12 ms·

The President's Plan to Reduce Gun Violence

35 points by Pr0 14y ago

drallison 14y ago
I get an invalid cert diagnostic. You attempted to reach www.whitehouse.gov, but instead you actually reached a server identifying itself as a248.e.akamai.net. This may be caused by a misconfiguration on the server or by something more serious. An attacker on your network could be trying to get you to visit a fake (and potentially harmful) version of www.whitehouse.gov.
- zerovox 14y ago
  I think that's because we've been linked to a non-secure page by https instead of http. I would have thought the servers should forward you on to the correct page without a cert error though
  - Hello71 14y ago
    They can't.
  - Firehed 14y ago
    I'm not sure it would be wise to provide the private key for www.whitehouse.gov to Akamai to attempt such a configuration, no matter how trustworthy they are. They need to fix the routing internally (slower, but safer).
  - Cushman 14y ago
    By putting https in, you're forcing your browser to authenticate the server before making an HTTP call. At the time that you see that cert error, the server has no idea what you want yet.
    - rachelbythebay 14y ago
      Modulo SNI, of course.
      - Cushman 14y ago
        I stand corrected, the server may know the HTTP host. Thanks :)
seanwoods 14y ago
Takes a long time to load for me, and it's a bit jerky. I often feel like all these HTML5 effects are not needed to convey the message. (However, it's cool that the videos start playing on the scroll event.)
jamesbritt 14y ago
It's very clever but doesn't really do anything for me. The first time I hit the space bar I get text rendered over an image, and it's hard to read. Further page-downs trigger the video, but there's no obvious place to look for what's causing the sound since the video is not centered on the page. It's off to the side, and either close to the top or the bottom of the screen. It's much like someone handing something to you to read, and then as soon you try to read it they start talking to you. Video keeps playing even if I've moved further down and the video is mostly off-screen. I appreciate people trying to do something a little more engaging but it's not done well enough here to offset the annoyances. It distracts from the content.
- chill1 14y ago
  Running latest version of Chrome here... The videos play when they come into view. They immediately stop playing when they leave view. I actually don't mind that. The videos themselves are each pretty short, so they don't seem like they'd be too distracting if trying to read the content.
  - aggie 14y ago
    The videos should delay starting until they are most of the way on the screen already, otherwise they are a distraction as I finish reading the text above them and they are just peeking out from the bottom of the screen. Stopping when they leave the screen works nicely though.
technojunkie 14y ago
HTML5 effects mixed with XHTML doctype? Oh noes!
- bentruyman 14y ago
  A proper <doctype> wouldn't have any effect here.
alxndr 14y ago
Auto-playing video is weeeeird.
- shitlord 14y ago
  Yeah, I didn't like that either. I guess I just don't like having any websites play sound... reminds me of the late 90's.
Bockit 14y ago
I think it's great that page content is getting more love lately, e.g., this and the recent NYTimes snowfall article [1]. Based on choppiness when scrolling, it does seem however that browsers still have a way to go in performance. I look forward to when scrolling a page like that is as smooth as butter on any device / browser combo. [1]: http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2012/snow-fall/ http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2012/snow-fall/
j2kun 14y ago
It's impressive! Come on, the white house doing something technologically modern? That's amazing!
Cushman 14y ago
Not to get too political, but as a progressive who generally supports gun control, can someone explain to me why an "assault weapons" ban keeps coming back? Based on the metric of political capital:lives saved, it seems like terrible policy.
- rdl 14y ago
  I think it's natural to say "oh, big high profile event involved people getting shot with a scary looking gun, so let's solve the problem by banning those scary-looking guns". Add to that that almost none of the legislators or members of their staff have any actual experience with or knowledge of weapons, and it becomes easy to push bad policy. I actually think this is a brilliant plan by President Obama. Push a bunch of things (some of which no reasonable person could oppose, like the efficiency improvements in the EOs), and some things which the Republicans in the House will probably not let get out of committee or to a vote on the floor (AWB and magazine capacity limits). That way, the President gets to accomplish some things (and some of those things which have costs are things a lot of gun owners, myself included, support -- 100% NCIC checks on all transfers). The Republicans who block AWB get painted as obstructionists for blocking part of that, which hurts them from the center/left. Some Tea Party/etc. people push even wackier candidates in 2014 if the Republicans compromise on any issues at all, thus helping the Democrats in 2014, too.
  - anigbrowl 14y ago
    An astute analysis - I disaagree only insofar as I think the magazine limits will prevail in some form. The AWB rpobably won't and is a political sacrifice as you say, but I think the manufacturers o such weapons are on the cusp of a long-term decline - this ad by Bushmaster [1] exemplifies what many people find repellent about gun culture/ Although gun sales are high right now and will surely rocket higher in the short term in response to these proposals, I think opposition to more regulation will decline over the longer term in the same way as opposition to gay marriage - because the sky never does get around to falling, and people get used to the idea and accept it. Incidentally, I was surprised to be reminded by the President's speech that the BATF hasn't had a full-time director the last 6 years. 1. http://cdn03.cdnwp.thefrisky.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/17/bushmaster-ad1-600x450.jpg http://cdn03.cdnwp.thefrisky.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/...
argumentum 14y ago
Astonishingly annoying.
rdl 14y ago
I must be the only person in the world who hates autoplaying video and particularly audio. At least the President's voice is normal and inoffensive, not like some of the preroll ads which run on other sites and autoplay.
evan_ 14y ago
The "poster"s for the three talking-head videos about halfway down are enormous .png files when they should be tiny .jpg files. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/shootings/ANNETTE.png http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/shootings/ANNE...
gnu8 14y ago
I wonder if this use of very advanced web technology is calculated to limit who can view their message. Perhaps they only want affluent, urban, technically savvy liberals to view their message, while excluding lower income rural people who use IE 6. This may seem like a paranoid theory, but the Obama campaign would certainly have the data and expertise to support such an effort.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
martinced 14y ago
It's more like an astonishing piece of propaganda ; ) Meanwhile drones are happily killing lots of people on other continents and that is ok. Because the state has the monopoly of violence. And it is slowly trying to disarm its own citizens as to be sure that the day people realize they're governed by an oppressive government they won't be able to do anything about it. How many deaths in 2012 due to complication related to obesity? How many due to guns? How many due to road accidents? Find your priorities and pick up the good fights. The ones taking away the only thing preventing a dictatorial government from being impossible to revolt against ain't one of them.
- bithive123 14y ago
  Somehow I doubt handguns and rifles offer much protection against drones. Your thinking is muddled and you seem kind of paranoid.
  - MartinCron 14y ago
    I think a shotgun would probably be most effective against drone aircraft, and there has been little to no discussion about changing how shotguns are regulated.
  - rhizome 14y ago
    I think we're way beyond any kind of disarmament situation, but a drone can certainly be considered to be a handgun of foreign policy.
  - defilade 14y ago
    It's not an issue of handguns vs. drones, or rifles vs. tanks. It's an issue of ~20 million households holding 300 million guns. In the (admittedly unlikely) event that someone has tyrannical aspirations, those numbers present a real obstacle.
    - bithive123 14y ago
      It's mostly in movies and comic books where the tyrants literally round everyone up at gunpoint and violate their rights. I'm not saying "we're all slaves because plutocracy" but your framing of the issue demonstrates a real lack of imagination.
rhizome 14y ago
What PR agency does the poster work for? Their 42-day old account has many many submissions, all for mainstream publications.
afandian 14y ago
"Astonishing bit of HTML5" in that it's choppy and does things I don't want?
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
theoj 14y ago
An astonishing bit of HTML5 that doesn't work well on the latest version of Google Chrome, unfortunately.
owenjones 14y ago
I imagine I will get a good bit of downvotes for this but I would not mind if the Government took away all the guns.
mattupstate 14y ago
Astonishing bit of HTML5? If you want to see astonishing HTML5 work go to http://www.chromeexperiments.com/ http://www.chromeexperiments.com/. The Obama administration has done far better and astonishing web work than this piece.

35 points by Pr0 14y ago

I get an invalid cert diagnostic. You attempted to reach www.whitehouse.gov, but instead you actually reached a server identifying itself as a248.e.akamai.net. This may be caused by a misconfiguration on the server or by something more serious. An attacker on your network could be trying to get you to visit a fake (and potentially harmful) version of www.whitehouse.gov.

zerovox 14y ago
I think that's because we've been linked to a non-secure page by https instead of http. I would have thought the servers should forward you on to the correct page without a cert error though
- Hello71 14y ago
  They can't.
- Firehed 14y ago
  I'm not sure it would be wise to provide the private key for www.whitehouse.gov to Akamai to attempt such a configuration, no matter how trustworthy they are. They need to fix the routing internally (slower, but safer).
- Cushman 14y ago
  By putting https in, you're forcing your browser to authenticate the server before making an HTTP call. At the time that you see that cert error, the server has no idea what you want yet.
  - rachelbythebay 14y ago
    Modulo SNI, of course.
    - Cushman 14y ago
      I stand corrected, the server may know the HTTP host. Thanks :)

seanwoods 14y ago

Takes a long time to load for me, and it's a bit jerky. I often feel like all these HTML5 effects are not needed to convey the message. (However, it's cool that the videos start playing on the scroll event.)

jamesbritt 14y ago

It's very clever but doesn't really do anything for me. The first time I hit the space bar I get text rendered over an image, and it's hard to read. Further page-downs trigger the video, but there's no obvious place to look for what's causing the sound since the video is not centered on the page. It's off to the side, and either close to the top or the bottom of the screen. It's much like someone handing something to you to read, and then as soon you try to read it they start talking to you. Video keeps playing even if I've moved further down and the video is mostly off-screen. I appreciate people trying to do something a little more engaging but it's not done well enough here to offset the annoyances. It distracts from the content.

chill1 14y ago
Running latest version of Chrome here... The videos play when they come into view. They immediately stop playing when they leave view. I actually don't mind that. The videos themselves are each pretty short, so they don't seem like they'd be too distracting if trying to read the content.
- aggie 14y ago
  The videos should delay starting until they are most of the way on the screen already, otherwise they are a distraction as I finish reading the text above them and they are just peeking out from the bottom of the screen. Stopping when they leave the screen works nicely though.

technojunkie 14y ago

HTML5 effects mixed with XHTML doctype? Oh noes!

bentruyman 14y ago
A proper <doctype> wouldn't have any effect here.

alxndr 14y ago

Auto-playing video is weeeeird.

shitlord 14y ago
Yeah, I didn't like that either. I guess I just don't like having any websites play sound... reminds me of the late 90's.

Bockit 14y ago

I think it's great that page content is getting more love lately, e.g., this and the recent NYTimes snowfall article [1]. Based on choppiness when scrolling, it does seem however that browsers still have a way to go in performance. I look forward to when scrolling a page like that is as smooth as butter on any device / browser combo. [1]: http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2012/snow-fall/ http://www.nytimes.com/projects/2012/snow-fall/

j2kun 14y ago

It's impressive! Come on, the white house doing something technologically modern? That's amazing!

Cushman 14y ago

Not to get too political, but as a progressive who generally supports gun control, can someone explain to me why an "assault weapons" ban keeps coming back? Based on the metric of political capital:lives saved, it seems like terrible policy.

rdl 14y ago
I think it's natural to say "oh, big high profile event involved people getting shot with a scary looking gun, so let's solve the problem by banning those scary-looking guns". Add to that that almost none of the legislators or members of their staff have any actual experience with or knowledge of weapons, and it becomes easy to push bad policy. I actually think this is a brilliant plan by President Obama. Push a bunch of things (some of which no reasonable person could oppose, like the efficiency improvements in the EOs), and some things which the Republicans in the House will probably not let get out of committee or to a vote on the floor (AWB and magazine capacity limits). That way, the President gets to accomplish some things (and some of those things which have costs are things a lot of gun owners, myself included, support -- 100% NCIC checks on all transfers). The Republicans who block AWB get painted as obstructionists for blocking part of that, which hurts them from the center/left. Some Tea Party/etc. people push even wackier candidates in 2014 if the Republicans compromise on any issues at all, thus helping the Democrats in 2014, too.
- anigbrowl 14y ago
  An astute analysis - I disaagree only insofar as I think the magazine limits will prevail in some form. The AWB rpobably won't and is a political sacrifice as you say, but I think the manufacturers o such weapons are on the cusp of a long-term decline - this ad by Bushmaster [1] exemplifies what many people find repellent about gun culture/ Although gun sales are high right now and will surely rocket higher in the short term in response to these proposals, I think opposition to more regulation will decline over the longer term in the same way as opposition to gay marriage - because the sky never does get around to falling, and people get used to the idea and accept it. Incidentally, I was surprised to be reminded by the President's speech that the BATF hasn't had a full-time director the last 6 years. 1. http://cdn03.cdnwp.thefrisky.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/17/bushmaster-ad1-600x450.jpg http://cdn03.cdnwp.thefrisky.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/...

argumentum 14y ago

Astonishingly annoying.

rdl 14y ago

I must be the only person in the world who hates autoplaying video and particularly audio. At least the President's voice is normal and inoffensive, not like some of the preroll ads which run on other sites and autoplay.

evan_ 14y ago

The "poster"s for the three talking-head videos about halfway down are enormous .png files when they should be tiny .jpg files. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/shootings/ANNETTE.png http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/shootings/ANNE...

gnu8 14y ago

I wonder if this use of very advanced web technology is calculated to limit who can view their message. Perhaps they only want affluent, urban, technically savvy liberals to view their message, while excluding lower income rural people who use IE 6. This may seem like a paranoid theory, but the Obama campaign would certainly have the data and expertise to support such an effort.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

martinced 14y ago

It's more like an astonishing piece of propaganda ; ) Meanwhile drones are happily killing lots of people on other continents and that is ok. Because the state has the monopoly of violence. And it is slowly trying to disarm its own citizens as to be sure that the day people realize they're governed by an oppressive government they won't be able to do anything about it. How many deaths in 2012 due to complication related to obesity? How many due to guns? How many due to road accidents? Find your priorities and pick up the good fights. The ones taking away the only thing preventing a dictatorial government from being impossible to revolt against ain't one of them.

bithive123 14y ago
Somehow I doubt handguns and rifles offer much protection against drones. Your thinking is muddled and you seem kind of paranoid.
- MartinCron 14y ago
  I think a shotgun would probably be most effective against drone aircraft, and there has been little to no discussion about changing how shotguns are regulated.
- rhizome 14y ago
  I think we're way beyond any kind of disarmament situation, but a drone can certainly be considered to be a handgun of foreign policy.
- defilade 14y ago
  It's not an issue of handguns vs. drones, or rifles vs. tanks. It's an issue of ~20 million households holding 300 million guns. In the (admittedly unlikely) event that someone has tyrannical aspirations, those numbers present a real obstacle.
  - bithive123 14y ago
    It's mostly in movies and comic books where the tyrants literally round everyone up at gunpoint and violate their rights. I'm not saying "we're all slaves because plutocracy" but your framing of the issue demonstrates a real lack of imagination.

rhizome 14y ago

What PR agency does the poster work for? Their 42-day old account has many many submissions, all for mainstream publications.

afandian 14y ago

"Astonishing bit of HTML5" in that it's choppy and does things I don't want?

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

theoj 14y ago

An astonishing bit of HTML5 that doesn't work well on the latest version of Google Chrome, unfortunately.

owenjones 14y ago

I imagine I will get a good bit of downvotes for this but I would not mind if the Government took away all the guns.

mattupstate 14y ago

Astonishing bit of HTML5? If you want to see astonishing HTML5 work go to http://www.chromeexperiments.com/ http://www.chromeexperiments.com/. The Obama administration has done far better and astonishing web work than this piece.