Sadly though, there is nothing stopping them from changing it back, except themselves. The ONLY way to force a popular vote that will actually decide the president, is to ammend the constitution of the US. And I never see this happening, as it removes power from the states, and if there's one thing I've learned about governments, it's they gobble up as much power as possible, and give away as little as possible.
1) Show me where in the constitution it says the Supreme Court over stepped their bounds. 2) The governor of Florida could have scrapped the popular vote completely and shoved a bunch of electors in there who would have voted for Bush, and it would have been perfectly legal.
Like I've posted in a previous comment in this story, the states control who is president, not the people. Even if Gore had won the popular vote in Florida after the recount (there is NO proof of that), it doesn't matter. If Florida wanted to vote for Bush, Florida would have voted for Bush, end of story, all perfectly legal.
No, the electoral voting system has been in effect since the forming of our fourth (and current) government, that's how Washington was elected. Fourth if you count the 1st and 2nd continental congresses as governments of our country. The states directly control who is an electoral voter, however the rules on how they're chosen varies per state. The governor of a state could put in people he knows will vote for whoever he wants, and if the state constitution allows the governor to control who the electors are, it's all perfectly legal for a governor to do that, and there's not a god damn thing anyone can do about it. The states control who is president, not the people.
That's assuming you're too stupid to realize we don't live in a direct democracy. The US is a republic, and an indirect democracy. Nowhere in our constitution does it guarentee us the right to directly vote for our president. We never have, in the 200+ years the US has been around. And Bush is NOT the first president to be elected without getting the popular majority vote. Don't get me wrong, I hate where this country is going with all this recient (and not so recient) legislation, however I hate it when everyone obsesses over the election in 2000, it was 6 years ago, wasn't the first time a president was elected without the popular majority, so just let it go.
While I cannot think of any circumstance where a state has done that, the power to decide who goes to the electoral college rests in the hands of the Governor of the state. If the Governor decides to put in people he knows will vote for who he wants, then he can do that, and it's all perfectly legal. Personally, I don't agree with that, however it's written into our constitution, so it pisses me off when people get all upset over popular votes. Guess what? Popular votes don't really mean shit, and you're lucky you can vote at all. Don't like it? Ammend the Constitution.
Except that in reality, the US is not a direct democracy, and the peoples' votes don't really have any power. Do you think everyone went out to the polls to elect George Washington? No, the Electoral college did that, and there doesn't have to be any popular vote AT ALL for a presidential election. The electoral colleges generally follow the popular vote for that state, but they don't have to, they can vote for whomever they wish. You don't like it? Too damn bad, that's how our government has been since it was formed.
Well technically BSD is shitting all over Linux, not me, so no, I really don't give a shit. And I'm not taking "pot-shots" on mascots, it was just funny, and the picture itself was inspired by a similar one I've seen on the internet. That specific banner was done by a friend for my site specifically. Also, I'm not trying to sway you from using Linux. Go ahead, use it all you want, doesn't matter to me. The whole point of my original posting, which started this very long thread, was that BSD encourages people to use their software for whatever they want, free of charge, but it has gone so far from that it seems pointless to respond anymore.
Where the government gets its money has never entered into the discussion. The discousion was that Microsoft was making money off of taxpayer money. And I was simply stating that the tax payers do have a say where tax money goes to. The "other" money (as you call it) never entered into it, nor did I deny that the government gets money from other sources. I'm sure it does, but this has absolutely nothing to do with my statement, that the tax payers have some say where their money goes to.
Actually YOU just demonstrated that you can't read. I said tax money, not just all government money. If the tax money doesn't come from taxes, then well it's not taxpayer money... so please learn to read before trying to reply to my comments AND insult me. Since we're talking about taxpayer money, the other money is irrelivent, and your argument is now pointless.
You seem to think that I am advocating BSD, which I am not. Use it, don't use it, I don't really give a shit. Just don't spread FUD, false information is worse than no information. Especially if you call MS bad for spreading FUD, then do it yourself. That is my personal website, with my own personal feelings. You don't like it, don't go to my website, I don't really give a shit.
That is really sweet. You can go to that folder in explorer if you go to temp internet files folder, then in the title bar manually type the Content.IE5 folder name and hit enter. However it doesn't appear in my history, and even with show system files and folders, and show hidden files and folders, it still doesn't show up. It seems to be some secret folder that MS doesn't want anyone to know anything about. I would be very interested to know where you read this, and what else that place has posted about this folder and such.
If an American citizen has no idea where the tax money is coming from, well they're just plain stupid. If they have no idea where the tax money goes, then they don't follow politics very well. Either way, it's up to them, but all this information is available to anyone that wishes to look for it. Whether or not most Americans actually DO know where it's going to, that's up to them, but they can find out, and then tell their congressman/senator what they think. And when I said the only real difference between BSD and public domain is you must include a Copyright notice, I was refering to the person or body using already written BSD-licensed software. Since that's the only restriction placed by the BSD license, and with public domain you don't have to do a damn thing, then basically yes, that's the only difference.
As long as they include a Copyright notice somewhere, yes it's legal. IIRC, MS has some BSD Copyright notices buried deep within their website, making it nice and legal. I assume that when you state that the tax payers paid for this software that you are talking about the first BSD IP-stack being written in Berkley, funded by DARPA, and further development at Berkley being built off of that. Well, the people (loosly) control where the government spends it's money, and if they didn't want that, then DARPA probably wouldn't again have funded BSD (at least once more, funding OpenBSD about $25 million, I don't remember off hand other instances). To address your last statement, I highly doubt most companies consider GPL to be public domain, since most of them avoid it like the plauge even if how they wanted to use it would have been legal. The only real difference between BSD and public domain is that you must include a Copyright notice.
What difference? faqmaster stated that MS stole BSD code, which is pure FUD. There was no comparision, I was simply stating that it's completely false. The BSD folks encourage everyone to use their code, they want MS to use the BSD IP stack. If they didn't, they wouldn't use the BSD license. Plain and simple.
In the sense that I have a high 6 digit UID, you could say I'm new to slashdot, however I did read it long before I actually signed up an account. It's just very disturbing to see the kind of FUD and hipocracy being spread around here. Slashdot folks wonder when MS and the like will stop spreading FUD, as well as Joe 6pack and the like start using Linux as a desktop, but maybe they should clean up their act first? It's hard to say how much better your (insert OSS item here) is over (insert MS equivelent item here) when you're doing a lot of the same things that you say makes MS's item look bad, or that make MS look bad.
Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you people? You CAN'T steal something that someone is giving away FREE OF CHARGE to use in ANY WAY you see fit. MS is given permision to use any BSD code they want, without doing a damn thing other than including a Copyright notice SOMEWHERE in their docs (whether it be online or in the distribution). And believe it or not, this is what the BSD folks want.
There is nothing ethically wrong with what MS did either. The whole ideals behind BSD was it was free for anyone to use for any purpose. They encouraged people to adopt their code, and the BSD's still do today. The whole BSD philosiphy is to give quality code to the community, to use as they see fit. Not to have others do your development for you, which is what the GPL wants, since it requires you to send your changes to the author.
Get the limited service which gives you all the local channels (no cable channels) and only costs $10/mo, and gives you $15 discount on internet, so you're bill is $5 cheaper plus you get your local channels on cable.
You can get internet access without cable TV at Comcast. You do however get a discount on Cable Internet if you are a Cable TV subscriber. I got the limited service with Comcast, which is basically local channels via cable (no TBS or anything), and it costs me $10/mo. I look at my bill, and says I get $15 discount on internet for being a TV subscriber, so I actually pay less than if I didn't have TV at all, so works out for me.
"Not only that, but these holes are usually patched in a matter of days,..."
Except this one which has been around for 7 years. Come on, this is a well known, 7 YEAR OLD vulnerability, why the hell did it make it's way back into Firefox/Mozilla? Don't get me wrong, I use Firefox all the time (using it now to post), but this is pretty bad when they code a known, 7 year old vulnerability back in.
I don't know, declaring encryption use as criminal intent could have it's benefits. Now, all the US Government is evil and has criminal intent. But then most of/. thinks that anyway without a Court ruling this, except now State governments think it too.
So, you've been using Linux since Torvalds wrote it back in the early 90's? Back then you had to have Minix just to install Linux, bet that was fun. Because if I remember correctly, Linux was born in '93, only 12 years ago, and that's if it was written in the begining of '93. And what are these Linux kernel based systems, I wasn't aware of any systems based on the Linux kernel, other than Linux?
Slashdot Mirror
Sadly though, there is nothing stopping them from changing it back, except themselves. The ONLY way to force a popular vote that will actually decide the president, is to ammend the constitution of the US. And I never see this happening, as it removes power from the states, and if there's one thing I've learned about governments, it's they gobble up as much power as possible, and give away as little as possible.
1) Show me where in the constitution it says the Supreme Court over stepped their bounds.
2) The governor of Florida could have scrapped the popular vote completely and shoved a bunch of electors in there who would have voted for Bush, and it would have been perfectly legal.
Like I've posted in a previous comment in this story, the states control who is president, not the people. Even if Gore had won the popular vote in Florida after the recount (there is NO proof of that), it doesn't matter. If Florida wanted to vote for Bush, Florida would have voted for Bush, end of story, all perfectly legal.
No, the electoral voting system has been in effect since the forming of our fourth (and current) government, that's how Washington was elected. Fourth if you count the 1st and 2nd continental congresses as governments of our country. The states directly control who is an electoral voter, however the rules on how they're chosen varies per state. The governor of a state could put in people he knows will vote for whoever he wants, and if the state constitution allows the governor to control who the electors are, it's all perfectly legal for a governor to do that, and there's not a god damn thing anyone can do about it. The states control who is president, not the people.
That's assuming you're too stupid to realize we don't live in a direct democracy. The US is a republic, and an indirect democracy. Nowhere in our constitution does it guarentee us the right to directly vote for our president. We never have, in the 200+ years the US has been around. And Bush is NOT the first president to be elected without getting the popular majority vote. Don't get me wrong, I hate where this country is going with all this recient (and not so recient) legislation, however I hate it when everyone obsesses over the election in 2000, it was 6 years ago, wasn't the first time a president was elected without the popular majority, so just let it go.
While I cannot think of any circumstance where a state has done that, the power to decide who goes to the electoral college rests in the hands of the Governor of the state. If the Governor decides to put in people he knows will vote for who he wants, then he can do that, and it's all perfectly legal. Personally, I don't agree with that, however it's written into our constitution, so it pisses me off when people get all upset over popular votes. Guess what? Popular votes don't really mean shit, and you're lucky you can vote at all. Don't like it? Ammend the Constitution.
Except that in reality, the US is not a direct democracy, and the peoples' votes don't really have any power. Do you think everyone went out to the polls to elect George Washington? No, the Electoral college did that, and there doesn't have to be any popular vote AT ALL for a presidential election. The electoral colleges generally follow the popular vote for that state, but they don't have to, they can vote for whomever they wish. You don't like it? Too damn bad, that's how our government has been since it was formed.
Well technically BSD is shitting all over Linux, not me, so no, I really don't give a shit. And I'm not taking "pot-shots" on mascots, it was just funny, and the picture itself was inspired by a similar one I've seen on the internet. That specific banner was done by a friend for my site specifically. Also, I'm not trying to sway you from using Linux. Go ahead, use it all you want, doesn't matter to me. The whole point of my original posting, which started this very long thread, was that BSD encourages people to use their software for whatever they want, free of charge, but it has gone so far from that it seems pointless to respond anymore.
Where the government gets its money has never entered into the discussion. The discousion was that Microsoft was making money off of taxpayer money. And I was simply stating that the tax payers do have a say where tax money goes to. The "other" money (as you call it) never entered into it, nor did I deny that the government gets money from other sources. I'm sure it does, but this has absolutely nothing to do with my statement, that the tax payers have some say where their money goes to.
Actually YOU just demonstrated that you can't read. I said tax money, not just all government money. If the tax money doesn't come from taxes, then well it's not taxpayer money... so please learn to read before trying to reply to my comments AND insult me. Since we're talking about taxpayer money, the other money is irrelivent, and your argument is now pointless.
You seem to think that I am advocating BSD, which I am not. Use it, don't use it, I don't really give a shit. Just don't spread FUD, false information is worse than no information. Especially if you call MS bad for spreading FUD, then do it yourself. That is my personal website, with my own personal feelings. You don't like it, don't go to my website, I don't really give a shit.
That is really sweet. You can go to that folder in explorer if you go to temp internet files folder, then in the title bar manually type the Content.IE5 folder name and hit enter. However it doesn't appear in my history, and even with show system files and folders, and show hidden files and folders, it still doesn't show up. It seems to be some secret folder that MS doesn't want anyone to know anything about. I would be very interested to know where you read this, and what else that place has posted about this folder and such.
If an American citizen has no idea where the tax money is coming from, well they're just plain stupid. If they have no idea where the tax money goes, then they don't follow politics very well. Either way, it's up to them, but all this information is available to anyone that wishes to look for it. Whether or not most Americans actually DO know where it's going to, that's up to them, but they can find out, and then tell their congressman/senator what they think. And when I said the only real difference between BSD and public domain is you must include a Copyright notice, I was refering to the person or body using already written BSD-licensed software. Since that's the only restriction placed by the BSD license, and with public domain you don't have to do a damn thing, then basically yes, that's the only difference.
As long as they include a Copyright notice somewhere, yes it's legal. IIRC, MS has some BSD Copyright notices buried deep within their website, making it nice and legal. I assume that when you state that the tax payers paid for this software that you are talking about the first BSD IP-stack being written in Berkley, funded by DARPA, and further development at Berkley being built off of that. Well, the people (loosly) control where the government spends it's money, and if they didn't want that, then DARPA probably wouldn't again have funded BSD (at least once more, funding OpenBSD about $25 million, I don't remember off hand other instances). To address your last statement, I highly doubt most companies consider GPL to be public domain, since most of them avoid it like the plauge even if how they wanted to use it would have been legal. The only real difference between BSD and public domain is that you must include a Copyright notice.
What difference? faqmaster stated that MS stole BSD code, which is pure FUD. There was no comparision, I was simply stating that it's completely false. The BSD folks encourage everyone to use their code, they want MS to use the BSD IP stack. If they didn't, they wouldn't use the BSD license. Plain and simple.
In the sense that I have a high 6 digit UID, you could say I'm new to slashdot, however I did read it long before I actually signed up an account. It's just very disturbing to see the kind of FUD and hipocracy being spread around here. Slashdot folks wonder when MS and the like will stop spreading FUD, as well as Joe 6pack and the like start using Linux as a desktop, but maybe they should clean up their act first? It's hard to say how much better your (insert OSS item here) is over (insert MS equivelent item here) when you're doing a lot of the same things that you say makes MS's item look bad, or that make MS look bad.
Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you people? You CAN'T steal something that someone is giving away FREE OF CHARGE to use in ANY WAY you see fit. MS is given permision to use any BSD code they want, without doing a damn thing other than including a Copyright notice SOMEWHERE in their docs (whether it be online or in the distribution). And believe it or not, this is what the BSD folks want.
There is nothing ethically wrong with what MS did either. The whole ideals behind BSD was it was free for anyone to use for any purpose. They encouraged people to adopt their code, and the BSD's still do today. The whole BSD philosiphy is to give quality code to the community, to use as they see fit. Not to have others do your development for you, which is what the GPL wants, since it requires you to send your changes to the author.
Do you have any proof of this? Like the location of the file? Or network logs of IE calling home? Give me something here, I'm very interested in this.
Get the limited service which gives you all the local channels (no cable channels) and only costs $10/mo, and gives you $15 discount on internet, so you're bill is $5 cheaper plus you get your local channels on cable.
You can get internet access without cable TV at Comcast. You do however get a discount on Cable Internet if you are a Cable TV subscriber. I got the limited service with Comcast, which is basically local channels via cable (no TBS or anything), and it costs me $10/mo. I look at my bill, and says I get $15 discount on internet for being a TV subscriber, so I actually pay less than if I didn't have TV at all, so works out for me.
Nananananananana google!
Nananananananana google!
google! google! BATMAN! I mean...GOOGLE!
"Not only that, but these holes are usually patched in a matter of days, ..."
Except this one which has been around for 7 years. Come on, this is a well known, 7 YEAR OLD vulnerability, why the hell did it make it's way back into Firefox/Mozilla? Don't get me wrong, I use Firefox all the time (using it now to post), but this is pretty bad when they code a known, 7 year old vulnerability back in.
I don't know, declaring encryption use as criminal intent could have it's benefits. Now, all the US Government is evil and has criminal intent. But then most of /. thinks that anyway without a Court ruling this, except now State governments think it too.
I wish to buy your tiger repelling rock...
So, you've been using Linux since Torvalds wrote it back in the early 90's? Back then you had to have Minix just to install Linux, bet that was fun. Because if I remember correctly, Linux was born in '93, only 12 years ago, and that's if it was written in the begining of '93. And what are these Linux kernel based systems, I wasn't aware of any systems based on the Linux kernel, other than Linux?