Not to directly compare Stephen to greats like Pryor or Carlin, but how many comedians have had this much impact on political discourse, this quickly? I'm a bit curious what political discourse has changed as a result of his "running", other than all the hubbub about a comedian with his own show running for President.
Has his short-lived non-run actually had an effect on any of the actual issues?
At most, I think he's shone some light into the procedure for becoming a candidate. That's hardly earth-shattering.
Or is it because his campaign is just a thinly disguised advertisement for his show? I thought his show was a thinly disguised advertisement for his presidential campaign...
Should there be some (very) slight preference for a particular ball, or set of balls, over a series of draws over time? So you can have a one in 990,000 chance instead of a one in a million chance?
There have been many stories on Slashdot about electronic voting, and I can recall at least one which detailed a polling station where nobody could vote for three hours because the electronic voting machines didn't work, and/or there was nobody on site who could get the to work.
I don't see any of the problems you list about paper ballots that can't also happen with electronic voting.
I never use chat and always disable it, so I was quite annoyed to discover that when Gmail 2.0 was rolled out, not only was chat re-enabled, but I was logged in! Any new account, or old account using Gmail 2.0 for the first time, will automatically have chat enabled and their status will be showing as online, without any request to do so. I consider this a privacy violation.
The "turn off chat" link at the bottom only disables it, though those stupid rollovers still show up (all I wanted to see was a reasonable-sized box with their e-mail address in it, not some big thing with a silhouette placeholder avatar that I will never fill in!).
There is no way to get rid of the chat box on top of the box of labels, without going to the "older version" in the link at the top right.
While I'm perfectly comfortable with the older version, and I'd have no problem staying with it, I have to click the "older version" link every single time I log in, especially when from a different computer or new location.
Hopefully and theoretically none, but this decision provides more FUD fuel to discredit claims that ODF and other open standards provide longevity for documents better than corporate closed formats do.
If Apple had locked down the iPod to only play with their other hardware we'd all be carrying around Zunes (kidding, but only slightly, SOMETHING would fill the need). The iPhone AT&T lock-in makes for a good test case for the "what if the iPod had been locked in to OSX?" question.
And I think there are far worse things to worry about than Steven Colbert actually winning, particularly since he's only running in South Carolina.
Though personally I think a vote for Ron Paul would also send a strong message about dissatisfaction with the system (and/or the way it is used). But not every election has a Ron Paul.
"What the hell did they manage to do before, so that they thought they'd could also get this through?" Maybe not the same people (though with the revolving doors...), but this comes to mind.
Don't worry, there won't be much outrage this time, either.
You think that if enough people ask Bush and Cheney to change their minds, they'll do so out of the goodness of their hearts? And if they don't, we'll have no choice but to ask them politely again?
Yeah, that's a real incentive.
That sounds a lot like (though not directly comparable to) abstaining from voting to promote change in the electoral system: "I'm going to ignore you and let you take more power until you change your ways."
Whenever I'm open cc'd without my permission, I just reply to the whole list with an angry (heh, no surprise there) rant about how it's important to use bcc, so that jerks with a vengeance don't spam the list with angry rants about the importance of using bcc. Sometimes other people on the list play along, too.
It usually results in a "We're sorry about this e-mail that you received from this guy" message being sent to the list, somehow implying that they had no control over my access to or use of the list.
Maybe his first act as president will be to ask Congress to make Dorritos the national chip? It would be more productive than what Congress is doing at the moment... Are you fucking kidding?
Doritos is clearly a Mexican chip--just look at its name! Do you really want America to be represented by Mexican-named snackfoods? Hell, it's not even a potato chip! And potatoes are as American as you can get--especially for a man with Irish roots like Colbert.
What's next? Replacing the Pledge of Allegiance with "Yo quiero Taco Bell"? Because that will happen if you vote for a candidate with the Mexican lobby behind him.
No, go ahead and vote for him--if you have the cajones.
I honestly hope Colbert wins in SC. Are you really sure about that?
Colbert is doing in this campaign exactly what he does on the show--an exaggerated version of the stupidest stuff that is done by the people he parodies.
The purpose of TDS and TCR is not to be a real news show, but to make really clear the stupid stuff that takes away the integrity of real news shows. Similarly, the purpose of this campaign is not to be a real campaign, but to expose the corruption and falseness of real political campaigns.
If he actually does win, it will only go to show that nobody gets his point, but that they're just a slightly different bunch of sheeple.
Slashdot Mirror
D'oh!
Thanks. In that case, I guess that makes "if he is, he will survive" a pretty big "if"!
- RG>
He will not be electrocuted, or at least if he is, he will survive.
Of all the crewmembers aboard the ISS/Space Shuttle, Parazynski is the most experienced.
If NASA were going to kill off a character, they'd send out one of the junior redshirts to do the repair job.
- RG>
Has his short-lived non-run actually had an effect on any of the actual issues?
At most, I think he's shone some light into the procedure for becoming a candidate. That's hardly earth-shattering.
- RG>
- RG>
You mean he really did apply? Paid the fee and everything? I thought he was just saying he was running, as a joke.
(Oblig:) You know, like Mike Gravel.
- RG>
- RG>
You're right, it looks like another instance of Gambler's Fallacy.
The only way to know is to test the predictive capacity of his theory against a recognized, standardized control.
If his theory is at least as good as a psychic at predicting lottery numbers, then we'll know he's onto something!
- RG>
There have been many stories on Slashdot about electronic voting, and I can recall at least one which detailed a polling station where nobody could vote for three hours because the electronic voting machines didn't work, and/or there was nobody on site who could get the to work.
I don't see any of the problems you list about paper ballots that can't also happen with electronic voting.
- RG>
I don't know who's sleeping with whom, but it sure looks like someone's getting fucked.
- RG>
More details at 11!
- RG>
- RG>
But his sig showed up, didn't it?
- RG>
I never use chat and always disable it, so I was quite annoyed to discover that when Gmail 2.0 was rolled out, not only was chat re-enabled, but I was logged in! Any new account, or old account using Gmail 2.0 for the first time, will automatically have chat enabled and their status will be showing as online, without any request to do so. I consider this a privacy violation.
The "turn off chat" link at the bottom only disables it, though those stupid rollovers still show up (all I wanted to see was a reasonable-sized box with their e-mail address in it, not some big thing with a silhouette placeholder avatar that I will never fill in!).
There is no way to get rid of the chat box on top of the box of labels, without going to the "older version" in the link at the top right.
While I'm perfectly comfortable with the older version, and I'd have no problem staying with it, I have to click the "older version" link every single time I log in, especially when from a different computer or new location.
Why can't I simply kill chat once and for all?
- RG>
Hopefully and theoretically none, but this decision provides more FUD fuel to discredit claims that ODF and other open standards provide longevity for documents better than corporate closed formats do.
- RG>
- RG>
Do you think that if a story like this were untrue, a corporation like BestBuy would just sit and not issue a denial?
Heck, they even try to deny these stories even when they are true.
Their silence speaks volumes--to me, at least.
- RG>
Naw, it's not a dupe, it's a hoax.
Listen: the summary says that the first chip was produced. How exactly can they make a 128MB array out of a single 64Mb chip?
- RG>
But... but... there aren't any gay astronauts!
How will they decorate this new room?
- RG>
Fair enough. It's more or less a catch-22.
And I think there are far worse things to worry about than Steven Colbert actually winning, particularly since he's only running in South Carolina.
Though personally I think a vote for Ron Paul would also send a strong message about dissatisfaction with the system (and/or the way it is used). But not every election has a Ron Paul.
- RG>
they'd could also get this through?" Maybe not the same people (though with the revolving doors...), but this comes to mind.
Don't worry, there won't be much outrage this time, either.
- RG>
Let me get this straight:
You think that if enough people ask Bush and Cheney to change their minds, they'll do so out of the goodness of their hearts? And if they don't, we'll have no choice but to ask them politely again?
Yeah, that's a real incentive.
That sounds a lot like (though not directly comparable to) abstaining from voting to promote change in the electoral system: "I'm going to ignore you and let you take more power until you change your ways."
Confrontation is necessary for change.
- RG>
Whenever I'm open cc'd without my permission, I just reply to the whole list with an angry (heh, no surprise there) rant about how it's important to use bcc, so that jerks with a vengeance don't spam the list with angry rants about the importance of using bcc. Sometimes other people on the list play along, too.
It usually results in a "We're sorry about this e-mail that you received from this guy" message being sent to the list, somehow implying that they had no control over my access to or use of the list.
- RG>
I dunno. With the US dollar where it is now, do you think he'll be able to afford to buy off all those officials?
- RG>
Doritos is clearly a Mexican chip--just look at its name! Do you really want America to be represented by Mexican-named snackfoods? Hell, it's not even a potato chip! And potatoes are as American as you can get--especially for a man with Irish roots like Colbert.
What's next? Replacing the Pledge of Allegiance with "Yo quiero Taco Bell"? Because that will happen if you vote for a candidate with the Mexican lobby behind him.
No, go ahead and vote for him--if you have the cajones.
- RG>
Colbert is doing in this campaign exactly what he does on the show--an exaggerated version of the stupidest stuff that is done by the people he parodies.
The purpose of TDS and TCR is not to be a real news show, but to make really clear the stupid stuff that takes away the integrity of real news shows. Similarly, the purpose of this campaign is not to be a real campaign, but to expose the corruption and falseness of real political campaigns.
If he actually does win, it will only go to show that nobody gets his point, but that they're just a slightly different bunch of sheeple.
- RG>