Turnout is expeced to be much heavier than normal, even for a presidential election. However, we probably won't break the 60% voter turnout mark.
Yes, sad to say that for a country that preaches to the rest of the world about freedom and democracy and the right to choose their leaders at least 1/3 of us won't even bother to get off our fat, lazy asses and indicate our choice for our leader(s).
Er, EVERY state is a swing state. You're asking yourself how that can be, aren't you? Let me explain.
For the sake of argument let's say that polls from a state are showing that likely voters prefer Bush* to Kerry, 52% to 45%. That's a 7 point margin of difference which is outside the margin of error.
Now, some Republicans in that state will think that Bush has a solid enough lead that if they don't vote it won't matter since the margin is so large. Thus, a certain percentage of Republican voters who would normally have voted won't stand in line for an hour or more to cast their votes which will reduce the number of votes cast for Bush.
However, on the Democratic side the get-out-the-vote campaign is still in high gear. Why if the polling numbers show such a wide margin of victory for Bush? There are various reasons:
The Democratic partys own polling numbers might suggest a much closer race (51% to 48% for example). Therefore every vote for Kerry they can find narrows that gap even further which may allow for a recount and/or challenges to the voting numbers
The Democratic party is counting on a certain percentage of Republicans not to go to the polls and vote since the margin seems large enough that a few votes not cast for Bush won't matter (The Truman v. Dewey syndrome)
The Democratic party might feel that the polls don't accurately reflect the people of this state. Maybe the unemployment is higher here so the Democrats are hoping for a larger than normal cross-over vote
Regardless, my point is that EVERYONE should go and vote if at all humanly possible. Yes, it might take longer than normal to vote but so what? Short of an emergency or being presented with a Nobel Prize, you can spend the hour or so to cast your vote.
*You can substitute the candidate of your choice for the above names. They were merely examples and were for demonstration purposes only. No endorsement of any candidate is suggested or inferred from anything stated herein. Offer void in Alaska, Hawaii, and the District of Columbia. Valid only in the United States and its territories. No purchase necessary. Value is 1/10 of one cent. Do not use while in shower or when asleep. Avoid contact with eyes or open sores. If ingested do not induce vomiting. Contact a physician immediately. Not for human consumption. Side effects may include an oily discharge.
Remember, Evolution (as well as Creation) are both Theories (the Theory of Evolution).
Stop it. Creationism is not a theory in the classical sense. It cannot be proven that a supreme being exists or does not exist therefore it cannot be a testable theory.
Evolution, however, can be and is continually being tested as evidenced by this story.
Constantly repeating an untruth won't eventually make it a truth.
but I'm not going to argue it with someone that doesn't hold the same belief as I do.
That's the problem. You have a belief which is unsubstantiated by the facts at hand.
I can believe I'm the King of San Francisco. Does it make it so?
The ability to make the browser popup ALT attributes for images?
This is not how the ALT is to be used which is why FF does not do it. According to the specifications one should use the TITLE tag if you want to see the popup for something. The ALT tag is to be used for text-only browswer or for screen readers.
Therefore, FF adheres to the standards while IE does not.
Also, when you first go to the W3C website hover over any of the links on the left side under the 'W3C A to Z' section and you will see the popups you are looking for. Now view the source for the page. Notice the use of the TITLE tag? That's how things should be done to get the popups.
of this administration trying to hide information. As if withholding the CIA report on 9/11 failures isn't bad enough now this administration is blocking access to its re-election web site from the rest of the world.
What are you hiding George?!!
(yes, this is partially sarcastic and partially serious. Laugh)
How about we drive, and not kill so many of us doing it.
So long as the ones dying are the idiots who think they need this stuff, I have no problem. The fewer idiots like this on the road the safer things will be.
Unfortunately, like with drunk driving, the ones who usually end up dead are not the drunks themselves but someone else.
This is definitely a simplistic question and has probably been answered somewhere else in the ether of the web but here goes:
If the probe will be able to float for a few hours IF it lands in a body of some liquid, why did they not include flotation devices like they used to have on the old Apollo capsules? Was it a weight thing (i.e. too much weight), design limitations (i.e. not enough room) a combination thereof or other reasons?
It would seem to me that if the device can float without these devices for several hours then including these devices could extend the floating ability of the probe for days/weeks/months/whatever. This would have substantially increased the time to gather information.
Or are there devices already on the probe and this is the best they could do under the circumstances?
It has nothing to do with making fun of the actual mods themselves (ok, a rear spoiler on a front wheel drive car is an exception). I personally like some of the cars I've seen.
What we (me at least) are annoyed about is that the vast majority of the folks who do the modding think that somehow by putting a rear spoiler on a front wheel drive car, adding a 6 billion watt stereo system, thin wheels, a tweaked engine chip and metallic paint makes them think that now they can go out and drive like the idiots we know them to be.
As far as the whumping is concerned, you want to play your stereo as loud as you want, be my guest. Just don't do down a neighborhood street at 10 at night on weeknight. Go to some abandoned warehouse or drive to some out of the way place and crank it up.
Don't think that by playing that crappy no rhythm 'music' that somehow you're 1337. You're not. You're just the typical wannabe who has no clue of what you're doing because 99.9% of the time you didn't even do the mods yourself. You paid someone to do it for you.
As far as making fun of those type, yes I do. Especially in parking lots with speed bumps. While they have to creep over the bumps so they don't crumple their air dams on the front I'm driving around them and over the bump so the traffic jam they are creating doesn't get any larger. And no, I'm not the only one who drives around them.
If they feel that whumping makes them important then I'm sure they won't mind me driving by their neighborhood at 7 in the morning with my death metal playing at similar levels.
How can people write such amazing worms and viruses and yet still have such POOR language in their little manifesto messages?
You don't read Slashdot much, do you? Look at the wonderful use of the word "your" for "you're" as well as the numerous renderings of "where"/"were"/"we're" or "their" and "there".
Hmm, maybe the same folks who can't spell correctly on this site are the same ones writing these worms and viruses. Nawww, that couldn't be true.
The folks on board might want to consider using this atomic clock for your wrist. After all, when you're 10s of thousands of miles away from earth and you have to know your position accuratly, what could be more accurate than a portable atomic clock?
Yes, this was another rejected story you won't hear about.
the new electronic voting system developed by David Chaum? No? If you're reading/. no wonder! Stories of ontopic interest are rarely posted.
Here's the link to the Business 2.0 article talking about his new system which he claims is "the first electronic mechanism that ensures both integrity and privacy."
Why not? Because the media companies say so? Because they have politicians in their pockets.
No, because as I stated above those doing the filesharing do not have an agreement with either the record company or the artist, or both, to do the distributing.
The artist signed a contract with the record company. This contract could simply be for the right to distribute the recordings to the exclusion of anyone else or it could be for the whole works (recording, processing, advertising, distributing, etc).
Filesharers have no such agreement. Therefore they are in violation of copyright law. This has nothing to do with what media companys say or how much they have paid to politicians. You want to distribute songs/albums, go get a contract with the necessary people. Like Apple and a few others have done.
Those 'sharing' the files do not have a right to do what they are doing. They don't own the licenses to the songs nor do they have an agreement with either the artist or record company to distribute the songs. They get what they deserve.
Now go ahead and be good little mods and mark me as Troll or Flamebait because I dare to express a point of view which runs counter to the whole 'information wants to be free' crap.
If you're so keen on giving away information then you develop something, pay with it out of your own pocket and give it away. We'll see how long you survive.
So how do you account for the article that I submitted on Sept 30th at 8:31 am about Googles new competitor, Clusty, which was rejected but then early in the morning on Oct 3rd it shows up by someone else? That's 4 days for these yahoos to figure out what to post.
Besides, what does Bloomberg being a news outlet have anything to do with it? That is where the original article came from, not Cnet. The Bloomberg article was much more informative and descriptive. People reference the NY Times, CNN and even Fox for articles and they certainly fall under the heading of news outlets.
Once again we can see the ridiculous nature of trying to get a post on/. Not only did I submit this exact same article YESTERDAY, it still shows as pending so get ready for the dupe to appear in the near future.
Actually, no country in its right mind would use WMDs on forces that are within its borders. Destroying your own country and making it unlivable defeats the point of the weapons themselves. They're offensive, used when you're trying to destroy someone ELSE's country.
You should read "The Sampson Option" by Seymour Hersh. In the book he describes how people within the Israeli national defense system have confirmed that Israel is willing to use its nuclear arsenal on its own territory should their backs be against the wall.
This was, in my opinion, one of the biggest reasons to go to war...the inspectors weren't being allowed to DO their jobs. They weren't allowed to talk to Iraqi scientists and weren't given the information they needed. They had been kicked out of the country before without completing their job, ergo the question became what was Saddam hiding?
Partially false. In the past Iraq had kicked the inspectors out and had given the run-around. However, in the last attempt to fend off an invasion Iraq threw open its doors. The inspectors could go anywhere they wanted. In fact, when the inspectors kept coming up empty the US gave inspectors its own information on where "it knew" the weapons were. Guess what, the inspectors found nothing. It was at this point that the US pulled the rug out from beneath the inspectors and invaded to try and prove that Iraq had wmds. As we now know Iraq never had any weapons since the early 1990s despite all our "evidence" that they had tons (to use Rumsfelds own words) of the stuff hidden away.
As far as why Saddam would do his best to hide something which didn't exist, various people have surmised it came down to appearances. If you can keep your enemies guessing as to what you do or do not have then you can appear strong. If Saddam had come out and said that he had nothing (which he eventually did) then he would appear weak in the eyes of the arab world.
Way to go guys. I posted this story on September 30th and it was rejected:
Googles newest competitor? Thursday September 30, @08:31AM Rejected
And I didn't even link to a NY Times article but rather an AP story.
You can see that I have this story listed in my journal at this link.
Keep up the good work. This is the kind of nonsense we have come to expect from/.
P.S. I will usually post some of the stories which have been rejected so be sure to check my journal every so often. After all, why wait for three days to go by when you can get the story when it comes out?
Slashdot Mirror
Turnout is expeced to be much heavier than normal, even for a presidential election. However, we probably won't break the 60% voter turnout mark.
Yes, sad to say that for a country that preaches to the rest of the world about freedom and democracy and the right to choose their leaders at least 1/3 of us won't even bother to get off our fat, lazy asses and indicate our choice for our leader(s).
For the sake of argument let's say that polls from a state are showing that likely voters prefer Bush* to Kerry, 52% to 45%. That's a 7 point margin of difference which is outside the margin of error.
Now, some Republicans in that state will think that Bush has a solid enough lead that if they don't vote it won't matter since the margin is so large. Thus, a certain percentage of Republican voters who would normally have voted won't stand in line for an hour or more to cast their votes which will reduce the number of votes cast for Bush.
However, on the Democratic side the get-out-the-vote campaign is still in high gear. Why if the polling numbers show such a wide margin of victory for Bush? There are various reasons:
Regardless, my point is that EVERYONE should go and vote if at all humanly possible. Yes, it might take longer than normal to vote but so what? Short of an emergency or being presented with a Nobel Prize, you can spend the hour or so to cast your vote.
*You can substitute the candidate of your choice for the above names. They were merely examples and were for demonstration purposes only. No endorsement of any candidate is suggested or inferred from anything stated herein. Offer void in Alaska, Hawaii, and the District of Columbia. Valid only in the United States and its territories. No purchase necessary. Value is 1/10 of one cent. Do not use while in shower or when asleep. Avoid contact with eyes or open sores. If ingested do not induce vomiting. Contact a physician immediately. Not for human consumption. Side effects may include an oily discharge.
Stop it. Creationism is not a theory in the classical sense. It cannot be proven that a supreme being exists or does not exist therefore it cannot be a testable theory.
Evolution, however, can be and is continually being tested as evidenced by this story.
Constantly repeating an untruth won't eventually make it a truth.
but I'm not going to argue it with someone that doesn't hold the same belief as I do.
That's the problem. You have a belief which is unsubstantiated by the facts at hand.
I can believe I'm the King of San Francisco. Does it make it so?
2004 Tokyo Game Show
2003 Tokyo Game Show
This is not how the ALT is to be used which is why FF does not do it. According to the specifications one should use the TITLE tag if you want to see the popup for something. The ALT tag is to be used for text-only browswer or for screen readers.
Therefore, FF adheres to the standards while IE does not.
For reference: ALT tag from W3C
Also, when you first go to the W3C website hover over any of the links on the left side under the 'W3C A to Z' section and you will see the popups you are looking for. Now view the source for the page. Notice the use of the TITLE tag? That's how things should be done to get the popups.
Does the book mention anything about speed holes and how they make the car go faster?
(hint: Simpsons)
What are you hiding George?!!
(yes, this is partially sarcastic and partially serious. Laugh)
So long as the ones dying are the idiots who think they need this stuff, I have no problem. The fewer idiots like this on the road the safer things will be.
Unfortunately, like with drunk driving, the ones who usually end up dead are not the drunks themselves but someone else.
If you think that sounds odd, and believe it might be japanese, maybe you should read this to see how things are really done in Japan.
Prosthetics are already tracked with a number. If you get a knee replacement there is a specific serial number on the replacement part.
Even breast implants have tracking numbers.
While using a RFID tag would make things easier it is by no means a requirement that this needs to be done.
This is definitely a simplistic question and has probably been answered somewhere else in the ether of the web but here goes:
If the probe will be able to float for a few hours IF it lands in a body of some liquid, why did they not include flotation devices like they used to have on the old Apollo capsules? Was it a weight thing (i.e. too much weight), design limitations (i.e. not enough room) a combination thereof or other reasons?
It would seem to me that if the device can float without these devices for several hours then including these devices could extend the floating ability of the probe for days/weeks/months/whatever. This would have substantially increased the time to gather information.
Or are there devices already on the probe and this is the best they could do under the circumstances?
It has nothing to do with making fun of the actual mods themselves (ok, a rear spoiler on a front wheel drive car is an exception). I personally like some of the cars I've seen.
What we (me at least) are annoyed about is that the vast majority of the folks who do the modding think that somehow by putting a rear spoiler on a front wheel drive car, adding a 6 billion watt stereo system, thin wheels, a tweaked engine chip and metallic paint makes them think that now they can go out and drive like the idiots we know them to be.
As far as the whumping is concerned, you want to play your stereo as loud as you want, be my guest. Just don't do down a neighborhood street at 10 at night on weeknight. Go to some abandoned warehouse or drive to some out of the way place and crank it up.
Don't think that by playing that crappy no rhythm 'music' that somehow you're 1337. You're not. You're just the typical wannabe who has no clue of what you're doing because 99.9% of the time you didn't even do the mods yourself. You paid someone to do it for you.
As far as making fun of those type, yes I do. Especially in parking lots with speed bumps. While they have to creep over the bumps so they don't crumple their air dams on the front I'm driving around them and over the bump so the traffic jam they are creating doesn't get any larger. And no, I'm not the only one who drives around them.
If they feel that whumping makes them important then I'm sure they won't mind me driving by their neighborhood at 7 in the morning with my death metal playing at similar levels.
You don't read Slashdot much, do you? Look at the wonderful use of the word "your" for "you're" as well as the numerous renderings of "where"/"were"/"we're" or "their" and "there".
Hmm, maybe the same folks who can't spell correctly on this site are the same ones writing these worms and viruses. Nawww, that couldn't be true.
Yes, this was another rejected story you won't hear about.
Here's the link to the Business 2.0 article talking about his new system which he claims is "the first electronic mechanism that ensures both integrity and privacy."
No, because as I stated above those doing the filesharing do not have an agreement with either the record company or the artist, or both, to do the distributing.
The artist signed a contract with the record company. This contract could simply be for the right to distribute the recordings to the exclusion of anyone else or it could be for the whole works (recording, processing, advertising, distributing, etc).
Filesharers have no such agreement. Therefore they are in violation of copyright law. This has nothing to do with what media companys say or how much they have paid to politicians. You want to distribute songs/albums, go get a contract with the necessary people. Like Apple and a few others have done.
Those 'sharing' the files do not have a right to do what they are doing. They don't own the licenses to the songs nor do they have an agreement with either the artist or record company to distribute the songs. They get what they deserve.
Now go ahead and be good little mods and mark me as Troll or Flamebait because I dare to express a point of view which runs counter to the whole 'information wants to be free' crap.
If you're so keen on giving away information then you develop something, pay with it out of your own pocket and give it away. We'll see how long you survive.
these characters to help get the youngins into the voting routine.
So how do you account for the article that I submitted on Sept 30th at 8:31 am about Googles new competitor, Clusty, which was rejected but then early in the morning on Oct 3rd it shows up by someone else? That's 4 days for these yahoos to figure out what to post.
Besides, what does Bloomberg being a news outlet have anything to do with it? That is where the original article came from, not Cnet. The Bloomberg article was much more informative and descriptive. People reference the NY Times, CNN and even Fox for articles and they certainly fall under the heading of news outlets.
For those interested here is the Bloomberg link.
At least this time there is a valid reason for my story being rejected.
You should read "The Sampson Option" by Seymour Hersh. In the book he describes how people within the Israeli national defense system have confirmed that Israel is willing to use its nuclear arsenal on its own territory should their backs be against the wall.
This was, in my opinion, one of the biggest reasons to go to war...the inspectors weren't being allowed to DO their jobs. They weren't allowed to talk to Iraqi scientists and weren't given the information they needed. They had been kicked out of the country before without completing their job, ergo the question became what was Saddam hiding?
Partially false. In the past Iraq had kicked the inspectors out and had given the run-around. However, in the last attempt to fend off an invasion Iraq threw open its doors. The inspectors could go anywhere they wanted. In fact, when the inspectors kept coming up empty the US gave inspectors its own information on where "it knew" the weapons were. Guess what, the inspectors found nothing. It was at this point that the US pulled the rug out from beneath the inspectors and invaded to try and prove that Iraq had wmds. As we now know Iraq never had any weapons since the early 1990s despite all our "evidence" that they had tons (to use Rumsfelds own words) of the stuff hidden away.
As far as why Saddam would do his best to hide something which didn't exist, various people have surmised it came down to appearances. If you can keep your enemies guessing as to what you do or do not have then you can appear strong. If Saddam had come out and said that he had nothing (which he eventually did) then he would appear weak in the eyes of the arab world.
Googles newest competitor? Thursday September 30, @08:31AM Rejected
And I didn't even link to a NY Times article but rather an AP story.
You can see that I have this story listed in my journal at this link.
Keep up the good work. This is the kind of nonsense we have come to expect from /.
P.S. I will usually post some of the stories which have been rejected so be sure to check my journal every so often. After all, why wait for three days to go by when you can get the story when it comes out?
P.P.S. Anyone else see the story of the vibrating condom?
Nice to see someone else knows what the hell I'm talking about. It's bad enough I have to talk to myself to have an intelligent conversation.
Had I said something about Microsoft or SCO being evil or the benefits of open source then I would not have been labeled as Offtopic (damn mods).
Though I have to admit, the one poster above who gave the values for X and Z compared to Blue certainly put things into perspective.
As everyone knows, Z is two better than X. So where does the Blue fit in?