McCain Releases Technology Platform

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "John McCain has finally released a technology platform. Most of it is the same old stuff; lower corporate taxes, protect children from porn, and avoid Internet regulation unless 'necessary.' Alas, in his view, helping the RIAA's War on Sharing is necessary to stop the 'global epidemic' of piracy, while Net Neutrality is something he 'does not believe in.' Ars Technica has a review of McCain's platform." A brief analysis is also available from Federal Computer Week. In addition to the technology policy, McCain has also released a paper describing his stance on security and privacy. We've previously contrasted his views with those of Barack Obama. Obama's technology policies are also available online.

RE: McCain Releases Technology Platform

Oh great. Yet another Linux distribution that www.distrowatch.org is going to have to track. "McCain-ix"
Probably needs 1GB just to load. I'll stick with Obama-mama-ix thanks.

Re: McCain Releases Technology Platform

I'll stick with Obama-mama-ix thanks.

That's still vaporware. :)

"protect children from porn, and avoid regulation"

Yay for contradictions?

John McCain on blogs

In 2006, John McCain gave the commencement address at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University [thecherrycreeknews.com], and took the opportunity to mock individual expression:

When I was a young man, I was quite infatuated with self-expression, and rightly so because, if memory conveniently serves, I was so much more eloquent, well-informed, and wiser than anyone else I knew. It seemed I understood the world and the purpose of life so much more profoundly than most people. I believed that to be especially true with many of my elders, people whose only accomplishment, as far as I could tell, was that they had been born before me, and, consequently, had suffered some number of years deprived of my insights. I had opinions on everything, and I was always right. I loved to argue, and I could become understandably belligerent with people who lacked the grace and intelligence to agree with me. With my superior qualities so obvious, it was an intolerable hardship to have to suffer fools gladly. So I rarely did. All their resistance to my brilliantly conceived and cogently argued views proved was that they possessed an inferior intellect and a weaker character than God had blessed me with, and I felt it was my clear duty to so inform them. It's a pity that there wasn't a blogosphere then. I would have felt very much at home in the medium.

His contempt for citizens expressing their views is, presumably, why he introduced legislation that would basically have shut down comments on blogs and on sites like Slashdot. Under John McCain, if you are an individual blogger and you allow user comments or user profiles, you'd have to follow the same reporting rules as an ISP, but you'd be subject to even harsher penalties. The EFF called McCain's bill a "constitutionally dubious proposal ... made apparently mostly based on fear or political considerations [thinkprogress.org]."

Re:John McCain on blogs

"I was so much more eloquent, well-informed, and wiser than anyone else I knew" ... "With my superior qualities so obvious..."

I knew it from the start! John McCain is a secret elitist!

By the way, too bad he's not quite sooo eloquent anymore. It could have been useful, for stuff like, making people want to vote for him.

Re:John McCain on blogs

he's mocking what many people perceive to be the stereotypical self-important blogger attitude.

I believed that to be especially true with many of my elders, people whose only accomplishment, as far as I could tell, was that they had been born before me,

What I believe he was implying is that children should be seen and not heard. Of course his definition of 'children' seems to extend to all bloggers, regardless of age. Of course the First Amendment gives freedom the press, but doesn't tell us the definition of "Press", but I really doubt if the Framers meant "Government sanctioned and licensed persons"

Re:John McCain on blogs

Sorry, but you just quoted McCain being facetious as though he were serious, meaning you didn't get the joke. It's funny. Laugh.

McCain used exaggerated language to humorous effect. That part's hard to miss.

What I find more important is that the target of his humor is the ceaseless argumentation on all matters, political and otherwise, that the citizenry engages in when permitted freedom of speech. Contrary to what career politicians would have us believe, there are things worth discussing beyond the pronouncements of our daily papers. There are wrongs to be called out and acts of courage to be heralded. We dredge up our politicians' histories, we compare and contrast, we insult and mourn and challenge not only our opponents' beliefs but our own. We're not polite, because unlike the self-righteous papers' hallowed halls of pretend-land, we talk the way real people talk. Sometimes we persuade, often not, but in large ways or small, we do learn from each other.

The blogosphere is democracy at its most raw, a ceaseless conversation about the way things are and ought to be, led not from the "top" but by whatever ordinary people want to talk about each day. It's political conversation that, for the first time in thousands of years, actually comes from the people. That worries the entrenched media who for decades have built up undeserved reputations as the arbiters of the news cycle, and the politicians whose unspoken agreements with the media got them where they are.

I've been a programmer for Slashdot for eight years now. I've spent much of that time writing code to quash abuse without censoring contributions, and support thoughtful comments while discouraging "omg roftl," because goddammit I believe there's something vital and important about what ordinary people have to say. I want to give those people a soapbox, and give their readers the tools to find the most interesting and thought-provoking comments. People with something to say don't need a lecture on prudence and humility from their betters, they need to be encouraged to stand up and join the conversation.

And politicians like McCain mock them, and mock the way we argue. We're youngsters who show insufficient deference to the hard-won wisdom of our elders. Fuck that shit.

hypocrisy

John McCain's stance on copyright infringement is hypocritical. The reason is that he is currently being sued by Jackson Browne for copyright infringement [chicagotribune.com] because he used the song "Running on Empty" without permission. This looks to be yet another Republican professing high fallooting morals but who by his deeds is shown to believe that morality is for the populace and doesn't apply to him.

Re:Who takes platforms seriously in an election?

The most wildly blatant contradiction, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation and he doesn't know how to use a computer. Man, you guys can really pick them, now I know how you managed to have both shrubs running the CIA and why the CIA made such a hack job of collect evidence on all those so called terrorists in GITMO.

The really lamest part of course is 'Educate Its Workforce For The Innovation Age', all the lamest politicians the world over have been rabbiting on about exactly the same thing and then in the next breath, global marketplace and free trade, with the net result that all those job are outsourced to countries that pay one tenth the wage and you have a flood of people in the food services industry with tech degrees. Either that or cannon fodder for the military industrial complex.

He picked Carly Fiorina as an advisor

Arguably one of the worst leaders in the tech industry. It's no wonder his technology positions don't make any sense. That's like picking Jeffery Skilling as an energy advisor...wait, he doesn't need him, he's got Phil Gramm. With the added advantage that Gramm isn't in federal prison...yet.

Let's just pick the most incompetent, corrupt people from every industry we can find and bring them together in one party. It's no wonder his positions on technology don't make any sense. A classic case of the problem dictating the solution.

Just look at the URLs :)

I took a look around the different campaign sites it's clear McCain is EVIL!
Links at McCain site:
johnmccain.com/Blog/Read.aspx?guid=3d8ee2ad-d7f2-4f3d-ad9f-ffe1b41ca178

Links a Obamas Site:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/ [barackobama.com]

Clearly, McCain is using a Microsoft server and Obama is using mod_rewrite or similar technology... Probably a rather none-evil technology...

Also at validator.w3.org:
McCain has: 124 Errors, 44 warning(s)
Obama has: 8 Errors
I'd say this proofs McCain is evil!

My Scorecard

My scorecard for the McCain platform. Rated on a uninflated A-F grading scale, where a "C" means the norm.

John McCain Supports Risk Capital For Investment In American Innovation

Grade: C. OK; nothing specific to the tech sector, though.

John McCain Will Not Tax Innovation By Keeping Capital Gains Taxes Low.

Grade: C. A good idea in general, but not of particular help to technology.

John McCain Will Reform And Make Permanent The R&D Tax Credit.

Grade: B. Good idea.

John McCain Will Lower the Corporate Tax Rate To 25 Percent To Retain Investment In U.S. Technologies.

Grade: C. Again, a good idea for the economy in general, but doesn't do anything to specifically address technology.

John McCain Will Allow First-Year Expensing Of New Equipment And Technology.

Grade: B. Good idea.

John McCain Will Ensure Technology And Innovation Is Not Hampered By Taxes On Internet Users.

Grade: C. OK, fine, but I'm not buying the rationale at all here. I think this is code for "no government regulation". A vast amount of bricks-and-mortar commerce has been moved onto the Internet. If we accept taxation of commerce, we should have no problem accepting taxation of it on the Internet.

John McCain Opposes Higher Taxes On Wireless Services.

Grade: C. OK, lower taxes, yeah, but what we are buying with our taxes in the first place?

America Must Educate Its Workforce For The Innovation Age.

Grade: B. Grants for higher ed are a good bargain for taxpayers.

Fill Critical Shortages Of Skilled Workers To Remain Competitive.

Grade: B. Good idea. More flexibility on H-1B visas will help.

John McCain Has Been A Long And Ardent Supporter Of Fair And Open World Trade.

Grade: C. Nice to know.

Competition Has Been A Great Strength For America -- Offering Opportunity, Low Prices, And Increased Choice For Our Citizens. Markets work best when there is robust competition.

Grade: D. McCain had a chance to address the real problems of non-competitiveness that plague the technology sector, and ducked.

John McCain Will Protect The Creative Industries From Piracy.

Grade: D. Another disappointment. The "creative industries" already have plenty of money, lawyers, lobbyists, and memberships in the exclusive clubs needed to get the protection they need. Who's giving the people the protection they need? Not the government, apparently.

John McCain Will Push For Greater Resources For The Patent Office.

Grade: C. Obviously needed; basic good management.

John McCain Will Pursue Protection Of Intellectual Property Around The Globe.

Grade: C. OK, fine; more good management.

Provide Alternative Approaches To Resolving Patent Challenges.

Grade: B. Some innovation here is long overdue. Good idea.

John McCain Will Preserve Consumer Freedoms.

Grade: B. Freedom is good, and additional attention in this area is needed to keep a level playing field.

When Regulation Is Warranted, John McCain Acts.

Grade: C. OK, that's the right pattern, but McCain seems to not get the fact that the tech sector really needs some tough love from the government right now. If regulation is not warranted now, when would it be?

John McCain does not believe in prescriptive regulation like "net-neutrality," but rather he believes that an open marketplace with a variety of consumer choices is the best deterrent against unfair practices.

Grade: F. The telco marketplace is anything

Re:Protect children from porn

The problem is that adults forget what it was like being a kid, and try to hoard all the porn for themselves. This is totally misguided, and kids need porn just as much as the rest of us.

Re:Protect children from porn

The problem is that adults forget what it was like being a kid, and try to hoard all the porn for themselves. This is totally misguided, and kids need porn just as much as the rest of us.

But yet more alarmingly, children from unfavoured homes who don't have access to the Internet at home have no means to educate themselves with pornography, causing a dramatic gap in sexual education. Trust me, these days, you don't want to be the only kid on the playground who thinks that "golden showers" have anything to do with Scourge McDuck.

Re:Protect children from porn

Trust me, these days, you don't want to be the only kid on the playground who thinks that "golden showers" have anything to do with Scourge McDuck.

Crap, neither do you want to sound like you read a BDSM version of Scrooge McDuck comics.

Re:Protect children from porn

Abstinence is the only proven method of not contracting STDs. The only way.

I'm sorry, my friend, but if you're going to slut it up... you're going to pay the price. All the latex and gels in the world won't give you the same protection as abstinence.

The problem is it only works in theory. In reality, on large scales, even kids with abstinence rings end up doing it, and getting pregnant or catching a STD. The reality is, most people just have to get laid, no matter what you say or what they say, they're gonna do it. All you can do is make sure the ones who will do it will do it properly. Pretending that it's as easy as not doing it is sticking your head in the sand. Abstinence alone isn't enough. You also need to be completely reliable, which is foolish to assume from anyone. Or very unattractive.

Re:grr.

Sadly when it comes to things such as network neutrality, MAFIAA litigation, censorship of the internet, and understanding how the internet has the potential to be an unstoppable force of intellectual freedom most U.S. citizens are woefully ignorant. They care about gas prices, making sure that they are not responsible for raising their kids, ensuring that gay couples are not recognized as a legal union, and which religion the candidate subscribes to. They have forgotten that there is a reason the the freedom of speech was the very first amendment, I have met very few that ever read the Federalist Papers, hell half of the people that I talk to have never even read the constitution or have the most basic understanding of how our government works. The internet has the power to be the most perfect force for the first amendment which is essential to the rest of the Constitution and in all honesty I don't think the GOP really wants the average citizen to have that kind of power.

Re:Worthless ...

If you are basing your vote solely on technological issues in a presidential election, you really need to get out more. There are much more important issues that the President should be considered about (economy, jobs, defense, etc).

Re:Worthless ...

And McCain is a big loser on all those fronts also. The economy is not his bag, man. Said so himself. Be ready to bail out another Lincoln Savings and Loan or three. And He's a warmonger. Not that the other guy is actually any better. Time to vote the party out.

Re:Worthless ...

Why is it not OK for a presidential candidate to admit that he doesn't know something? I'm sick to death of people who think they have to pretend to know everything all the time.

Not that McCain is worth the electrons I just encoded his name with, but in my book he scored one point for being aware of his ignorance. Seems a nice change from Republican policy. And Democratic policy, for that matter, although they are on average approximately 23% less ignorant than Republicans...

Re:Worthless ...

It's worth remembering that technology is a huge factor in the US economy, jobs, defence, (privacy/spying, civil rights, scientific progress...) etc. - so the topic is quite important.

Re:Worthless ...

You're right, we need a President who is very concerned about the Iraq/Pakistan border [thecarpetb...report.com]. I'd also like him confuse Sudan and Somalia [thinkprogress.org], after all, they are like the same thing, right?

McCain, at one point, may have known his stuff. But he has lost it. There is already a very long list of these gaffes. Is this the kind of face you want America to have?

Did he ever have your vote?

I knew this kind of position was coming as soon as he said he didn't know how to use a computer. He obviously doesn't understand the issues, so naturally he is just going to default to his party's (or contributor's) position.

If I were in his place and somebody asked me to formulate a position on farming, I would do the same thing. That's why it is important to look at what party a candidate belongs to and who is giving him money.

Re:Worthless ...

Maybe I'm just reading different posts than you are but I can't recall the last time I saw a post supporting a conservative view point that didn't get flamed.

I'm a registered Republican, so maybe I'm just focusing on the posts I agree with that get tarred and feathered, and the ones I strongly disagree with that keep getting modded +5 insightful.

Re:Worthless ...

I'll reply to this as an AC rather than moderating you then. The average political post seems to center around a few things...

1. Protection of the little guy - stop allowing big corporations to use the law/lobbying to create an unfair environment. See DRM, Patent trolls, subsidies given without stipulation and no-bid contracts. Most think it's ridiculous you can patent a seed to which you found in a government vault, which they obtained from the wild. You can.

Enforcing a free market is a conservative value.

2. Government staying out of our personal lives. This would fall under the small government category/give us personal freedoms. These are views in keeping with the constitution/bill of rights. I'd say that the constitution has a Libertarian feel to it. This isn't the viewpoint of the Republican party, so you have us there.

3. Most of us don't seem to be for most welfare in it's current state, view SS and medicade as a fiscal disaster in need of much revamping, etc. Conservative/Libertarian.

I think in general we're all for a competent government, whatever form that may be, so long as it will stay competent/for the people. As a Republican you do realize that in the past 20 years, your party has changed drastically. Government debt goes up the most during your terms, often setting new records. Not fiscally conservative.

In terms of the past 8 years, we're tired of the government being very competent at taking away the rights we're guaranteed to have in that "goddamned piece of paper". We're tired of how competent they are at lying, but incompetent they are at leading. They're experts at returning favors for those who gave them money or ran their political party, but they fail horribly of their ONLY responsibility, which is to uphold and defend that piece of paper. They spit on the hundreds of thousands who have died to defend this country and its ideals and the people who have given them the power in the first place.

Maybe that's why we appear liberal. We cannot stand the current adminstration, and if your quote is any indication, you are a traditional republican. I suggest you check out the Libertarian party's main points, http://www.lp.org/platform [lp.org], as they are more in line with traditional Republican viewpoints. The one main area you might disagree on is the US's role in the world.