"It may be a lost fight, but at least the fight brings to people's attention that it is, strictly speaking, incorrect usage."
No, it doesn't. The people whose attention it is capable of acquiring, are the same people who already understand about these things. The rest will *intentionally* misuse the expression *because* you complained.
Try explaining that "presently" means "in a little while" to someone.
"Consider that it may actually come out for the best (worldwide) that Bush won the election."
I agree, but not for reasons as complex as your analysis.
Kerry would have inherited a big mess. He would not have appeared to be successful, no matter how well he actually performed.
Bush, on the other hand, has for the first time in his LIFE, become obligated to face the consequences of his own actions.
Anyone who occupies the oval office today, has a lost cause in his hands. Better to watch Bush go down in flames, than to shackle such a legacy on some other more competent leader.
Despite the repeated asseration that "the whole world hates the US", I've seen absolutely NO meaningful opposition to the US policies. Why was no resistance mustered to forestall the invasion of Iraq? The US interpretation, of course, is that the world approves, overwhelmingly. Even those countries that supposedly don't approve, gave their consent by not fighting against it. Yeah, that would have cost lives and broken alliances. We're talking WAR already, so that's what it comes down to.
"What if the UN or some other international organization were to step in and question the legitimacy of this election"
If they didn't see fit to raise an opposition (military opposition, that is), to the invasion and occupation of a sovreign country (a necessary and sufficient catalyst for WWIII, in my opinion), what makes you think they care about something as trivial as an election?
>No one is holding them at gunpoint, granted, but it > is about as much "force" as it is with sexual >harassment where the secretary must have sex with >the boss or be fired.
You just equated unionization with sexual harassment? I can't reason with you.
"To get the game on the same day they could walk down the street and buy it for $50."
I think there's another angle. The Hype Machine wants you to believe that the stores will sell out of the product within a matter of minutes or hours. That you will NOT be able to walk down the street and buy it for $50, because the store will have sold out (due to all the people who camped out and waited). So then the price on ebay goes up so high that the $300 ebay price starts looking good.
Meanwhile I continue to play nethack and wonder what you people see in these undergamed things.
"The other strong possibility is that the $265 bid isn't serious."
I know more than a few people who paid twice that much for the first generation X-Box. (You do realize these auctions are for a bundle with the XBox and the game, don't you?)
I paid $250 for my X-Box with two games. I don't really see the problem here.
The "world" doesn't count. The "world" sat on its goddamned ass and whistled polly wolly doodle while the US invaded a sovreign country and replaced its government. *The* action that should have engendered World War Goddamned Three, and that cowardly "world" of yours just sat by and tacitly approved. Don't talk to me about opposition, because there was none.
The US just relected the man who presided while the country demonstrated that it alone rules the world.
Deal with it. Or do something about it. But don't try to claim "the world" doesn't approve. They don't lift a finger to do anything about it. That's approval.
In keeping with my view that things need to get a whole lot worse before anyone lifts a finger, the go ahead and do whatever it takes to make things orders of magnitude worse.
$12.00/gallon gasoline? 80% unemployment? Dissolution of the UN and NATO? Former allies forming a coalition and declaring war on the US?
My scenario is so much worse than the worst case scenario of the darkest doom-and-gloomer, it's not even funny. But I really think things need to become far worse before people really wake up.
"I don't think many Americans realise how much the world hates your president. "
And they won't realize it, until some nation in this "world" you speak of, musters the integrity to do something about it. That means, in case you haven't figured it out yet, taking military action against the US. Don't hate the US that much yet? Oh well.
The electors were listed by name on my ballot. It is very clear that the vote is for the electors for a given presidential candidate, and NOT for a president and vice president. In fact, the vice presidents were not even named on my ballot. Just the candidate and his electors.
It will be the first time in Bush's life that he will be compelled to take responsibility for the consequences of his action. Early retirement would have been the easy way out.
>but you can't impeach him if he's out of office.
It takes an Act of Congress to impeach, and that is highly unlikely now.
More drastic solutions would begin with other nations seriously shutting the US out, or even, taking up arms against the US. That's not going to happen either. I expect the UK to go in a similar way -- adamant support for the status quo, despite an implication that popular opinion runs the opposite way.
There won't be a civil war, there won't be any assassinations, the UN and NATO aren't going to dissolve, and the allies of the US are not going to coalesce into an opposition force and try to destroy it.
Slashdot Mirror
"It may be a lost fight, but at least the fight brings to people's attention that it is, strictly speaking, incorrect usage."
No, it doesn't. The people whose attention it is capable of acquiring, are the same people who already understand about these things. The rest will *intentionally* misuse the expression *because* you complained.
Try explaining that "presently" means "in a little while" to someone.
Sad and scary, but I observed this book in use for a high school curriculum (in Texas), as recently as 1990.
"I bought a copy of Mechwarrior at EB last week for $13. There's about 40 of them on Ebay right now. Not that hard to find."
My point is that the version currently being distribruted has the exploit "fixed."
You *cannot* simply buy a new copy of Mechassault from EB or whatever, and use it to boot linux. Microsoft has already seen to that.
The cause you're fighting is every bit as noble as that for "hacker", and just as lost.
"A $10 or less copy of Mechwarrior or 007 and he could have soft modded them and installed Linux that way."
Those games, in the versions required for the boot exploit, are not that easy to find. They have already become collectors' items.
No, I don't buy it.
"Protesting" didn't work, so you didn't take it to the next level.
We're talking life and death, war and peace, sovreignty and conquer here.
Running around in the street, shouting and carrying a sign isn't up to this level.
If your politicians really don't speak for you, why do they live to see the next day?
"Although I won't argue that the original HALO and HALO 2 are superb games, are they really as good as people say they are?"
Games come and go, and for me, only Nethack endures.
"Consider that it may actually come out for the best (worldwide) that Bush won the election."
I agree, but not for reasons as complex as your analysis.
Kerry would have inherited a big mess. He would not have appeared to be successful, no matter how well he actually performed.
Bush, on the other hand, has for the first time in his LIFE, become obligated to face the consequences of his own actions.
Anyone who occupies the oval office today, has a lost cause in his hands. Better to watch Bush go down in flames, than to shackle such a legacy on some other more competent leader.
Despite the repeated asseration that "the whole world hates the US", I've seen absolutely NO meaningful opposition to the US policies. Why was no resistance mustered to forestall the invasion of Iraq? The US interpretation, of course, is that the world approves, overwhelmingly. Even those countries that supposedly don't approve, gave their consent by not fighting against it. Yeah, that would have cost lives and broken alliances. We're talking WAR already, so that's what it comes down to.
"What if the UN or some other international organization were to step in and question the legitimacy of this election"
If they didn't see fit to raise an opposition (military opposition, that is), to the invasion and occupation of a sovreign country (a necessary and sufficient catalyst for WWIII, in my opinion), what makes you think they care about something as trivial as an election?
"If Kerry were elected, then would we be seeing the same amount of nitpicking of the election results?"
If Kerry had been elected, he would have been assassinated by now.
>No one is holding them at gunpoint, granted, but it
> is about as much "force" as it is with sexual
>harassment where the secretary must have sex with
>the boss or be fired.
You just equated unionization with sexual harassment? I can't reason with you.
"Meijer forces its workers to join political organizations"
Cite please? You aren't talking about unions are you? What sort of "force" are you referring to?
"To get the game on the same day they could walk down the street and buy it for $50."
I think there's another angle. The Hype Machine wants you to believe that the stores will sell out of the product within a matter of minutes or hours. That you will NOT be able to walk down the street and buy it for $50, because the store will have sold out (due to all the people who camped out and waited). So then the price on ebay goes up so high that the $300 ebay price starts looking good.
Meanwhile I continue to play nethack and wonder what you people see in these undergamed things.
"look at it this way, they are paying you 200$ to buy a copy for them."
It might not be so easy to get a copy of this very hyped item in a store during the Christmas season.
Don't make a committment you might not be able to keep!
"The other strong possibility is that the $265 bid isn't serious."
I know more than a few people who paid twice that much for the first generation X-Box. (You do realize these auctions are for a bundle with the XBox and the game, don't you?)
I paid $250 for my X-Box with two games. I don't really see the problem here.
"American 2054 = Britain 1950?"
I'm going to laugh hard when the UK re-elects Tony Blair, and the continuation of the Bush agenda for Britain.
So all you have to do is persuade some of the electors that they've been had.
Standard of proof are going to be high. And you only have a couple of weeks to do it. Good luck.
"95% of the world (if it counts)"
The "world" doesn't count. The "world" sat on its goddamned ass and whistled polly wolly doodle while the US invaded a sovreign country and replaced its government. *The* action that should have engendered World War Goddamned Three, and that cowardly "world" of yours just sat by and tacitly approved. Don't talk to me about opposition, because there was none.
The US just relected the man who presided while the country demonstrated that it alone rules the world.
Deal with it. Or do something about it.
But don't try to claim "the world" doesn't approve. They don't lift a finger to do anything about it. That's approval.
So bring it on.
In keeping with my view that things need to get a whole lot worse before anyone lifts a finger, the go ahead and do whatever it takes to make things orders of magnitude worse.
$12.00/gallon gasoline?
80% unemployment?
Dissolution of the UN and NATO?
Former allies forming a coalition and declaring war on the US?
My scenario is so much worse than the worst case scenario of the darkest doom-and-gloomer, it's not even funny. But I really think things need to become far worse before people really wake up.
"I don't think many Americans realise how much the world hates your president. "
And they won't realize it, until some nation in this "world" you speak of, musters the integrity to do something about it. That means, in case you haven't figured it out yet, taking military action against the US. Don't hate the US that much yet? Oh well.
>Why does this prohibit efficient paper-voting?
It does not. It places the responsibility for creating an efficient system in the Legislature of each state.
Most places *do* have an efficient paper system.
> There were no electors on my ballot
The electors were listed by name on my ballot.
It is very clear that the vote is for the electors for a given presidential candidate, and NOT for a
president and vice president. In fact, the vice presidents were not even named on my ballot. Just the candidate and his electors.
>I've never heard of anyone who actually did it.
A good friend of mine and former slashdot poster moved to Guinee. It's worked out great, to my surprise.
"Technically, an election isn't over until the electoral college meets on December 13, 2004"
Do the electors get 24 hour bodyguards between now and then?
>The good news in all of this...
It will be the first time in Bush's life that he will be compelled to take responsibility for the consequences of his action. Early retirement would have been the easy way out.
>but you can't impeach him if he's out of office.
It takes an Act of Congress to impeach, and that is highly unlikely now.
More drastic solutions would begin with other nations seriously shutting the US out, or even,
taking up arms against the US. That's not going to happen either. I expect the UK to go in a similar way -- adamant support for the status quo, despite an implication that popular opinion runs the opposite way.
There won't be a civil war, there won't be any assassinations, the UN and NATO aren't going to dissolve, and the allies of the US are not going to coalesce into an opposition force and try to destroy it.