If we start looking at every politician based soley on his or her merits alone and ignore his or her political affiliation we would see the enormous "change of course" that we have been promised oh-so-many times and never actually seen.
Sorry Charlie, even that won't help fix the problem. It doesn't matter how we evaluate candidates and politicians.
What matters is how our electoral system is set up, the bylaws that encourage a two-party system, and the very real way that support for specific legislation is bought and sold by concessions and support of other legislation. Throwing in with one of two parties is the best way for any legislator to ensure they actually have input into the legislative process... and no amount of consideration at the ballot is going to change that.
The only way to break out of this system is to rewrite our electoral procedures, and to rewrite our congressional procedures. Not gonna happen, since the people who could do so are the very people benefited by our current system.
Furthermore, evaluating a candidate on the issues is fairly meaningless, since when push comes to shove they'll make sure to vote with the people that give them their power (and if you think their power comes from the voters, you're deluded). See Obama in re: warrantless wiretapping.
If they don't want to follow the constitution, then they have no claim to legitimacy.
No strictly legitimate claim to legitimacy.
However, they have lots of other claims to legitimacy, the most important of which is:
The consent of the people (evidenced by the lack of support for their overthrow).
The consent of the people trumps the Constitution in practice as well as in principle; though the failure of the people to force government to adhere to the Constitution tells me that the Constitution is a dead document. I suggest putting your faith in that document is misguided at best, since it obviously is worth very little.
Sure there is, I'm guessing that it's a federal judge sitting on a bench in New Jersey. It's not any different than referring to somebody as a Tallahassee lawyer or an East Bristol painter.
Just because you can't separate the two bits doesn't mean that it's wrong.
1. The judge sits in PA, not NJ.
2. Besides the factual error, specifying the actual Court makes more sense since it provides disambiguation.
This is not the same as a Tallahassee lawyer or an East Bristol painter, since strict jurisdiction does not apply to lawyers or painters.
That's not a problem normally but if you put plastic boxes that aren't supposed to be recycled into your dishwasher to use them as a lunch-box then you have a problem since they weren't designed for such high temperatures and the phthalates are released.
It's not just phthalates that are a problem when microwaving/dishwashing soft plastics. Everyone has heard of the plastic wrap/dioxin issue... and though this is a myth, it pays to be cautious and only use recommended plastics in the microwave.
Some of the nasties that these soft plastics may emit: Phthalates, polyvinyl chlorides, bisphenol A, xenoestrogens, midichlorians, and corporothetans.
The last two are of particular concern, since the FDA does not regulate or test for them AT ALL. Long-term exposure to these substances may result in the conditions doofus speechimpedimus (Binksism) and megalomaniacal dwarfism (Tomcruisitis), respectively.
Note: joking aside, the link provided is a good resource.
I have a friend with a large vinyl album collection. Some 5,000 vinyls!
Funny, I always thought he was a bit of an introvert. Now I know why.;)
Tangentially, what about new cars? Part of the "new car smell" is phthalates and other plasticizers outgassed from the car interior... I wonder if there is a higher incidence of autism in children whose parents bought a new car early in their life?
Unrelated to autism (I think), I get nauseous in new cars, or in limos with the "new car small" releaser thingy on the dashboard. So much so that I'll never buy a new car without having my wife use it for the first few months... but since she does the majority of schlepping the kid around, maybe I should rethink that strategy.
The judge may be in NJ (since federal jurisdictions often overlap individual states).
Also note that there is no such thing as a "New Jersey federal judge". Submitter should be a little more careful... that judge has a specific title which wolud disambiguate which court we're talking about.
and just released a tool to retroactively remove DRM from older games.
No they didn't. In essence, they released a tool to reset your "activated" flag from TRUE to FALSE.
So when you try to install and activate on a second machine, you can -- as long as you have unactivated on the first machine. This is nice, since it allows for continuance of the doctrine of first sale. This is not nice, as it still leaves the DRM.
All this does is make their DRM adhere to certain consumer protection laws.
Also note that they have not committed to release Sims 3 DRM-free; instead, they have vowed not to use the broken DRM tool they have been using up til now.
if they qualify under  50.24 Exception from informed consent requirements for emergency research, The probably.
That's an awesome way to say 'yes'. I think I'm going to use it from now on.
Wife: Did you take the trash out yet? Me: The probably.
Daughter: Daddy can I have a cookie? Me: The probably.
Wife: Do you want to have another baby? Me: The probably.
At the very least, it will buy me some time while they are confused, which will allow me to either think of a better answer, or escape to another location.
Me: Hey ladies, my kittehs - let me show you them. Ladies: Awww, he has kittehs in his box Bouncer: I can't believe this crap. Two guys bringing in dead kittens on the same day? Open the box. Me: No, they're not dead yet! Well, they're not alive either. They're both until we open the box, and given that there are two kittehs, chances are about 50% that we have one live kitteh and one dead one. Or maybe two half-dead kittehs. Bouncer: Out you go Me: *THUMP*
Maybe I'm just too geeky, but this bringing-kitties-into-the-bar-thing doesn't seem to work well.
And seriously, wtf? A live/dead kitty post and it takes an hour and FIVE posts before a Schrodinger reference? WTF happened to my beloved slashdot?
So... in a couple years, we'll see a slimmed-down version of Firefox (we can call it Earthbadger or something). And when excited developers let feature creep set in, we can then move on to the slimmed-down version of Earthbadger (which we can call WaterBeaver or something). Then, when that gets bloated, we can move on to the slimmed-down AirKitteh.
You get where I'm going with this?
You want a slim browser, right now? Use Lynx. It won't get any slimmer than that.
Microsoft: 4437
IBM: 1413
Hewlett-Packard: 520
Apple Computer: 291
Never mind the fact that one of those companies is a service company (IBM). Maybe parent to your post chose to ignore the fact that IBM has entire LOBs that are headshops, more-or-less?
Second, true free markets[1] are not guaranteed to be always upward moving; failures and downturns are part of the natural process. And there is really nothing wrong with that[1]. When a government gets in the way of the natural progression, it is no longer a free market[3].
[1] Please define what you mean by true free market -- do you mean an ideal free market, or a free-as-in-unchecked-capitalism market?
[2] Care to support your opinion that there's nothing wrong with an unchecked business cycle? You state it as fact, but I personally have a differet opinion -- namely, that it is possible and just for government to act to reduce the negative impacts of a natural economic downturn (things like starvation come to mind); and I also believe that it is possible and just for a government to act to benefit the whole of the population by esatblishing rules and regulations that serve to mitigate risk, thus allowing capital to flow freely.
[3] So? What is to say that a free market is the best way to handle an economy?
Here's the thing I don't understand about most people who support free markets -- do they support free markets "just because" of some idealogical notion, or is there some rational reason that an unrestricted market would produce better results?
Even the Austrian model recognizes the need for regulation in order to (1) promote better information access to the market and (2) adjust for monopolies.
Cuz I'm the real postgre, yes I'm the real postgre
All you other DBs are not relational-y
So won't the real postgre please stand up,
Please stand up, please stand up?
Somehow postgreSQL flows much more lyrically than MySQL.
If it's really so stale that your sweetie doesn't appreciate it that way, maybe you need to figure out what you're doing wrong.
It was a joke. None of it was true. My wife never asks me to pick up tampons.
When I was single, I used to buy tampons at the store all the time, it's a great way to start conversations with women -- they are instantly disarmed by the idea that you are not single.
Then I'd swoop in with the "I'm a high-altitude climber and tampons are the best way to stop a nosebleed at 14,000 feet" and presto! I had a date for the night and was getting laid.
OK, I admit, I never did that, but a friend of mine did.
And even if it got a laugh, it never got him laid.
And actually no one I know has ever tried it, but it was suggested in a book "How to Pick Up Women Even If You are a Scrawny Pimple-faced Teenager" advertised in the back of a comic book.
It is anti-capitalist. I could handle my wages going down 10% a year if the prices I pay for goods were going down at the same rate.
That's exactly what has happened, except in the reverse order.
Prices dropped (relatively) on consumer goods due to globalisation (see prices at Walmart, for example). Wages stayed high. Now, due to the recession, wages are dropping (in effect -- more people unemployed ~= lower wages).
Not you specifically, but anyone who complains about globalisation or offshoring, but shops at Walmart, needs to check themselves.
In other words, TomTom tried to get a better deal, Microsoft called their bluff, and TomTom folded their hand.
A poker analogy? Really?
I demand a car analogy. I'll make it myself - it's a simple game of chicken.
TomTom is driving a mid-size sedan. Microsoft is driving a semi. TomTom pulls onto the patent infringement claim one-lane road, heading west. Microsoft pulls onto the same road, one mile west of TomTom, heading east. The wind is blowing from the SW at 40 knots, and road conditions are icy. What time does TomTom arrive in Schenectady, New York assuming an average velocity of "Back the fuck up, MS is bringing out the FAT claims"?
What do you mean, how did I "realize" it? Don't you keep track of your post count, incrementing by one for each post you make? What kind of slashdot geek are you?!
You know some couples are actually secure enough with each other not to freak out if their partners hints that they sometimes think about other people, and are actually capable of taking a joke about it.
Sure, but the best relationships are secure enough that if one partner hints they sometimes think about other people, the other partner says, "Well, let's have her over for drinks".
Or so I've heard.
Or fantasized.
Actually, I read about it in Penthouse Forum.
(offstage shouting)
Yes honey, I forgot, I'm so sorry, I'll go pick up tampons at the store for you -- I'm leaving right now. (That's how relationships actually work, in my experience).
I guess folks haven't been reading ProPublica, Media Matters or Talking Points Memo.
ProPublica -- fair enough. Investigative journalism is the meat & potatoes of this org.
Media Matters -- not investigative journalism. MM is a metajournalism site -- they are all about criticizing other media sources for bad journalism.
Talking Points Memo -- They are trying to focus more on original reporting, but are still largely a metajournalism site. Most of the entries are viewpoints on stories published elsewhere. It remains to be seen if they can pull off the switch to actual reporting (Polk award last year is helping:)).
There is a high degree of priority shuffling right now as we fence w/ the corporate overlords about what defines "important".:)
Sounds like a typical large project... partway through implementation the powers that be change the goalposts. Though I have to say I'm very curious what the project plan looks like:)
I certainly don't care about what stories they've tagged. Why should I?
Because the corporate overlords want slashdot to be your 'home on the web'. They want you to direct acquaintances and friends to your user page to find more about you. They want your slashdot journal to replace your blog.
My question is, how long until we have the capability to post pics on slashdot? It's completely in my own head, but I feel like the long-term goal is to make slashdot a complete social networking site (for nerds).
Heh, I just realized that the comment I'm replying to was my 5000th comment.
Fitting that it should be a comment in a meta-article.
I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry -- but it appears I have spent enough time on slashdot to have built my flying car myself instead of bemoaning the lack of same on slashdot.
Shattered Glass is a film about how an investigative journalist, Adam Peneberg, working for Forbes.com in 1996, exposed journalist Stephen Glass for plagiarizing nearly every article he wrote for The New Republic, a well trusted and highly respected journalistic publication.
Stephen Glass wasn't busted for plagiarism, he was busted mostly for making up sources and facts.
A contemporary of his at TNR, Ruth Shalit, was busted (& fired) for plagiarism and factual errors.
Under Peretz (the Editor-in-Chief of TNR), TNR has lost a ton of respect in journalistic circles.
There have been more recent issues with TNR, (google Spiegel, Ackerman, or Beauchamp and The New Republic for details)... lots of factual problems and insufficient editorial oversight.
At any rate, you're correct about investigative journalism on the web... I just find it interesting that the examples you cite (sans wikileaks) deal with 'disproving' traditional print media investigative journalism. I find the web to be a great source for debunking falsehoods, but not as good for primary material... maybe I'm looking in the wrong places:)
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry Charlie, even that won't help fix the problem. It doesn't matter how we evaluate candidates and politicians.
What matters is how our electoral system is set up, the bylaws that encourage a two-party system, and the very real way that support for specific legislation is bought and sold by concessions and support of other legislation. Throwing in with one of two parties is the best way for any legislator to ensure they actually have input into the legislative process... and no amount of consideration at the ballot is going to change that.
The only way to break out of this system is to rewrite our electoral procedures, and to rewrite our congressional procedures. Not gonna happen, since the people who could do so are the very people benefited by our current system.
Furthermore, evaluating a candidate on the issues is fairly meaningless, since when push comes to shove they'll make sure to vote with the people that give them their power (and if you think their power comes from the voters, you're deluded). See Obama in re: warrantless wiretapping.
No strictly legitimate claim to legitimacy.
However, they have lots of other claims to legitimacy, the most important of which is:
The consent of the people (evidenced by the lack of support for their overthrow).
The consent of the people trumps the Constitution in practice as well as in principle; though the failure of the people to force government to adhere to the Constitution tells me that the Constitution is a dead document. I suggest putting your faith in that document is misguided at best, since it obviously is worth very little.
1. The judge sits in PA, not NJ.
2. Besides the factual error, specifying the actual Court makes more sense since it provides disambiguation.
This is not the same as a Tallahassee lawyer or an East Bristol painter, since strict jurisdiction does not apply to lawyers or painters.
It's not just phthalates that are a problem when microwaving/dishwashing soft plastics. Everyone has heard of the plastic wrap/dioxin issue... and though this is a myth, it pays to be cautious and only use recommended plastics in the microwave.
Some of the nasties that these soft plastics may emit: Phthalates, polyvinyl chlorides, bisphenol A, xenoestrogens, midichlorians, and corporothetans.
The last two are of particular concern, since the FDA does not regulate or test for them AT ALL. Long-term exposure to these substances may result in the conditions doofus speechimpedimus (Binksism) and megalomaniacal dwarfism (Tomcruisitis), respectively.
Note: joking aside, the link provided is a good resource.
Tangentially, what about new cars? Part of the "new car smell" is phthalates and other plasticizers outgassed from the car interior... I wonder if there is a higher incidence of autism in children whose parents bought a new car early in their life?
Unrelated to autism (I think), I get nauseous in new cars, or in limos with the "new car small" releaser thingy on the dashboard. So much so that I'll never buy a new car without having my wife use it for the first few months... but since she does the majority of schlepping the kid around, maybe I should rethink that strategy.
These teens are in PA, not NJ.
There is no Wyoming County in NJ.
The judge may be in NJ (since federal jurisdictions often overlap individual states).
Also note that there is no such thing as a "New Jersey federal judge". Submitter should be a little more careful... that judge has a specific title which wolud disambiguate which court we're talking about.
That summary was atrocious. Blech.
No they didn't. In essence, they released a tool to reset your "activated" flag from TRUE to FALSE.
So when you try to install and activate on a second machine, you can -- as long as you have unactivated on the first machine. This is nice, since it allows for continuance of the doctrine of first sale. This is not nice, as it still leaves the DRM.
All this does is make their DRM adhere to certain consumer protection laws.
Also note that they have not committed to release Sims 3 DRM-free; instead, they have vowed not to use the broken DRM tool they have been using up til now.
That's an awesome way to say 'yes'. I think I'm going to use it from now on.
Wife: Did you take the trash out yet?
Me: The probably.
Daughter: Daddy can I have a cookie?
Me: The probably.
Wife: Do you want to have another baby?
Me: The probably.
At the very least, it will buy me some time while they are confused, which will allow me to either think of a better answer, or escape to another location.
I heard it alssso makes the wearer invisssible.
You know, because it's preciousss.
Maybe I'm just too geeky, but this bringing-kitties-into-the-bar-thing doesn't seem to work well.
And seriously, wtf? A live/dead kitty post and it takes an hour and FIVE posts before a Schrodinger reference? WTF happened to my beloved slashdot?
So... in a couple years, we'll see a slimmed-down version of Firefox (we can call it Earthbadger or something). And when excited developers let feature creep set in, we can then move on to the slimmed-down version of Earthbadger (which we can call WaterBeaver or something). Then, when that gets bloated, we can move on to the slimmed-down AirKitteh.
You get where I'm going with this?
You want a slim browser, right now? Use Lynx. It won't get any slimmer than that.
Never mind the fact that one of those companies is a service company (IBM). Maybe parent to your post chose to ignore the fact that IBM has entire LOBs that are headshops, more-or-less?
[1] Please define what you mean by true free market -- do you mean an ideal free market, or a free-as-in-unchecked-capitalism market?
[2] Care to support your opinion that there's nothing wrong with an unchecked business cycle? You state it as fact, but I personally have a differet opinion -- namely, that it is possible and just for government to act to reduce the negative impacts of a natural economic downturn (things like starvation come to mind); and I also believe that it is possible and just for a government to act to benefit the whole of the population by esatblishing rules and regulations that serve to mitigate risk, thus allowing capital to flow freely.
[3] So? What is to say that a free market is the best way to handle an economy?
Here's the thing I don't understand about most people who support free markets -- do they support free markets "just because" of some idealogical notion, or is there some rational reason that an unrestricted market would produce better results?
Even the Austrian model recognizes the need for regulation in order to (1) promote better information access to the market and (2) adjust for monopolies.
Somehow postgreSQL flows much more lyrically than MySQL.
It was a joke. None of it was true. My wife never asks me to pick up tampons.
When I was single, I used to buy tampons at the store all the time, it's a great way to start conversations with women -- they are instantly disarmed by the idea that you are not single.
Then I'd swoop in with the "I'm a high-altitude climber and tampons are the best way to stop a nosebleed at 14,000 feet" and presto! I had a date for the night and was getting laid.
OK, I admit, I never did that, but a friend of mine did.
And even if it got a laugh, it never got him laid.
And actually no one I know has ever tried it, but it was suggested in a book "How to Pick Up Women Even If You are a Scrawny Pimple-faced Teenager" advertised in the back of a comic book.
That's exactly what has happened, except in the reverse order.
Prices dropped (relatively) on consumer goods due to globalisation (see prices at Walmart, for example). Wages stayed high. Now, due to the recession, wages are dropping (in effect -- more people unemployed ~= lower wages).
Not you specifically, but anyone who complains about globalisation or offshoring, but shops at Walmart, needs to check themselves.
A poker analogy? Really?
I demand a car analogy. I'll make it myself - it's a simple game of chicken.
TomTom is driving a mid-size sedan. Microsoft is driving a semi. TomTom pulls onto the patent infringement claim one-lane road, heading west. Microsoft pulls onto the same road, one mile west of TomTom, heading east. The wind is blowing from the SW at 40 knots, and road conditions are icy. What time does TomTom arrive in Schenectady, New York assuming an average velocity of "Back the fuck up, MS is bringing out the FAT claims"?
What do you mean, how did I "realize" it?
Don't you keep track of your post count, incrementing by one for each post you make?
What kind of slashdot geek are you?!
http://slashdot.org/users.pl
Saw it in another comment.
Dunno how long we'll have the classic view.
Sure, but the best relationships are secure enough that if one partner hints they sometimes think about other people, the other partner says, "Well, let's have her over for drinks".
Or so I've heard.
Or fantasized.
Actually, I read about it in Penthouse Forum.
(offstage shouting)
Yes honey, I forgot, I'm so sorry, I'll go pick up tampons at the store for you -- I'm leaving right now. (That's how relationships actually work, in my experience).
ProPublica -- fair enough. Investigative journalism is the meat & potatoes of this org.
:)).
Media Matters -- not investigative journalism. MM is a metajournalism site -- they are all about criticizing other media sources for bad journalism.
Talking Points Memo -- They are trying to focus more on original reporting, but are still largely a metajournalism site. Most of the entries are viewpoints on stories published elsewhere. It remains to be seen if they can pull off the switch to actual reporting (Polk award last year is helping
Gersh Gurn-dee Seerven zee subpoenorsky bork bork bork?
Sounds like a typical large project... partway through implementation the powers that be change the goalposts. Though I have to say I'm very curious what the project plan looks like :)
Because the corporate overlords want slashdot to be your 'home on the web'. They want you to direct acquaintances and friends to your user page to find more about you. They want your slashdot journal to replace your blog.
My question is, how long until we have the capability to post pics on slashdot? It's completely in my own head, but I feel like the long-term goal is to make slashdot a complete social networking site (for nerds).
Heh, I just realized that the comment I'm replying to was my 5000th comment.
Fitting that it should be a comment in a meta-article.
I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry -- but it appears I have spent enough time on slashdot to have built my flying car myself instead of bemoaning the lack of same on slashdot.
Stephen Glass wasn't busted for plagiarism, he was busted mostly for making up sources and facts.
:)
A contemporary of his at TNR, Ruth Shalit, was busted (& fired) for plagiarism and factual errors.
Under Peretz (the Editor-in-Chief of TNR), TNR has lost a ton of respect in journalistic circles.
There have been more recent issues with TNR, (google Spiegel, Ackerman, or Beauchamp and The New Republic for details)... lots of factual problems and insufficient editorial oversight.
At any rate, you're correct about investigative journalism on the web... I just find it interesting that the examples you cite (sans wikileaks) deal with 'disproving' traditional print media investigative journalism. I find the web to be a great source for debunking falsehoods, but not as good for primary material... maybe I'm looking in the wrong places