What is wrong with voting for who you want to win? Notice the candidate's fanatical insistance (he mentioned it at least three times for every question) on run-off elections. So that he can vote for Kerry and himself so that Kerry will win. And now you too. Why not vote for the candidate you actually want to win?
In short this candidate is just as much a politician as the others. Full of symbols that have more to do with adherence to ideology than with solutions to real problems.
How does he compare to the two options that are presented to us? Both the Dems and the GOP are not representing much of the population anymore. Their main goal is to not alienate votes. I seriously doubt that the Dems or GOP match your views best. This is why I despise the two-party system.
Your views do not match the Greens. Find a party that better match your views, whether Reform, Libertarian, etc... and help end the two-party system.
I vote for Greens because they've got a pretty centrist - at least in a European context - fiscal policy and very liberal social agenda (drugs, sex, immigration and religion).
Maybe there's something wrong with my views of what liberal and conservative are, but I always thought the Greens had a pretty conservative outlook on drugs, sex, and religion (maybe not immigration...) Pretty much, keep the government out of it!!!
The Republicans are NOT conservative. I consider myself more of a conservative American than a liberal one when it comes to government, and I have lost all respect for the Big-Government, Control the Population, Republican party we have today. And that is why I am voting Kerry
BTW, I voted for Nader in 2000 (I knew California was going Democratic), I'm a registered Green member, and for most elections for local/state government I vote Green or Libertarian depending on the candidates running.
Also in the news, Sony will finally start making a digital music portable that plays MP3s. Their present players only read their proprietary ATRAC3 format, forcing you to transcode any MP3 files you want to play on them."
Why do I have a Sony CD/MP3 player sitting next to me that I purchased a little over a year ago????
Managers did exist before the industrial revolution. They might not have been called managers then, but when people worked through the day, they had the equivalent of a "boss" that told them what to do.
And yes, I still think it holds true. If the country is to be run by the "people", then policy makers need to be part of the "people". Not some political aristrocrat that has friends mostly consisting of other aristrocrats and has not lived a normal everyday life for decades.
Being a politician should not be something one is for a lifelong career. The founders of our country all considered their job something other than "politician" while starting this country.
The country should be run by the people, for the people. A lifetime in politics puts you out of touch as to what the "people" really need.
The MDA (Muscular Dystrophy Association) has been doing a lot of research on using gene therapy for MD. (I only know this because one of my best friends was told when he was 12 that he'll prolly not live past 16 years of age. He made it to 18 before his body gave out.)
It's been a number of years since I've read anything about it, but last I remember there were two issues with using gene therapy to treat MD.
The gene needed to counter-act MD is pretty big. It is hard to fit the necessary genetic code into a virus. (If you don't know, viruses are the easiest way to insert genetic code into a person)
The second issue is that many people can get sick from the type of virus used to deliver the genetic payload. The viruses aren't bad for the body, but the immune system cannot tell the difference between a good human-engineered virus, and a bad disease causing virus. What this means is that gene therapy is best for people who are not in the later stages of MD (ie, people who can still walk).
As I said, it's been a while since I read any recent research to treating MD, so I would definately appreciate it if someone knowledgeable could provide more information.
I RTFA. Intriguing, but it would be a huge struggle for Google to become like anything in the article. There's too much money in having the right information at the right time.
"Now XML has gone nowhere except as a set of popular libraries for cross-language data serialization..."
XML is still getting more popular and more accepted with each passing month.
The biggest issues are that there are a few monstrous companies out there that want to control the standard of how information is shared, and mutate XML into some proprietary form that their company can control.
XML is a good thing, like most standards. Standards can fall short at times, especially when the uber-companies start trying to fight for control over them. I believe that this fight for control will do more to prevent the easy transfer of data, more than any problem with XML itself.
Precisely. I love Google because they have no bias. I just checked Google News and they have the following headline on one of their top Sci/Tech stories:
Microsoft Deploys Newsbot To Track Down Headlines
The Google newsbot put a front page link up about Microsoft's new newsbot.
Do you think that Microsoft's newsbot would do the same for Google's bot?
It seems to me that the driver falls into the manslaughter category, which includes vehicular manslaughter. If he were to be convicted of murder, it would mean that all drunk driving fatalaties could now be classified as murders as well.
I am not a lawyer, but I do know this:
Killing someone while driving drunk will get you charged with MURDER in some states, not vehicular manslaughter.
It's not the Webster definition of murder, but I'm sure people who are facing murder charges care a *lot* more about what the courts think, rather than what Webster thinks...
You know, I kind of hope that a state with their beta electronic voting systems screw up again. Imagine what would happen if the election went to the US Supreme Court twice in a row. I would hope then at that point Americans would be FORCED to think about voting, the amount of corruption that takes place, and (most importantly) just think in general about who they put in office.
In that case we could avoid having to deal with Slashdot stories like this. (I am glad it is on Slashdot though, Americans especially need to take note of this guy)
Then again, I think I'm just an optimist... The above is just wishful thinking.
Re:Diebold *BLOCKED* in California
on
Open Voting at OSCON
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Sorry for replying to my own post, but I forgot to quote this nugget from the article:
Panel members also recommended that a secretary of state's office report released Wednesday, detailing alleged failings of Diebold in California, be forwarded to the attorney general's office to consider civil and criminal charges against the company.
"I'm disgusted with the actions of this company," said panel member Marc Carrel, an assistant secretary of state.
Diebold *BLOCKED* in California
on
Open Voting at OSCON
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Pretty much, California's Voting Systems and Procedures Panel decided by a UNANIMOUS vote of 8 - 0 to block counties from using Diebold machines for the November elections.
I'm normally very cynical when it comes to politics, but it's nice to see my state get (somewhat) of a clue.
This is just a result of standard statistics. This has been known in Gambling for some time. If a game has a 50/50 chance, and you start losing, you are most likely to keep on losing. You are starting the next game that has a 50/50 chance of winning, however, *YOU ARE ALREADY LOSING*. The same goes on the flip side. If you are already winning, and you continue a game where you have a 50/50 chance of winning, *YOU ARE ALREADY WINNING*
Think about this. The coin first lands on tails. On the next two throws, it's 50/50 chance of tails or heads. Thus, if it landed once on tails, and once on heads, you have 2/3 tosses tails, and 1/3 toss heads.
However, statistics also says, the more you play the game, the more the overall outcome will get close to 50/50. However, if you start out losing, you are more likely to stay losing. You will just get closer and closer to 50/50 even if you don't win overall.
This is one of the number one myths of gambling. Just because you've been losing, doesn't mean your "luck" will change and you can start winning. In fact, you are more likely to stay a loser overall.
What if instead of "Lindows" it was called "X-Lindows"? X-Lindows could show its roots from the x-windowing system. Would that "X" in front of Lindows protect them from Microsoft?
Microsoft is a made-up word. Windows is a generic term that has been in computer techie use since before Microsoft Windows was ever a product.
Microsoft can trademark "Microsoft". They never should have been able to trademark "Windows" in a computing context.
Slashdot Mirror
How long before they have to shut off comments or block users en masse because the comments and postings are all negative.
I RTFA. SCO will not be allowing the public to post comments.
Where did you get the 25 cent figure from? I guess it's important that you have a fee for it. Free ramen gets you a free trip to court...
What is wrong with voting for who you want to win? Notice the candidate's fanatical insistance (he mentioned it at least three times for every question) on run-off elections. So that he can vote for Kerry and himself so that Kerry will win. And now you too. Why not vote for the candidate you actually want to win?
See: Florida 2000
How does he compare to the two options that are presented to us? Both the Dems and the GOP are not representing much of the population anymore. Their main goal is to not alienate votes. I seriously doubt that the Dems or GOP match your views best. This is why I despise the two-party system.
Your views do not match the Greens. Find a party that better match your views, whether Reform, Libertarian, etc... and help end the two-party system.
Maybe there's something wrong with my views of what liberal and conservative are, but I always thought the Greens had a pretty conservative outlook on drugs, sex, and religion (maybe not immigration...) Pretty much, keep the government out of it!!!
The Republicans are NOT conservative. I consider myself more of a conservative American than a liberal one when it comes to government, and I have lost all respect for the Big-Government, Control the Population, Republican party we have today. And that is why I am voting Kerry
BTW, I voted for Nader in 2000 (I knew California was going Democratic), I'm a registered Green member, and for most elections for local/state government I vote Green or Libertarian depending on the candidates running.
Why do I have a Sony CD/MP3 player sitting next to me that I purchased a little over a year ago????
Managers did exist before the industrial revolution. They might not have been called managers then, but when people worked through the day, they had the equivalent of a "boss" that told them what to do.
And yes, I still think it holds true. If the country is to be run by the "people", then policy makers need to be part of the "people". Not some political aristrocrat that has friends mostly consisting of other aristrocrats and has not lived a normal everyday life for decades.
The MDA (Muscular Dystrophy Association) has been doing a lot of research on using gene therapy for MD. (I only know this because one of my best friends was told when he was 12 that he'll prolly not live past 16 years of age. He made it to 18 before his body gave out.)
It's been a number of years since I've read anything about it, but last I remember there were two issues with using gene therapy to treat MD.
As I said, it's been a while since I read any recent research to treating MD, so I would definately appreciate it if someone knowledgeable could provide more information.
I RTFA. Intriguing, but it would be a huge struggle for Google to become like anything in the article. There's too much money in having the right information at the right time.
XML is still getting more popular and more accepted with each passing month.
The biggest issues are that there are a few monstrous companies out there that want to control the standard of how information is shared, and mutate XML into some proprietary form that their company can control.
XML is a good thing, like most standards. Standards can fall short at times, especially when the uber-companies start trying to fight for control over them. I believe that this fight for control will do more to prevent the easy transfer of data, more than any problem with XML itself.
Precisely. I love Google because they have no bias. I just checked Google News and they have the following headline on one of their top Sci/Tech stories:
The Google newsbot put a front page link up about Microsoft's new newsbot.
Do you think that Microsoft's newsbot would do the same for Google's bot?
>I am not a lawyer, but I do know this:
Killing someone while driving drunk will get you charged with MURDER in some states, not vehicular manslaughter.
It's not the Webster definition of murder, but I'm sure people who are facing murder charges care a *lot* more about what the courts think, rather than what Webster thinks...
You know, I kind of hope that a state with their beta electronic voting systems screw up again. Imagine what would happen if the election went to the US Supreme Court twice in a row. I would hope then at that point Americans would be FORCED to think about voting, the amount of corruption that takes place, and (most importantly) just think in general about who they put in office.
In that case we could avoid having to deal with Slashdot stories like this. (I am glad it is on Slashdot though, Americans especially need to take note of this guy)
Then again, I think I'm just an optimist... The above is just wishful thinking.
Sorry for replying to my own post, but I forgot to quote this nugget from the article:
Article Here
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3 4424-2004Apr22.html
Pretty much, California's Voting Systems and Procedures Panel decided by a UNANIMOUS vote of 8 - 0 to block counties from using Diebold machines for the November elections.
I'm normally very cynical when it comes to politics, but it's nice to see my state get (somewhat) of a clue.
Only Symbolic because this product will get pulled of networks as soon as it is put on.
This is just a result of standard statistics. This has been known in Gambling for some time. If a game has a 50/50 chance, and you start losing, you are most likely to keep on losing. You are starting the next game that has a 50/50 chance of winning, however, *YOU ARE ALREADY LOSING*. The same goes on the flip side. If you are already winning, and you continue a game where you have a 50/50 chance of winning, *YOU ARE ALREADY WINNING*
Think about this. The coin first lands on tails. On the next two throws, it's 50/50 chance of tails or heads. Thus, if it landed once on tails, and once on heads, you have 2/3 tosses tails, and 1/3 toss heads.
However, statistics also says, the more you play the game, the more the overall outcome will get close to 50/50. However, if you start out losing, you are more likely to stay losing. You will just get closer and closer to 50/50 even if you don't win overall.
This is one of the number one myths of gambling. Just because you've been losing, doesn't mean your "luck" will change and you can start winning. In fact, you are more likely to stay a loser overall.
What if instead of "Lindows" it was called "X-Lindows"? X-Lindows could show its roots from the x-windowing system. Would that "X" in front of Lindows protect them from Microsoft?
Microsoft is a made-up word. Windows is a generic term that has been in computer techie use since before Microsoft Windows was ever a product.
Microsoft can trademark "Microsoft". They never should have been able to trademark "Windows" in a computing context.
Just to let you know, if the /. editors posted a story about HP shipping Mandrake, It would prolly be considered a dupe.
How do you know Lindows is playing of Microsoft Windows? Remember X-Windows? That had been around much before Microsoft had anything windows based.
What of instead of Lindows they called it X-Lindows, as it being based of *nix software? Would Microsoft then still have a case in your opinion?