7 ms·

All the better when coding and knowing the guy you voted for understands what network neutrality means.

by jmtame 18y ago

mixmax 18y ago
and intends to appoint a national CIO
- ojbyrne 18y ago
  And overall supports intellectualism.
  - Prrometheus 18y ago
    And unionism, protectionism, and high taxes. Oh, I'm sorry, did I stumble into the wrong party? Where's the party for people that support an open country with strong privacy rights and a dynamic business environment?
    - ojbyrne 18y ago
      You did, actually. But you have creationism trailing behind you. Like a big superhero cape.
      - Prrometheus 18y ago
        What?
        ojbyrne 18y ago
        Unions, higher taxes, whatever, just don't compare to Guantanamo, Rendition, and Creationism. And its not entirely clear he'll fix those, but there's hope.
        Prrometheus 18y ago
        Obama voted for Bush's FISA bill. He voted for the PATRIOT Act II. He voted to continue the war. He chose as VP the guy who claimed to have written much of the PATRIOT Act to pass in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing. I don't trust Obama on those issues at all, given his record. Bringing sanity to the war on terror isn't that important to him. McCain also said he would close Guantanamo and end torture. I'm sorry, but this party looks like a bunch of folks obsessing over a pretty politician who is moderately awful on the issues after 8 years of one who was completely awful on the issues, and not nearly as pretty. And you should care about unionism. The 94% of Americans who aren't in unions are going to be fleeced by protectionist bills to pad the pockets of the powerful unions that support the Democratic Party.
        krschultz 18y ago
        Well if you are going to call out Obama for those votes, don't quote McCain as opposing Guantanamo Bay when he voted FOR waterboarding. I agree that for me, torture trumps unions. I don't like unions, but they are fading. Torture is just unacceptable.
        Prrometheus 18y ago
        The unions will not fade. Their biggest membership comes from federal government workers, whose numbers burgeoned under Bush and are bound to grow under Obama. Also, union firms like GM are getting $billions from the Federal Government to make up for the fact that they can't turn a profit on the market (the airlines did this, too). Tax money will keep them alive even if they are the dinosaurs of the marketplace. When anti-China tariffs come down the line, you can thank the unions. Obama will not deny them. You can also nix the idea of school choice under an Obama administration, since the National Teacher's Union is a strong supporter of the Democratic Party. It's no wonder that Obama's plan for education is basically "more money! more money!". The unions couldn't have written a more favorable plan themselves.
        davidw 18y ago
    - jobeirne 18y ago
      The Libertarian party: we'll be waiting over there with the whack-jobs in the Green party until America's ready.
      - ksvs 18y ago
        When America's ready for your policies, the major parties will steal them piecemeal.
        SwellJoe 18y ago
        That would be lovely, thanks.
      - wheels 18y ago
        In Germany if you do an across the board left-shift there's an analogous party structure: - Social Democrats (Democrats) - Christian Democrats (Republicans) - Liberals (Libertarians) - Greens (There's also an additional Marixst party.) Here the Greens and the Liberals (note that "liberal" outside of the US implies classical liberalism) grew up a lot as being a part of main-stream politics. I really wish that were possible in the US because it forces the other points in the political spectrum to actually deal with reality and softens their rhetoric in a pragmatic, but effective way. German Greens nearly as crack-potted as American ones as a result.
    - jhancock 18y ago
      The right to create unions is a fundamental American protection. I realize in our lifetimes we have seen some unions become more of a problem then a benefit. This is what happens to most institutions as they become too big and "crufty". Sometimes you swing too far in one direction. The system corrects itself. But to trash one part of the constitution while savagely protecting another part is simply unacceptable. Its all or nothing. And so far as protectionism goes. This is just another feeling that I am certain _most_ Americans will start swinging in the other direction on. The next year will see China<->U.S. sentiments on both sides growing very tense. And high taxes? Get this straight: When the FED/Treasury "prints" money, that is a tax!!! And the last 8 years we've seen massive amounts this form of debt.
      - Prrometheus 18y ago
        I have no problem with unions as such. However, I do have a problem when they use their concentrated political power to get themselves government favors at the expense of the rest of the country. Bailouts for failing industries and protectionist measures benefit unions while harming the nation as a whole. They expect the Democratic Party to sacrifice the interests of the nation for their benefit, and it looks like they will get their pound of flesh. In addition, unions have many legal rights outside of a normal, voluntary gathering of people. In many states, they can force new employees of a company to join. Democrats are currently pushing for legislation to eliminate secret ballots for the formation of unions. When employee preferences are no longer secret, they can be coerced and threatened into supporting the union, which should enable Democrats to increase their union base. In addition, unions can force their employers to bargain with them by law, instead of by voluntary agreement by both parties. Federal law prohibits its agencies from paying contractors less than the union price, which is often high above the market price of similar services. It is no coincidence that heavily unionized sectors of our economy tend to be failing, bloated, and stagnant. The big ones are undoubtedly a negative influence on American society. And they undoubtedly run the economic program of the Democratic Party; it surely isn't run by any coherent economic school of thought that I can recognize.
        redrobot5050 18y ago
- robg 18y ago
  And as a cabinet member. A CTO sitting at the table with the Sec of Defense and Sec of State.
bapbap 18y ago
And that a bubble sort probably isn't the the most efficient way to sort one million 32-bit integers
- mynameishere 18y ago
  Yeah. That matters. You're joking, but a lot of people actually voted for him for equally trivial reasons.
  - snprbob86 18y ago
    When jokingly asked by Eric Schmidt, "How would you sort 1 million integers?", Obama actually answered "Well I'd bet that the bubble sort is not the correct approach." Certainly, knowing the answer to that question, or knowing what a bubble sort even is, doesn't make or break a candidate. But all else being equal, wouldn't you rather a president who took at least one course on computer science? Sure it is a little thing, but I found myself saying "all other things being equal" a lot about Obama. All those things added up: I voted for him.
    - mynameishere 18y ago
      No, man. Listen: Obama is smarter than McCain. He's smarter than Bush. He's smarter than me, if you can believe it. But do I care if Obama can: 1) Fix my toilet? 2) Balance my books? 3) Remove my appendix? 4) Parge my lath? 5) Sort my integers? No. All trivia.
      - jhancock 18y ago
        Have you ever parged a lath? I can assure you sir, it is not trivial.
      - hugh 18y ago
        Having had my appendix removed last week, I'm really glad I didn't have to rely on any politician to do it. Unfortunately, making the government responsible for appendix-removal is one of the things which Obama wants to do. Comparing my experiences in US hospitals ("Oh hi, here's a bed and two nurses, your surgeon and his team will be along in ten minutes") to my experiences in Australian hospitals ("Oh hi, here's a wheelchair, please wait here for six hours") I really am not keen to see the US system become more like the Australian one.

All the better when coding and knowing the guy you voted for understands what network neutrality means.

by jmtame 18y ago

All the better when coding and knowing the guy you voted for understands what network neutrality means.

mixmax 18y ago

and intends to appoint a national CIO

ojbyrne 18y ago
And overall supports intellectualism.
- Prrometheus 18y ago
  And unionism, protectionism, and high taxes. Oh, I'm sorry, did I stumble into the wrong party? Where's the party for people that support an open country with strong privacy rights and a dynamic business environment?
  - ojbyrne 18y ago
    You did, actually. But you have creationism trailing behind you. Like a big superhero cape.
    - Prrometheus 18y ago
      What?
      - ojbyrne 18y ago
        Unions, higher taxes, whatever, just don't compare to Guantanamo, Rendition, and Creationism. And its not entirely clear he'll fix those, but there's hope.
        Prrometheus 18y ago
        Obama voted for Bush's FISA bill. He voted for the PATRIOT Act II. He voted to continue the war. He chose as VP the guy who claimed to have written much of the PATRIOT Act to pass in 1995 after the Oklahoma City bombing. I don't trust Obama on those issues at all, given his record. Bringing sanity to the war on terror isn't that important to him. McCain also said he would close Guantanamo and end torture. I'm sorry, but this party looks like a bunch of folks obsessing over a pretty politician who is moderately awful on the issues after 8 years of one who was completely awful on the issues, and not nearly as pretty. And you should care about unionism. The 94% of Americans who aren't in unions are going to be fleeced by protectionist bills to pad the pockets of the powerful unions that support the Democratic Party.
        krschultz 18y ago
        Well if you are going to call out Obama for those votes, don't quote McCain as opposing Guantanamo Bay when he voted FOR waterboarding. I agree that for me, torture trumps unions. I don't like unions, but they are fading. Torture is just unacceptable.
        Prrometheus 18y ago
        The unions will not fade. Their biggest membership comes from federal government workers, whose numbers burgeoned under Bush and are bound to grow under Obama. Also, union firms like GM are getting $billions from the Federal Government to make up for the fact that they can't turn a profit on the market (the airlines did this, too). Tax money will keep them alive even if they are the dinosaurs of the marketplace. When anti-China tariffs come down the line, you can thank the unions. Obama will not deny them. You can also nix the idea of school choice under an Obama administration, since the National Teacher's Union is a strong supporter of the Democratic Party. It's no wonder that Obama's plan for education is basically "more money! more money!". The unions couldn't have written a more favorable plan themselves.
        davidw 18y ago
  - jobeirne 18y ago
    The Libertarian party: we'll be waiting over there with the whack-jobs in the Green party until America's ready.
    - ksvs 18y ago
      When America's ready for your policies, the major parties will steal them piecemeal.
      - SwellJoe 18y ago
        That would be lovely, thanks.
    - wheels 18y ago
      In Germany if you do an across the board left-shift there's an analogous party structure: - Social Democrats (Democrats) - Christian Democrats (Republicans) - Liberals (Libertarians) - Greens (There's also an additional Marixst party.) Here the Greens and the Liberals (note that "liberal" outside of the US implies classical liberalism) grew up a lot as being a part of main-stream politics. I really wish that were possible in the US because it forces the other points in the political spectrum to actually deal with reality and softens their rhetoric in a pragmatic, but effective way. German Greens nearly as crack-potted as American ones as a result.
  - jhancock 18y ago
    The right to create unions is a fundamental American protection. I realize in our lifetimes we have seen some unions become more of a problem then a benefit. This is what happens to most institutions as they become too big and "crufty". Sometimes you swing too far in one direction. The system corrects itself. But to trash one part of the constitution while savagely protecting another part is simply unacceptable. Its all or nothing. And so far as protectionism goes. This is just another feeling that I am certain _most_ Americans will start swinging in the other direction on. The next year will see China<->U.S. sentiments on both sides growing very tense. And high taxes? Get this straight: When the FED/Treasury "prints" money, that is a tax!!! And the last 8 years we've seen massive amounts this form of debt.
    - Prrometheus 18y ago
      I have no problem with unions as such. However, I do have a problem when they use their concentrated political power to get themselves government favors at the expense of the rest of the country. Bailouts for failing industries and protectionist measures benefit unions while harming the nation as a whole. They expect the Democratic Party to sacrifice the interests of the nation for their benefit, and it looks like they will get their pound of flesh. In addition, unions have many legal rights outside of a normal, voluntary gathering of people. In many states, they can force new employees of a company to join. Democrats are currently pushing for legislation to eliminate secret ballots for the formation of unions. When employee preferences are no longer secret, they can be coerced and threatened into supporting the union, which should enable Democrats to increase their union base. In addition, unions can force their employers to bargain with them by law, instead of by voluntary agreement by both parties. Federal law prohibits its agencies from paying contractors less than the union price, which is often high above the market price of similar services. It is no coincidence that heavily unionized sectors of our economy tend to be failing, bloated, and stagnant. The big ones are undoubtedly a negative influence on American society. And they undoubtedly run the economic program of the Democratic Party; it surely isn't run by any coherent economic school of thought that I can recognize.
      - redrobot5050 18y ago
robg 18y ago
And as a cabinet member. A CTO sitting at the table with the Sec of Defense and Sec of State.

bapbap 18y ago

And that a bubble sort probably isn't the the most efficient way to sort one million 32-bit integers

mynameishere 18y ago
Yeah. That matters. You're joking, but a lot of people actually voted for him for equally trivial reasons.
- snprbob86 18y ago
  When jokingly asked by Eric Schmidt, "How would you sort 1 million integers?", Obama actually answered "Well I'd bet that the bubble sort is not the correct approach." Certainly, knowing the answer to that question, or knowing what a bubble sort even is, doesn't make or break a candidate. But all else being equal, wouldn't you rather a president who took at least one course on computer science? Sure it is a little thing, but I found myself saying "all other things being equal" a lot about Obama. All those things added up: I voted for him.
  - mynameishere 18y ago
    No, man. Listen: Obama is smarter than McCain. He's smarter than Bush. He's smarter than me, if you can believe it. But do I care if Obama can: 1) Fix my toilet? 2) Balance my books? 3) Remove my appendix? 4) Parge my lath? 5) Sort my integers? No. All trivia.
    - jhancock 18y ago
      Have you ever parged a lath? I can assure you sir, it is not trivial.
    - hugh 18y ago
      Having had my appendix removed last week, I'm really glad I didn't have to rely on any politician to do it. Unfortunately, making the government responsible for appendix-removal is one of the things which Obama wants to do. Comparing my experiences in US hospitals ("Oh hi, here's a bed and two nurses, your surgeon and his team will be along in ten minutes") to my experiences in Australian hospitals ("Oh hi, here's a wheelchair, please wait here for six hours") I really am not keen to see the US system become more like the Australian one.