If WikiLeaks primarily leaks things about the US, that is actually a GOOD thing. Doing so will help to force the US to enforce the laws on big banks (as opposed to wink win nudge nudge letting them off), ditto for big pharma, the military, etc. The US will be better off if we are a law-abiding, honest country. Hiding corruption does us no good.
I want the US to be an honest country. If Europe or Asia is dishonest in comparison, because WikiLeaks ignores them, all the better for us.
Actually the paper says, "we where inspired by prior work on extensible forwarding planes" and merely names Click as one example. Extensible forwarding planes and doing software-based routers have been around a long time.
It isn't clear why this article was posted now, XORP project has been around for years already. It also has not made a dent in Cisco's business (nor was it intended to).
I can understand the Greens doing this (being socialists, they like Kerry more than Bush) but this is an incredibly stupid thing for the LP to do. The LP is just marginalizing themselves by donning tin hats. Even liberal rags like Slate have admitted that Bush won, fair and square.
I am saddened to see the LP making fools of themselves, because I agree with a lot of libertarian ideas and vote Libertarian sometimes.
I'd started writing up a long post, but in the the end decided it isn't worth it. My response at least contained two specific links for where one could get more information. Yours essentially contained assertions only, and yet you end with criticism that mine is the one in denial, factless, etc. I think our basic thought process as to what are facts, what is information, and what is opinion is so different that we probably can't feasibly communicate.
...still looking for a good, thoughtful pro-Kerry blog that isn't just sarcasm and handwaving.
The reason many of the arguments in these threads attack the article selection is because that is the issue - the article selection being quite biased.
That being said, there are plenty of thoughtful, well reasoned arguments for Bush out there, if people take the time to look for them. Try Hugh Hewitt for example. I've actually been looking for thoughtful, well reasoned bloggers for Kerry and had little success. Many of them are pure propaganda (e.g. Michael Moore) or are mostly just sarcasm and snide comments with little real substance (e.g. Joshua Marshall).
As to Bush being a liar, a proxy, or a poor leader, you would need to be more specific to get a good counter argument. In regards to the accusation of Bush being a low IQ, there is evidence that Kerry's is lower.
A/. poll would only prove that bored computer people have a certain opinion. Generalizing from that to the "tendency" of the general population's intelligence is silly. Maybe/. is mostly slackers and all the really hardworking, intelligent computer people don't bother reading/posting/moderating here, in which case the Kerry support is simply a symptom that lazy computer people support Kerry. Of course, this theory I just made up is entirely lacking in factual basis - just as the theory that bright people choose kerry is lacking in any solid factual basis.
A significant number of commentators are pretty immature, in that they assume bright people must be anti-Bush. Part of maturity is realizing those who disagree with you are not necessarily stupid.
Orrin Hatch, Sponsor (R)
Cosponsors:
Sen Alexander, Lamar [TN] - (R) - 7/15/2004
Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] - (D) - 6/22/2004
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] - (D) - 7/7/2004
Sen Daschle, Thomas A. [SD] - (D) 6/22/2004
Sen Frist, Bill [TN] - (R) - 6/22/2004
Sen Graham, Bob [FL] - (D) - 9/22/2004
Sen Graham, Lindsey O. [SC] - (R) - 6/22/2004
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] - (D) - 6/22/2004
Sen Sarbanes, Paul S. [MD] - (D) - 7/12/2004
Sen Stabenow, Debbie [MI] - (D) - 7/15/2004
The Democrats are just as much in the pocket of Hollywood and willing to get rid of Betamax as the Republicans are.
I think the study actually has several flaws which make it difficult to conclude the viewers are smarter. For instance, it could be that newspaper readers are flipping straight to the sports section. Sports fanatics don't tune into the Daily Show or to O'Reilly, so the newspaper readership comparison isn't too relevant to the relative smartness. Ditto for network news - at 6pm and 10pm network news is on a lot of channels for people who don't have cable, maybe we are just seeing that audience's smartness, which again, isn't the same audience as O'Reilly (which is only on the FNC cable channel) or the Daily Show.
I called my two Senators today (Oregon - Wyden and Smith) and it was incredibly easy. I told them "I am a constituent of Senator Wyden/Smith oppose the INDUCE act because it stifles technology innovation and will lead to frivolous lawsuits". One of them asked my zip code. Both thanked me for calling. Total time spent was about 1 minute.
Any American citizen who has a DVR (like MythTV), a DVD-RW or CDR-Burner, or a variety of other such devices should take a single minute out of their day and call in. The INDUCE act sucks and/. is a pretty big voting block. Make your voice heard!
First, the title of the summary says "Daily Show viewers best CNN viewers" - which is incorrect, CNN viewers where not included in the quiz.
Second, the summary says, "Daily Show viewers are better informed than viewers of [O'Reilly's] show", which is also incorrect. The CNN article states that more Daily Show viewers are 4+ years college educated and $100K+ salaried, but it says nothing about who is more informed between O'Reilly and the Daily Show. The Daily Show viewers are more informed than Letterman etc.
Story submitters and mods need to do a better job and actually read the articles they submit.
So you admit that the Slashdot postings tend to be left leaning (since they are not including "Republican Spin")?
This is actually very telling - even left wingers are essentially admitting that slashdot's politics posts are left-leaning. This is of course in direct contradiction with CmdrTaco's claim that the politics section would be promised fair with story selection.
The editors need to end this failed experiment - it is clear that fairness is not being implemented.
If Carter is so wonderful and non-partisan, why hasn't he spoken out about the abuses being perpetrated in Oregon? How about the dead Democrat voters in Chicago?
Funny how this wonderful man only speaks out about alleged abuses that hurt democrats, not the ones that hurt republicans.
Great post. Lots of good information that was not included in the original story. Well done!
I expect the mods will mark your post as flamebait, which seems to be their reaction to anything that doesn't agree with their political notions. Note to moderators: Disagreement over politics does not automatically make it flamebait. Shocking concept I guess.
I agree. The source article is flamebait and not news for nerds. Out of context usage of quotes to mislead people is not news, and most nerds should be intelligent enough to realize that such quotes have an information value of zero.
Where is the metamoderator option to mark CmdrTaco as being tediously left leaning with a terrible taste in stories?
So people who don't agree with you about Bush v. Kerry must be not be observant and don't think clearly?
There are plenty of extremely intelligent people I know who are voting for Bush (or against Kerry, as the case may be). There are plenty of extremely intelligent people I know who are voting for Kerry (or against Bush, as the case may be).
Only very insecure people and fanatics convince themselves that people who disagree with them else must be stupid.
The parent was not a troll and whoever moderated it as a troll should be ashamed of themselves. The parent was commentary on the story and on Slashdot's increasingly left-leaning story postings.
Leave the politics to the political blogs. Kerry vs. Bush isn't news for nerds, and "the world loves Kerry" is Politics for Democrat Nerds and is getting tiresome.
Actually they are not being "put forth [as] standard". The experimental drafts track (which is where the ADs and chairs just consigned the various proposals) is most definitely not the standards track.
All the various proposals are now considered (by the IETF) as experiments. They are being documented as experimental RFCs and the various authors have been told to go off and try them out and prove they work.
Maybe in a year or two the IETF will look and say, "ok, it is clear that solution X is working and the interested parties are willing to compromise on something instead of being such jerks about it" - at that point the IETF might recharter the WG and move one of the drafts to the standards track (but don't hold your breath).
Re:Stupid site not worthy of slashdot
on
Mock World Vote
·
· Score: 1
You are right, no need for the gymnastics I described. The site is even more stupid than I thought.
Stupid site not worthy of slashdot
on
Mock World Vote
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The mock world vote site is a stupid waste of time for many reasons:
As with all web polls, it is totally unscientific.
There is no real protection from people setting up vote-bots. Even kapchas (sp) don't offer real protection.
There is no protection from people lying about their age, gender, or other factors.
The source country can be manipulated if one has access to computers in different geographics. At most large companies this is easy - In my case I just change the proxy firewall my browser goes through to proxy.(country).(mycompanynamewhichi'mnotdisclosin g).com and voila, I am a voter from UK, or Israel, or any of several other countries our intranet spans.
Given all the above, and the lack of information or facts the site gives, posting it by the story pickers shows at best poor judgement for story selection, or at worst the story pickers are as desparate about Kerry's implosion as the main stream media is and are frantic to put up anything that supports Kerry.
Slashdot Mirror
NSA apologist trope #57: [insert foreign country that has no 4th amendment] routinely does the same thing we do.
This is one of the dumbest arguments in the NSA apologist playbook. Gee, we are as bad as China when it comes to spying on our populace. Great job!
If WikiLeaks primarily leaks things about the US, that is actually a GOOD thing. Doing so will help to force the US to enforce the laws on big banks (as opposed to wink win nudge nudge letting them off), ditto for big pharma, the military, etc. The US will be better off if we are a law-abiding, honest country. Hiding corruption does us no good. I want the US to be an honest country. If Europe or Asia is dishonest in comparison, because WikiLeaks ignores them, all the better for us.
Actually the paper says, "we where inspired by prior work on extensible forwarding planes" and merely names Click as one example. Extensible forwarding planes and doing software-based routers have been around a long time. It isn't clear why this article was posted now, XORP project has been around for years already. It also has not made a dent in Cisco's business (nor was it intended to).
Seems like a sweet deal to me - I'd take a $10K paycut for that in a heartbeat.
I am saddened to see the LP making fools of themselves, because I agree with a lot of libertarian ideas and vote Libertarian sometimes.
...still looking for a good, thoughtful pro-Kerry blog that isn't just sarcasm and handwaving.
That being said, there are plenty of thoughtful, well reasoned arguments for Bush out there, if people take the time to look for them. Try Hugh Hewitt for example. I've actually been looking for thoughtful, well reasoned bloggers for Kerry and had little success. Many of them are pure propaganda (e.g. Michael Moore) or are mostly just sarcasm and snide comments with little real substance (e.g. Joshua Marshall).
As to Bush being a liar, a proxy, or a poor leader, you would need to be more specific to get a good counter argument. In regards to the accusation of Bush being a low IQ, there is evidence that Kerry's is lower.
A /. poll would only prove that bored computer people have a certain opinion. Generalizing from that to the "tendency" of the general population's intelligence is silly. Maybe /. is mostly slackers and all the really hardworking, intelligent computer people don't bother reading/posting/moderating here, in which case the Kerry support is simply a symptom that lazy computer people support Kerry. Of course, this theory I just made up is entirely lacking in factual basis - just as the theory that bright people choose kerry is lacking in any solid factual basis.
A significant number of commentators are pretty immature, in that they assume bright people must be anti-Bush. Part of maturity is realizing those who disagree with you are not necessarily stupid.
And in your next post you say most lies are told by the [Republican] right
And finally, you say you are a registered Republican...
This either makes you of sub-par intelligence (for a /.er at least) or schizophrenic. Which is it?
Wyden is a Senator.
Orrin Hatch, Sponsor (R)
Cosponsors:
Sen Alexander, Lamar [TN] - (R) - 7/15/2004
Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] - (D) - 6/22/2004
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] - (D) - 7/7/2004
Sen Daschle, Thomas A. [SD] - (D) 6/22/2004
Sen Frist, Bill [TN] - (R) - 6/22/2004
Sen Graham, Bob [FL] - (D) - 9/22/2004
Sen Graham, Lindsey O. [SC] - (R) - 6/22/2004
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [VT] - (D) - 6/22/2004
Sen Sarbanes, Paul S. [MD] - (D) - 7/12/2004
Sen Stabenow, Debbie [MI] - (D) - 7/15/2004
The Democrats are just as much in the pocket of Hollywood and willing to get rid of Betamax as the Republicans are.
I think the study actually has several flaws which make it difficult to conclude the viewers are smarter. For instance, it could be that newspaper readers are flipping straight to the sports section. Sports fanatics don't tune into the Daily Show or to O'Reilly, so the newspaper readership comparison isn't too relevant to the relative smartness. Ditto for network news - at 6pm and 10pm network news is on a lot of channels for people who don't have cable, maybe we are just seeing that audience's smartness, which again, isn't the same audience as O'Reilly (which is only on the FNC cable channel) or the Daily Show.
Any American citizen who has a DVR (like MythTV), a DVD-RW or CDR-Burner, or a variety of other such devices should take a single minute out of their day and call in. The INDUCE act sucks and /. is a pretty big voting block. Make your voice heard!
Second, the summary says, "Daily Show viewers are better informed than viewers of [O'Reilly's] show", which is also incorrect. The CNN article states that more Daily Show viewers are 4+ years college educated and $100K+ salaried, but it says nothing about who is more informed between O'Reilly and the Daily Show. The Daily Show viewers are more informed than Letterman etc.
Story submitters and mods need to do a better job and actually read the articles they submit.
So by your logic, since the 1st amendment doesn't explicitly mention the Internet, then 1st amendment rights shouldn't apply to web sites?
And we all know felons never use guns since it is against the law for them to have them...
This is actually very telling - even left wingers are essentially admitting that slashdot's politics posts are left-leaning. This is of course in direct contradiction with CmdrTaco's claim that the politics section would be promised fair with story selection.
The editors need to end this failed experiment - it is clear that fairness is not being implemented.
If Carter is so wonderful and non-partisan, why hasn't he spoken out about the abuses being perpetrated in Oregon? How about the dead Democrat voters in Chicago? Funny how this wonderful man only speaks out about alleged abuses that hurt democrats, not the ones that hurt republicans.
I expect the mods will mark your post as flamebait, which seems to be their reaction to anything that doesn't agree with their political notions. Note to moderators: Disagreement over politics does not automatically make it flamebait. Shocking concept I guess.
Where is the metamoderator option to mark CmdrTaco as being tediously left leaning with a terrible taste in stories?
There are plenty of extremely intelligent people I know who are voting for Bush (or against Kerry, as the case may be). There are plenty of extremely intelligent people I know who are voting for Kerry (or against Bush, as the case may be).
Only very insecure people and fanatics convince themselves that people who disagree with them else must be stupid.
Leave the politics to the political blogs. Kerry vs. Bush isn't news for nerds, and "the world loves Kerry" is Politics for Democrat Nerds and is getting tiresome.
All the various proposals are now considered (by the IETF) as experiments. They are being documented as experimental RFCs and the various authors have been told to go off and try them out and prove they work.
Maybe in a year or two the IETF will look and say, "ok, it is clear that solution X is working and the interested parties are willing to compromise on something instead of being such jerks about it" - at that point the IETF might recharter the WG and move one of the drafts to the standards track (but don't hold your breath).
You are right, no need for the gymnastics I described. The site is even more stupid than I thought.
- As with all web polls, it is totally unscientific.
- There is no real protection from people setting up vote-bots. Even kapchas (sp) don't offer real protection.
- There is no protection from people lying about their age, gender, or other factors.
- The source country can be manipulated if one has access to computers in different geographics. At most large companies this is easy - In my case I just change the proxy firewall my browser goes through to proxy.(country).(mycompanynamewhichi'mnotdisclosi
n g).com and voila, I am a voter from UK, or Israel, or any of several other countries our intranet spans.
Given all the above, and the lack of information or facts the site gives, posting it by the story pickers shows at best poor judgement for story selection, or at worst the story pickers are as desparate about Kerry's implosion as the main stream media is and are frantic to put up anything that supports Kerry.