if the shoe was on the other foot...
They said Avalon would be released for XP, before longhorn's release...
"Thumb-scratch decorated husband". Right. As opposed to Bush, who was pissing on cars and shouting abuse at policemen while that "husband" was actually fighting in Vietnam. Bush is the pussy, not Kerry. I mean, at least think for yourself here, not some "Swift boat veterans for whatever the whitehouse wants to say" advert. People like you are why other people want to park jetliners in your skyscrapers.
I hear your arguments, but I feel you've missed the big point. American jobs are expensive. Indian ones aren't. The American Dream, capitalism, demands the jobs go abroad. You can't have it both ways.
My point is, to reiterate: US tech jobs are overpaid. Overpaid compared to other American sectors. Seeing as American Farmers can't code C++ as well as Indian IT-outsourcing companies, the jobs go to India. The jobs aren't intrinsically "American" jobs, but just jobs. They go to whoever can do them best and for the least amount of money, or who can add the most value to their service. Seeing as American IT workers add no value and charge more than Indian workers, the jobs go over there. It's either that, or US IT companies become so woefully underfunded that they all collapse causing even bigger headaches for American IT workers.