Exactly! When I read the Swimsuit Issue I feel the same towards the right ones as I do the left ones! They both look better when you're in the center though!!
(Oh crap there goes any claim I had to the moral high-ground)
No thats not the point. What I *said* was that when there was a positive story on McCain it was 'balanced' by a negative story about something else. When there was a positive story on Obama it was always 'underscored' by positive stories about something else.
Now allow me to elaborate... I dont think CNN had some master plan to do that. (Judging from their writing I dont think they're smart enough Ha ha ha). It probably had more to do with automatically promoting popular stories by tracking click rates. CNN's readers probably are more likely to read happy stories when their candidate is presented positively and so on. If there is a lesson it's that news should be disassociated from popularity so as not to be so self-serving.
Im a conservative and I agree with you on NPR. If there is any common theme in NPR it's that the issue is more complicated than it seems. If there is a common theme in Big Media, its that we're idiots for watching this crap. But what should we expect when the networks only manage to sandwich in a 30 minute news show between "Dancing With The Stars" and "Survivor". And what should we expect when we dont demand more from them, and are willing to accept shallow half-truths and out-of-context sound bites.
Dont be a fool, those are certainly not bold claims, and Im not even sure it was a claim. And if it were even a cursory application of critical thinking would show they cant be proven, and certainly not to the vast majority of those that have their minds made up. And even if it's true I doubt it's a conspiracy as much as an unintentional reflection of the mindset of the editors.
I'm not trying to sway any opinions here... but maybe one or two people will look more carefully at the way news is presented and may see the pattern I thought I saw. If anyone replies to this thread in six months and tells me I imagined it all I can live with that. If you dont give a crap I can live with that too. But dont accuse me of making some Grand Statement and demand thorough and incontrovertible documentation because a thought doesnt conveniently fit in your mindset.
To be honest every liberal should only get their news from Fox and every conservative should only get their news from NPR
Ha ha not a bad idea. Obviously Im conservative, but I cant stand Fox, and they're my last choice for a news outlet. I read CNN mostly because its a good page layout, and provide links to more in-depth coverage thats less biased (Time/Money/SI Swimsuits/etc).
If you want unbiased though you need to go to BBC I think. I cant look at the BBC RSS feed without thinking either US news is incompetent or purposely burying world news. Either excuse is disturbing.
Agreed! I dont think Obama's ads were all that negative. The *Union* adds against McCain were some scary shit. SEIU made the AFL/CIO look like kittens. The thing that worries me about the election results were how many favors the Dems owe the Unions for their millions this election cycle.
screams "correlation is not causation!". You're clearly not part of that half.
Yes, Im the half that isnt screaming.:-) What half are you in?
But at the risk of offending you, not all economic news is downbeat. Housing starts are defting all logic to trend sharply down. Jobs are holding steadier than anyone thought possible. Consumer confidence is down, but thats driven as much by media as by events. Consumer spending on durable goods has been far better than the bleak face the media puts on TV every night. Not enough bankers have jumped from the top floors, but personally I consider that a negative.
Like I said, bias is in the eye of the beholder. You clearly are a fan of Obama, so OK, but that doesnt make you more unbiased than me. To me there is a pattern on CNN and I noticed it back in the Clinton administration so my statistical sample isnt as small as you would like.
Funny, I find MSNBC less biased than CNN. Perhaps conservatives and liberals perceive bias differently:-) But the slant I noticed on CNN was elegant and subtle. Not only were they unlikely to run a positive story on McCain, but if they did then all other stories on the main page would be negative. If the biz section had a downbeat story on the economy, then the political section would have a McCain story. If the Science section told of some breakthrough, they would run an Obama story in National or Politics. Stories also ran for very arbitrary periods of time... negative stories could stay on the page for weeks unchanged. Positive stories lasted half a day to two days. I think there was an intentional effort on CNN's part to paint the public mood as gloomy as possible, which helped Obama.
Also although I agree that Obama's message did strike a chord and McCain's messages were largely negative, in all fairness McCain had lots of positive messages but they were flatly refused to be reported. The new outlets only mentioned his negative stuff. Obama had *lots* of attacks on McCain but he was getting a lot more coverage so it didnt appear as if thats all he was saying.
Depends on the girl. As someone said, a woman should dress as expensively as getting her undressed will be. Three carats of VVF will usually get you more than 3 shots of Cabo Wabo. Both together will get you absolutely *mauled* though.
Not that I disagree with your views, but try to remember they are *your* views. Gay marriage, whether you're for or against, is a lot more important and relevant to some people than saving Bletchley. Not to me, I'm a geek, but we have to accept other people's right to believe and support what they want, just as we expect to not have others views imposed on us. The world needs some tolerance of others a lot more than it needs money.
... here
here including the kid's name. Article notes this isnt the first time he's been in trouble for hacking, so it may explain the apparent over zealous charges.
I thought it was clear from the get-go I object to the treatment of the topic by the/. editor that tagged it "onemorevoteformccain" and the general timbre of the discussion board.
While I agree that courts may not put gag orders on political manifestos, they can do so when they are presented as, say, works for hire by the court, or if they contain (as you yourself suggest) trade secrets, unsubstantiated libel, or such. I cannot find any references that say if Andy was hired by the court as an independent expert, or if simply filed an amicus birief as he did in prior cases. Most of what I read about Andy is written by Andy, and that I find that a little suspicious as well. Note too that "his fellow researchers" are actually his students, so no credit for objectivity there either. That Andy even said "fellow researchers" instead of "students" shows, if not bias, then at least a lil' spin on his part. Im also noting that Andy, while not the plaintif per se, certainly does not have an arms-length disinterest from the plaintiffs, nor is he politically objective. I would prefer that the expert testimony before a court not come from someone with political bias; not that there is necessarily a willful intent to deceive but that its very difficult to see issues clearly through the lens of one's personal passions. I would argue that Andy has to be a *little* passionate to kick in $4000 on a teachers salary.
I can get behind the idea that Andy's work is in the public interest, but his blog writings are a little self-important and this one seems a little fit of pique. It's not Andy but Slashdot that took the post and made a Saint and Saviour of him, took up the call for a lynching, and front-page news over this non-story. Just/. being/. I guess...
Thats not fair. Id rather insult you too and Im not even arguing with you. Parent is right, you're clueless. The rule of law is about being fair and consistent, not caving to your silly needs for gratification
If you want to pass judgement on court documents, Im afraid that you'll either have to become a judge, or move somewhere that no one gives a shit about defendents' rights.
Oh, about your sig, been meaning to tell you that "Patriotism" isnt akin to racism, that would be "Nationalism", which incidentally I agree with.
I agree. Completely! So if we all agree why the hell does every discussion about voting machines end up blaming Republicans for yet another Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (VRWC (tm))? Why, when a clearly biased and self-interested plaintiff bitches on a blog about what is very possibly his political manifesto get gagged by the court that ordered an independent review, does slashdot whip itself into a frenzy of moral outrage. Front page news with no corroboration except one guys blog rant, and every comment screaming GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY is modded +200 insightful. If we're supposed to be the best and brightest, society is effing doomed.
Andy Appel donated $4000 to Kerry http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2004/09/13/news/10683.shtml and originally complained that his voting machine had an extra vote for Obama. Now that the primary is over his conspiracy theory has switched to focusing on an extra vote for Republicans. Andy would probably like the machine just fine if it had an extra vote for Clinton.
Donating $4000 to Democrats hardly gives me a warm 'n fuzzy that Andy Appel's report or blog can be trusted to be objective. Since he is basically the plaintif as well, he has no reason to be objective either. That's fine I guess, but the media reports and his own blog suggest he is some kind of independant expert retained by the court, which is absolutely untrue and misleading.
And screw our objective/. editors that immediately tagged the story with "onemorevoteformccain", although a recent check says they thought better of it.
"In fairness, the picture is wholly unrelated to the story"
...and the picture isnt taken in August in Germany (note bare trees and winter driving gear) and the driver isnt 17 unless they've been taking East German steroids. Which would ALSO be AWESOME!
It is overpriced, underwhelming performance, and absolutely the coolest damned thing Ive bought in ten years. When I can fight off the kids over the rights to pry it from my wife's hands, its just a blast to use. Ive now read more Terry Pratchett on the Kindle than in dead tree form. And the kids find all these great direct-to-electronic format books from micropublishers. OK so it didnt live up to my plan to download all my PDF tech manuals. And it may only have a 100k books available, but they seem to be the 100k books I wanted to read. And the web browser is fair to passing, and access to wikipedia works just peachy, and Amazon picks up the wireless charges. I take back some of what I said about Bezos...
As a New Englander, I wouldn't much mind shorter winters
Hah! Liar!! Real New Englanders scoff at spring and welcome the snow. The only real danger of global warming is shortening the snowmobile season. (Not the skiing season, which is a silly practice inflicted on us by New Yawkuhs and other Foreigners, performed on imitation snow, as a conspiracy to shorten the hunting season).
Depends on your point of view. You have to pay more to get a Vista version that is downgrade-able, but you do end up with XP Pro instead of XP Home. If you wanted Home you cant have it at all. If you want Pro, its the same price as always. From a practical standpoint, its 'paying extra' depending on how much you want to hate Dell and Microsoft.
"People who live in Maine"... thats your problem. Very different from people *from* Maine. A lot of Maine is populated by New Yorkers that couldnt afford Long Island waterfront. They cant find Massachusetts on a map even though they drove through it to get to Maine, and they hit a few Starbucks there on the way.
Real Mainiacs can be identified by their large feet evolved for crossing snow drifts, know where they are relative to Canada just by sniffing the air, and can find the nearest unguarded border crossings using a mutated recessive gene. A Real Maniac, most importantly though, will pretend to look at the map you shove at them and give you a fiendishly crafted answer with the sole intended result of making you go back to New York and never returning. An answer like "What's Canada?" for instance...
...or you been played by Iran to make you think you been played by the CIA to *erode* support for taking action. Oh wait, maybe you been played by Israel to make you think you been played by Iran to make you think you been played by the CIA. No, WAIT! You been played by the media to hype the story about being played by... no, wait,... well, you been played anyway.
Besides the time you've wasted thinking about it, there are 160+ comments on this story resulting in probably near $10k in lost engineering person-hours. Seriously, into the trash with them.
If they have to be like fridge leftovers, and sit in a pile until the guilt diffuses out of them, OK, but dont dwell on it.
If it helps to let go, give them a purpose discarding them... load them with porn, put some in the bosses trash, and call HR. Bury them all behind the competitions offices and call the EPA. Load them with Google Earth images of military bases, distribute them to 100 Chinese restaurants, and call Homeland Security. Or just fill them with random file names with random data and mail to the NSA for decryption.
An 'FPGA'? Now all we need is a backronym.... - Finally Protecting Groovy Audio?
- For Profit - Genuine Advantage (r)
- Fucking Punk Gangster Attorneys?
- Forced to Purchase Google Adware?
- Financial Ploy to Generate Assets?
- Federal Policy Gets Absurd?
- Funding Prohibited Government Appropriations?
- For Playing God Again?
Freedom, Privacy Getting Ambushed?
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly! When I read the Swimsuit Issue I feel the same towards the right ones as I do the left ones! They both look better when you're in the center though!!
(Oh crap there goes any claim I had to the moral high-ground)
No thats not the point. What I *said* was that when there was a positive story on McCain it was 'balanced' by a negative story about something else. When there was a positive story on Obama it was always 'underscored' by positive stories about something else.
Now allow me to elaborate... I dont think CNN had some master plan to do that. (Judging from their writing I dont think they're smart enough Ha ha ha). It probably had more to do with automatically promoting popular stories by tracking click rates. CNN's readers probably are more likely to read happy stories when their candidate is presented positively and so on. If there is a lesson it's that news should be disassociated from popularity so as not to be so self-serving.
Im a conservative and I agree with you on NPR. If there is any common theme in NPR it's that the issue is more complicated than it seems. If there is a common theme in Big Media, its that we're idiots for watching this crap. But what should we expect when the networks only manage to sandwich in a 30 minute news show between "Dancing With The Stars" and "Survivor". And what should we expect when we dont demand more from them, and are willing to accept shallow half-truths and out-of-context sound bites.
Dont be a fool, those are certainly not bold claims, and Im not even sure it was a claim. And if it were even a cursory application of critical thinking would show they cant be proven, and certainly not to the vast majority of those that have their minds made up. And even if it's true I doubt it's a conspiracy as much as an unintentional reflection of the mindset of the editors.
I'm not trying to sway any opinions here... but maybe one or two people will look more carefully at the way news is presented and may see the pattern I thought I saw. If anyone replies to this thread in six months and tells me I imagined it all I can live with that. If you dont give a crap I can live with that too. But dont accuse me of making some Grand Statement and demand thorough and incontrovertible documentation because a thought doesnt conveniently fit in your mindset.
Ha ha not a bad idea. Obviously Im conservative, but I cant stand Fox, and they're my last choice for a news outlet. I read CNN mostly because its a good page layout, and provide links to more in-depth coverage thats less biased (Time/Money/SI Swimsuits/etc).
If you want unbiased though you need to go to BBC I think. I cant look at the BBC RSS feed without thinking either US news is incompetent or purposely burying world news. Either excuse is disturbing.
Agreed! I dont think Obama's ads were all that negative. The *Union* adds against McCain were some scary shit. SEIU made the AFL/CIO look like kittens. The thing that worries me about the election results were how many favors the Dems owe the Unions for their millions this election cycle.
Yes, Im the half that isnt screaming. :-) What half are you in?
But at the risk of offending you, not all economic news is downbeat. Housing starts are defting all logic to trend sharply down. Jobs are holding steadier than anyone thought possible. Consumer confidence is down, but thats driven as much by media as by events. Consumer spending on durable goods has been far better than the bleak face the media puts on TV every night. Not enough bankers have jumped from the top floors, but personally I consider that a negative.
Like I said, bias is in the eye of the beholder. You clearly are a fan of Obama, so OK, but that doesnt make you more unbiased than me. To me there is a pattern on CNN and I noticed it back in the Clinton administration so my statistical sample isnt as small as you would like.
Funny, I find MSNBC less biased than CNN. Perhaps conservatives and liberals perceive bias differently :-) But the slant I noticed on CNN was elegant and subtle. Not only were they unlikely to run a positive story on McCain, but if they did then all other stories on the main page would be negative. If the biz section had a downbeat story on the economy, then the political section would have a McCain story. If the Science section told of some breakthrough, they would run an Obama story in National or Politics. Stories also ran for very arbitrary periods of time... negative stories could stay on the page for weeks unchanged. Positive stories lasted half a day to two days. I think there was an intentional effort on CNN's part to paint the public mood as gloomy as possible, which helped Obama.
Also although I agree that Obama's message did strike a chord and McCain's messages were largely negative, in all fairness McCain had lots of positive messages but they were flatly refused to be reported. The new outlets only mentioned his negative stuff. Obama had *lots* of attacks on McCain but he was getting a lot more coverage so it didnt appear as if thats all he was saying.
Depends on the girl. As someone said, a woman should dress as expensively as getting her undressed will be. Three carats of VVF will usually get you more than 3 shots of Cabo Wabo. Both together will get you absolutely *mauled* though.
Not that I disagree with your views, but try to remember they are *your* views. Gay marriage, whether you're for or against, is a lot more important and relevant to some people than saving Bletchley. Not to me, I'm a geek, but we have to accept other people's right to believe and support what they want, just as we expect to not have others views imposed on us. The world needs some tolerance of others a lot more than it needs money.
... here here including the kid's name. Article notes this isnt the first time he's been in trouble for hacking, so it may explain the apparent over zealous charges.
I thought it was clear from the get-go I object to the treatment of the topic by the /. editor that tagged it "onemorevoteformccain" and the general timbre of the discussion board.
/. being /. I guess ...
While I agree that courts may not put gag orders on political manifestos, they can do so when they are presented as, say, works for hire by the court, or if they contain (as you yourself suggest) trade secrets, unsubstantiated libel, or such. I cannot find any references that say if Andy was hired by the court as an independent expert, or if simply filed an amicus birief as he did in prior cases. Most of what I read about Andy is written by Andy, and that I find that a little suspicious as well. Note too that "his fellow researchers" are actually his students, so no credit for objectivity there either. That Andy even said "fellow researchers" instead of "students" shows, if not bias, then at least a lil' spin on his part. Im also noting that Andy, while not the plaintif per se, certainly does not have an arms-length disinterest from the plaintiffs, nor is he politically objective. I would prefer that the expert testimony before a court not come from someone with political bias; not that there is necessarily a willful intent to deceive but that its very difficult to see issues clearly through the lens of one's personal passions. I would argue that Andy has to be a *little* passionate to kick in $4000 on a teachers salary.
I can get behind the idea that Andy's work is in the public interest, but his blog writings are a little self-important and this one seems a little fit of pique. It's not Andy but Slashdot that took the post and made a Saint and Saviour of him, took up the call for a lynching, and front-page news over this non-story. Just
Thats not fair. Id rather insult you too and Im not even arguing with you. Parent is right, you're clueless. The rule of law is about being fair and consistent, not caving to your silly needs for gratification
If you want to pass judgement on court documents, Im afraid that you'll either have to become a judge, or move somewhere that no one gives a shit about defendents' rights.
Oh, about your sig, been meaning to tell you that "Patriotism" isnt akin to racism, that would be "Nationalism", which incidentally I agree with.
I agree. Completely! So if we all agree why the hell does every discussion about voting machines end up blaming Republicans for yet another Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (VRWC (tm))? Why, when a clearly biased and self-interested plaintiff bitches on a blog about what is very possibly his political manifesto get gagged by the court that ordered an independent review, does slashdot whip itself into a frenzy of moral outrage. Front page news with no corroboration except one guys blog rant, and every comment screaming GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY is modded +200 insightful. If we're supposed to be the best and brightest, society is effing doomed.
Andy Appel donated $4000 to Kerry http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2004/09/13/news/10683.shtml and originally complained that his voting machine had an extra vote for Obama. Now that the primary is over his conspiracy theory has switched to focusing on an extra vote for Republicans. Andy would probably like the machine just fine if it had an extra vote for Clinton.
/. editors that immediately tagged the story with "onemorevoteformccain", although a recent check says they thought better of it.
Donating $4000 to Democrats hardly gives me a warm 'n fuzzy that Andy Appel's report or blog can be trusted to be objective. Since he is basically the plaintif as well, he has no reason to be objective either. That's fine I guess, but the media reports and his own blog suggest he is some kind of independant expert retained by the court, which is absolutely untrue and misleading.
And screw our objective
They led you where you are now
You mean affluent, employed, or happy?
It is overpriced, underwhelming performance, and absolutely the coolest damned thing Ive bought in ten years. When I can fight off the kids over the rights to pry it from my wife's hands, its just a blast to use. Ive now read more Terry Pratchett on the Kindle than in dead tree form. And the kids find all these great direct-to-electronic format books from micropublishers. OK so it didnt live up to my plan to download all my PDF tech manuals. And it may only have a 100k books available, but they seem to be the 100k books I wanted to read. And the web browser is fair to passing, and access to wikipedia works just peachy, and Amazon picks up the wireless charges. I take back some of what I said about Bezos...
As a New Englander, I wouldn't much mind shorter winters
Hah! Liar!! Real New Englanders scoff at spring and welcome the snow. The only real danger of global warming is shortening the snowmobile season. (Not the skiing season, which is a silly practice inflicted on us by New Yawkuhs and other Foreigners, performed on imitation snow, as a conspiracy to shorten the hunting season).
What has that got to do with AMD, though?
Because AMD was the one that *started* the rumor, of course!!
But you do have to pay extra for it
Depends on your point of view. You have to pay more to get a Vista version that is downgrade-able, but you do end up with XP Pro instead of XP Home. If you wanted Home you cant have it at all. If you want Pro, its the same price as always. From a practical standpoint, its 'paying extra' depending on how much you want to hate Dell and Microsoft.
"People who live in Maine"... thats your problem. Very different from people *from* Maine. A lot of Maine is populated by New Yorkers that couldnt afford Long Island waterfront. They cant find Massachusetts on a map even though they drove through it to get to Maine, and they hit a few Starbucks there on the way.
Real Mainiacs can be identified by their large feet evolved for crossing snow drifts, know where they are relative to Canada just by sniffing the air, and can find the nearest unguarded border crossings using a mutated recessive gene. A Real Maniac, most importantly though, will pretend to look at the map you shove at them and give you a fiendishly crafted answer with the sole intended result of making you go back to New York and never returning. An answer like "What's Canada?" for instance...
...or you been played by Iran to make you think you been played by the CIA to *erode* support for taking action. Oh wait, maybe you been played by Israel to make you think you been played by Iran to make you think you been played by the CIA. No, WAIT! You been played by the media to hype the story about being played by... no, wait, ... well, you been played anyway.
Besides the time you've wasted thinking about it, there are 160+ comments on this story resulting in probably near $10k in lost engineering person-hours. Seriously, into the trash with them.
If they have to be like fridge leftovers, and sit in a pile until the guilt diffuses out of them, OK, but dont dwell on it.
If it helps to let go, give them a purpose discarding them... load them with porn, put some in the bosses trash, and call HR. Bury them all behind the competitions offices and call the EPA. Load them with Google Earth images of military bases, distribute them to 100 Chinese restaurants, and call Homeland Security. Or just fill them with random file names with random data and mail to the NSA for decryption.
Or, like, seriously, throw them away.
- For Profit - Genuine Advantage (r) - Fucking Punk Gangster Attorneys? - Forced to Purchase Google Adware? - Financial Ploy to Generate Assets? - Federal Policy Gets Absurd? - Funding Prohibited Government Appropriations? - For Playing God Again? Freedom, Privacy Getting Ambushed?