Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
News

Vice President Gore Writes for Slate 374

Posted by Roblimo from the charming-the-public dept.
calibanDNS writes "Slate Magazine (owned by Microsoft) is running an article by VP and presidential hopeful Al Gore. In the article he downplays tension over the recent 'Findings of Fact' and suggests a crucial issue for voters: 'Whose finger do you want on the ALT-CONTROL-DELETE button?' He also talks about the features of Win 2K. The article has the normal Gore tone to it, but it gives us a good idea of what Gore's policy on monopolies and dealing with them is." All in all, a surprisingly decent article. Really. Sure wish we could get VP Gore to do a Slashdot interview, but every time we ask we get fobbed off on a different campaign staffer. Oh well.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Vice President Gore Writes for Slate More

Vice President Gore Writes for Slate

Comments Filter:

  • gore (Score:1)

    by BadERA ( 107121 )
    "Sure wish we could get VP Gore to do a Slashdot interview, but every time we ask we get fobbed off on a different campaign staffer." And put how many sleep-deprived /.'rs to sleep? #RIT can put you know what you know where
  • Beautiful. You think he'd know that, having invented the Internet and everything. Or is it a subtle joke?
  • That the guy who invented the internet thought he had to be physically present at an office to write an article, don't you think?
  • Mr. Gore, How did you think of the wonderful concept of the Internet, and why didn't you patent it?

    (Just to illustrate the kinds of questions we'd be likely to see moderated up to 5... No wonder he keeps saying no. :) )

    "The wages of sin is death but so is the salary of virtue, and at least the evil get to go home early on Fridays."

  • I know a lot of geeks are going to hate Gore for his constant use of the term "Information Superhighway" and his more recent comments that as a United States Senator he "took the lead in creating the Internet," but whatever you politics, I urge you not to be hasty. Don't reject Gore because of his occasionally boneheaded remarks. I think he actually has a relatively good grasp of technology issues (certainly more so than Mr. Bush).

    I'm sure there are a host of sound reasons not to vote for Mr. Gore, but please don't let offhand remarks be the reason. Dig in before you decide!

    Paid for by the by the Tweedledee for Ratcatcher Committee. All rights reserved. Some restrictions apply. Offer void in California, Rhode Island, and the Domincan Republic...
  • So I obviously spent too much time in advance preparing for a pop quiz about CEO's of software companies from hot spots around the world.

    Or his speechwriter does. Either way, that was my favourite part of the article. :) And, I'm even a George W. Bush [georgewbush.com] supporter.

    On the whole, it was a lot better than I expected. Perhaps Gore isn't the most technologically astute person, but he at least expresses opinions (his own or otherwise) well.

    Wonder if he's studying the names of Justice Department heads around the world... :)

    --------------------

  • I still say Bradley...
    He's not a career politician, he's in it for the people, he's not juat a "jock", he's a Rhoades scholar...

  • ALT-CONTROL-DELETE? (Score:3)

    by kootch ( 81702 ) on Wednesday November 17, 1999 @10:57AM (#1524600) Homepage
    I'm curious, but how many of your would actually say "ALT-CONTROL-DELETE"?

    normal pronunciation, correct me if I'm wrong, would be "CONTROL-ALT-DELETE", wouldn't it? Don't most people, in the instances when they have to, go from left to right? And wouldn't you say it aloud the same way that you normally hit the buttons?

    now try doing it the way Gore suggested.

    ALT CONTROL DELETE

    go on. try it with me.





    sorry about that, I really wanted to see how many of you almost rebooted your computer
  • cannot comprehend how some can argue that hate crimes are no different from all other crimes.

    Umm...well...how about...

    Murder is murder?

    Yes, you're still just as dead whether you're white, black, Filipino-American, Korean, gay, or straight.

    Mr. Vice President, if you hadn't spent so much time inventing the Internet, you might understand this.
    --
  • Rant+++
    I used have a great deal of respect for VP. Gore. Before he started this campaign I was very pro-Gore (even having been pro-Gore when he ran in '88)
    He may even get my vote this time, I'm not sure yet. But he has really gone down in my estimation. Between declaring his webpage "open-source," and claiming he "invented the internet." And then defending the claim with bald assertions.... I mean if he'd said "Well I was instruemental in getting the intial funding passed," that would have been fine, but saying "VP. Gore stands by his statement."

    I guess what I'm trying to say is: "Hey, Al your handlers are making you look like a fool. Quit trying to be cool and be yourself... one of the most intelligent and thoughtful Democrats around. You do that, and you may actually make it to the election."

    Sigh,
    Rant--
    RobK

  • More Comments (Score:3)

    by calibanDNS ( 32250 ) <brad_statonNO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Wednesday November 17, 1999 @10:59AM (#1524603)
    Slate has its own thread of comments on the article that can be seen here [slate.com]. There are several good comments and A LOT of flames. Maybe they should impliment a moderation system over there.

    ~Caliban
  • I cannot comprehend how some can argue that hate crimes are no different from all other crimes. That is why we need tougher laws to prevent and punish them.

    I cannot comprehend how some can argue that if someone murders me, or my wife, or my niece, in any of the same ways that Al listed (prior to the quoted line), the murderers should be treated less harshly simply because the three of us chose not to lead an openly gay lifestyle.

    I don't even see why our racial heritage would enter into it, so I don't get that aspect of hate-crimes legislation either. Ditto gender, religion, etc.

    We can protect minorities of all types from oppression and hate using our most valuable resources -- love, charity, respect -- all we should ask from our government's court system is fairness, which, in setting punishments, should be as blind to the things that differentiate us as possible.

  • A friend has a keyboard that actually has a single key labeled "alt-control-delete". I wish I could find one; I understand they were made for the ubernewbie. Rumor has it that it also has an "any" key. Shouldn't there be a test or something to weed out those users out? Goodness.

    The Good Reverend
  • What the hell is the Alt-Control-Delete button? Is that some strange euphimism for the big red button President Clinton has on his desk that he uses to nuke the Godless Ruskies? Is this a thinly veiled threat from the democrats who are planning to shutdown -r now the USA? My god, what could they be up to? Perhaps they plan on logging into America's root! Or maybe President Gore will fsck America and send all the homeless into concentration camps! The possibilites are horrifyingly endless!

  • Hate crimes (Score:4)

    by Col. Klink (retired) ( 11632 ) on Wednesday November 17, 1999 @11:02AM (#1524608)
    Al Gore says "And to me, in a year when Matthew Shepard was crucified on a split rail fence because of his sexual orientation; when James Byrd was dragged to his death because of his skin color; and both a Filipino-American and a Korean graduate student were murdered because of the shape of their eyes--I cannot comprehend how some can argue that hate crimes are no different from all other crimes. That is why we need tougher laws to prevent and punish them."

    Two of the killers of Byrd have already been given the death sentence, the third is still on trial.

    The killer of Matthew Shepard avoided the death penalty because the family did not seek it, but he will still face life behind bars.

    How, exactly, could "hate crime" legistlation possibly affect these crimes?
  • I suggested that one crucial issue for voters to ponder is this: Whose finger do you want on the ALT-CONTROL-DELETE button?

    Is that the button I keep hitting by mistake, giving me a BSOD?

    (I guess by this that Al Gore claims to have invented the keyboard, too)

  • I won't let his offhand comments change the way I will vote. His wife did that for me years ago when she founded the PMRC and began her crusade to 'clean up' music. Of course, being in Texas, I can't say much good about Bush Jr. either. Guess I'll have to see how things turn out before I fully decide who gets my vote, but the thought of the founder of the PMRC living in the White House scares the crap out of me personally. Of course, those are just my feelings. Feel free to differ. =)

  • Not if you are doing the "vulcan nerve pinch" i.e. one handed ctrl-alt-delete is actually alt-ctrl-delete (look at your keyboard). (It works better with non-win 95 keyboards... what is that menu key for??) If you want to nit-pick, why not point out his "ergonometric" keyboard.
  • sorry about that, I really wanted to see how many of you almost rebooted your computer

    I really hope you're not still running an OS that reboots on ctrl-alt-del! :)

    --GnrcMan--
  • Don't reject Gore because of his occasionally boneheaded remarks. I think he actually has a relatively good grasp of technology issues (certainly more so than Mr. Bush).

    So we should vote on presidential candidates based on their grasp of technology issues?

    It's a big world. There's more to it than computers.

    And I am the only person upset that it's one year before the actual election and our choices have been narrowed down to Bush and Gore (which, BTW, sounds like a pornographic slasher movie, but I digress....)
  • Well, if you wanted to hit them all with one hand, the left to right order IS alt-ctrl-del...

    But, I will agree with you that no one SAYS it that way :)

    Eric
  • Ok.. so was there a point to his article? It appeared to me that he just rattled on. I felt like I was reading his journal about what he did for the day. There were words on the page, but there was no meaning. Did I miss something besides some PR for himself and MS?

    "Where's the beef?"

  • I usually use three finger from my right hand (thumb, ring finger, and pinky), so actually, so, for me, it actually is alt-ctrl-del.

    Although I still say "Control Alt Delete" in a sentence.
  • I'm curious, but how many of your would actually say "ALT-CONTROL-DELETE"?

    That's very observant, and darn funny that he wrote it that way... I forget what it's called, but my brain just processed the sentence as the more standard order "Ctrl-Alt-Delete".

    If I start on the left-hand side of the keyboard I do Ctrl-Alt-Delete, using the Alt key on the left-hand side of the spacebar. However, if you start at the Alt key on the right side of the spacebar, you can do Alt-Ctrl-Del... but it definitely sounds and feels wrong.

    Anyways... whatever. :)

    -dr

  • He did it in alphabetical order ;)

    -

  • It's very very unlikely he wrote the article. (Score:4)

    by MattXVI ( 82494 ) on Wednesday November 17, 1999 @11:07AM (#1524622) Homepage
    ..Sure wish we could get VP Gore to do a Slashdot interview, but every time we ask we get fobbed off on a different campaign staffer. Oh well.

    Guys, I work on Capitol Hill, and can assure you that Al Gore did NOT write the article. A staffer did. Vice-Presidents, Presidents, and Congressmen do not have time or inclination to do this, especially when they are campaigning. Everything is written and edited by staffers and looked over (sometimes) by the politician.

    I can think of only a handful of exceptions to this. Nixon was the last President to write a significant number of his own speeches. Ronald Reagan was the only President to write a book while in office (It was a short book on the subject of abortion). Al Gore actually was one of the few to write a book himself while in office (the execrable Earth in the Balance), but a few of his Senate staff did most of the research. Anyway, Senators serve six-year terms, and have more time on their hands. Almost any other example I can think of was ghostwritten.

  • Disclaimer: Gore has always rubbed me the wrong way. A lot of what he says strikes me as silly -- and particularly annoying because it's said in that technocrat, poli-sci-as-science tone.

    Which brings me to "And to me, in a year when ...I cannot comprehend how some can argue that hate crimes are no different from all other crimes."

    Now, I'm not especially opposed to hate crime legislation, but I'm ambivalent about it, because it punishes thought rather than actions, and especially because it diminishes the rights of the individual (my right not to be assaulted) in favor of group rights (a group's right not to be targeted).

    I'm supposed to be impressed that Gore can't comprehend why people might disagree with him? I'd be a lot more impressed if he said, "I understand people's concerns but here's why I think what I do."

  • Re:Hope he comes through (Score:3)

    by SoftwareJanitor ( 15983 ) on Wednesday November 17, 1999 @11:08AM (#1524625)
    I won't vote for Gore because of his stance on gun control, for his stance on crypto (he was the poster-boy for Clipper, for instance), etc. His continual boneheaded remarks are the least of my concern, as I don't think any other politicians at his level have much of a clue when real tech issues come up.

  • Just because Gore happens to be a robot doesn't mean that all of us technology enthusiasts should rush out and support him. In my mind Bradley is the better candidate. Too bad most of America has no idea who he is, even though he has had an amazing career so far.
  • ...Whose finger do you want on the ALT-CONTROL-DELETE button?

    It's Control - Alt - Delete!

    And what the heck is that supposed to mean, anyway? What does the president conceptually have the power to "reboot"? It sure isn't the economy, or any industry. Maybe education? Or maybe he's referring to "logging on", NT-style.

    I bet some staffer just came up with a phrase that sounded sort of techno-power-cool and seemed appropriate for Microsoft (snicker), and didn't bother to define it, or even think very hard about it. And Gore just spouted it off.

    Azog the Goblin
  • along with several other posters, I think hate crime legislature may not make that much sense...

    Should people who kill and do criminal things without hate get a lesser punishment than those who do? Dead people are dead people either way.
  • due to the Bush debacle where he couldn't name 4 leaders, could we do a Gore trial and give him 4 terms and see how many he can identify?

    lets try...

    1. GUI
    2. BIOS
    3. system bus
    4. OS

    bets are he ties Bush and gets one right...
  • It doesn't matter whose fingers are on the button if you are bluescreened and forced to do it.
  • It's worth noting that the "hate crime" nature of these crimes was certainly an aggravating factor in sentencing -- the law isn't "hate-blind" by any means.
    1. Microsoft has created a single "control-alt-delete" button, to reduce finger strain.
    2. Any poster who pokes fun at Gore for wanting to take credit care to list all those times they've bent the truth in their favour, for any reason? If he's guilty, there's not a living soul who isn't.
    3. If thoughts are bubbling, Microsoft should turn up the air-conditioning, immediately. The protein in their engineer's brains will colagulate at those kinds of temperatures.
    4. Al Gore's refusal to comment about the finding of fact is right and proper, but if he wins, it's his duty to ensure market laws are -strengthened-, not weakened.
  • Absolutely excellent point. It is a (superfluous) attempt to criminalize motivation. But even that is taken into consideration during sentencing. Even in the absence of "hate crime" laws, I will likely get a longer sentence if I murder out of hatred than out of impulse.
  • Who cares. Just don't be a dumbass and press delete first. Unless you really don't know anything about the BIOS bits, and don't understand about "Press almost any key to continue." Then you've stumbled into the wrong discussion on the wrong website. Go back to the man pages, do not pass go, do not collect $200.
    ---
    pb Reply rather than vaguely moderate me.
  • What the hell is the Alt-Control-Delete button?

    A one key reboot may not be the greatest of ideas... but it sure would be damn funny to press it on your buddies keyboard after he's been up all night writing his/her master's thesis...

    Actually though, my favourite button is the f*ck it [bitonic.com] key.

    -dr

  • The way Gore said it-- "...be worth *two* trillion dollars..."-- makes it sound like Gates is worth *one* trillion right now.

    Dan Quayle may need some spelling lessons, but Gore needs a lesson in basic mathematics-- perhaps he could use a refresher course on scientific notation... Or counting, since CTRL-ALT-DEL is a *three* key combination, last time I checked...

    Then again, he said that the whole "creating the Internet" thing was due to a "lack of sleep". Perhaps he'll finally fess up and attribute these screw ups to "lack of clue".
  • ...of the English language disturbs me. "Ergonometric" isn't a word (according to www.m-w.com). It's ergonomic, you twit!!! What is it with our recent VPs anyway?

    Eric
  • Murder is murder?

    Oh, really? Then I guess there should only be one sentence for someone convicted of murder. I mean, if murder is murder, what is this thing about 2nd or 3rd degree?

    Most rational,intelligent people understand that there are some crimes that are more heinous than others. Someone who stalks his girlfriend for 6 months and shoots her in front of her kids deserves a stiffer punishment than some guy who drives drunk, gets into an accident and kills his passenger. The loss of life in either situation is deplorable, but we as a society understand that the person who premeditates murder is much more of a threat.

    Hate crime is a serious issue in any society.

  • Whose finger do you want on the ALT-CONTROL-DELETE button?

    Sorry to say this, but I would feel much safer with the government looming over my computer's shoulder than some multi-billion dollar mega-corporation. At least with the government, I have some recourse should my rights be violated.

    Obviously, though, the best answer to this question is ME which can easily be achieved - by using linux instead. :)

    Man's unique agony as a species consists in his perpetual conflict between the desire to stand out and the need to blend in.

  • Clinton was a Rhodes scholar too, and all that intelligence didn't improve his legacy. Anyway, how can you say Bradley is not a career politician when he spent most of his adult life as a Senator, and only got out because Christine Whitman was planning to run against him (at the time)? Now he wants to spend a few more years at the trough in Washington, and somehow he is not a career politician? He is as big a hack as anybody. You shouldn't believe every puff piece you read in Time Magazine.

  • Back when Wired [wired.com] was still worth reading, they ran a pretty good article called "The Making of the President 2000" [wired.com] (which is archived for free browsing on their Web site) comparing Al Gore's and Newt Gingrich's efforts to position themselves as the tech-savviest politico in preparation for the 2000 election. Of course, the article, which originally was published in the December 1995 issue, is a little dated; remember, this was back in the full flush of the Republican Revolution, when Gingrich looked like a revolutionary conservative leader and not a broken, slightly pathetic figure. But it's still worth reading for anyone interested in how Gore's ideas about tech developed to where they are today.


    -- Jason A. Lefkowitz

  • Years ago, a friend of mine had to write some sort of Technology and Policy document for some Senate subcommitee that Senator Al Gore chaired. Gore was only responsible for endorsing it by writing a foreward.

    Ordinarily, a Senator will assign some (hopefully) bright staffer to write the foreward and then signs his or her name (Kay Bailey Hutchison probably needs help with that, too). To my friend's surprise, Senator Gore made time to meet with him and discuss the paper. Gore asked a series of increasingly deep technical questions and when he felt he understood the contents of the paper, he wrote the foreward himself. In addition, it was insightful.

    My friend has been a staunch Gore supporter since.

    You may now continue with your regularly-scheduled episode of "Slashdot posters bash Gore."

  • I read the article and am left wondering why this is newsworthy? Basically, we have Gore making an appearence on an Internet forum, but saying little of substance. This is the Internet equivalent of a photo-op. The impression I get is Gore's campaign staff saw this as an oportunity to make him seem more 'hip', more Internet-saavy. On that, he kind of blows it (it's Ctrl-Alt-Delete, or is this another pronunciating war?). Also, emailing his article to Slate should not surprise someone so intimately familiar with the Internet! :)

    Anyhow, I'm not a Gore fan, but neither am I an attack dog. Gore fans will generally like the piece, his detractors won't care for it. My main point stands: There's just not much significant or new that he says in his article. Kind of a non-event, IMHO.
    --
  • Must be a Microsoft keyboard, to serve the needs of MS-operating-system-using poeple that must hit that button more often than users of any other OS...
  • I like his swipe at Bush [cnn.com]...

    So I obviously spent too much time in advance preparing for a pop quiz about CEO's of software companies from hot spots around the world.
  • This whole thing reminds me of one of the swerves in Pro Wrestling. It seems as though Al plans to switch to the republican party and is going to intentionally throw the election. I mean come on, everybody on the face of the planet knows that Al Gore's monotone talking ass didn't invent the internet and all you have to do is type in the words "Microsoft Sucks" or "Anti-Microsoft" into Yahoo to determine the publics opinion of MS, whom Al seems to be bedding down with.

    I can see it now. It is the day after the election. The Democrats lost horrendously cause Al didn't even get one vote. Then the President Elect steps up to the mic

    "Ladies and gentlemen. I would like to introduce to you the newest member of the GOP." Pyro goes off, Rock and Roll music starts, and out comes Al Gore, who takes the mic

    "I would just like to say, that I am tired of Bill Clinton getting all the women, and as far as I'm concerned the Democrats can SUCK IT! And now that I am certified to represent the G-O-P, we will insure that the common man is forever opprosed by the wealthy. And leading the charge as head opproser I would like to introduce....Heir Gates!"

    Bill Gates comes out to some really lame music and takes the microphone.

    "From now on all computers will run Windows. Running Linux will result in the death penalty. And that's the bottom line cause Bill Gates said so!"

    *Sigh* Oh well if we are lucky maybe we will see Bill Gates powerbombed through a table by some irate democrats. hehe.

  • I may not be the biggest fan of Algore or even any of his opponents, but I wonder if Slate is going to let the rest of them have a chance to post equally blatant campaign stump speeches under the guise of "trip reports"?

    The fact that Microsoft owns a publication like Slate really blurs the line between corporate PR and independent media. It's not hard to envision a scenario by which Microsoft offers Gore the free chance to spout his vote-for-me schtick in exchange for subtly favorable treatment if and when he becomes President.

    Slate appeals to current-events junkies who also happen to spend a lot of time online. These are people likely to be quite knowledgeable about the DoJ vs MS case, and they also happen to be a key demographic Gore would like to reign in.

    I don't like it, it's corporate-sponsored campaigning. Microsoft should definitely stay the hell out of presidential politics.

    -Sharv

  • The problem I see with hate crimes is best exemplified in this comic [salon.com].

  • Re:Hate crimes (Score:5)

    by mochaone ( 59034 ) on Wednesday November 17, 1999 @11:32AM (#1524682)
    How, exactly, could "hate crime" legistlation possibly affect these crimes?

    Okay, two can play that game. I'll answer your question if you can answer mine:

    Why is premeditated murder considered more reprehensible than other murders? Why are cop murderers more likely to face the death penalty than someone who drives a cab?

    You're looking for equity in a system where there is none. We have already acknowledged gradations of criminilality with proportional punishment. Why do you have a problem with elevating hate crime to the lofty status of premeditated murder or cop killing? Is it because it serves to protect people that you feel don't deserve extra protection in the law? If so, I hope you are beseeching your congressmen/senator to overturn the laws in use now that provide disparity in dispensing justice.

  • Re:It's very very unlikely he wrote the article. (Score:3)

    by technos ( 73414 ) on Wednesday November 17, 1999 @11:33AM (#1524685) Homepage Journal
    You've a point. Most pols seem to pass it off to staffers. Perhaps we should forget asking for a 'Gore' interview and just ask for the uber-staffer? We might stand a chance: the staffer will spend his/her political career in the shadow of 'The Candidate', and a dose of limelight might just be enticing enough.
  • As I mentioned above, Senators in safe seats have soooo much more free time than VP's running for President.
  • cannot comprehend how some can argue that if someone murders me, or my wife, or my niece, in any of the same ways that Al listed (prior to the quoted line), the murderers should be treated less harshly simply because the three of us chose not to lead an openly gay lifestyle.

    Do you have a problem with cop killers getting the dealth penalty when the majority of murderers just face jail time? I don't think so because you realize this in no way marginalizes anyone else's murder.

    Hate crime is an insidious evil that deserves special scrutiny. The hypocritical nature of people often comes out when discussing this issue. I wonder why.
  • IANAL, but I believe 1st-3rd degree murder is primarily based on heat of the moment vs. premeditation, with intent to kill thrown in there somewhere.

    What I don't understand is why should the particular reason you hate someone make a difference in the punishment. I agree that "hate crimes" are absolutely deplorable. What I don't feel comfortable with is legislating people's feelings. The crime is not hating someone, the crime is killing someone.
  • I did look before I spouted off. And if you could parse English with more skill, you'd see that you are demonstrating my point. To wit: that in the absence of "hate crime" legislation, there is already great consideration for intent and motivation in our legal system.
  • Now THAT would be a trick. Almost every staffer on the Hill is a PoliSci or Econ grad, usually from a fufu liberal arts school. All the Technologically Aware people I know are over the river in VA.
  • I don't see how categorizing certain crimes as "hate crimes" is intellectually defensible in the U.S., given the principles this country is founded on. To elevate a criminal charge based on whether there was an element of hate involved is absurd, even if we restrict the kinds of hate that are applicable in this situation to a narrow set.

    Basically, this is an effort to criminalize certain kinds of thinking. We haven't progressed yet to the point where people are being arrested and charged soley for their thoughts. But if a person commits a crime, we are at the point where if he had certain thoughts (identified as unacceptable) that may have motivated the crime, the charges can be elevated. Thus, the thoughts themselves are criminalized to the degree that the criminal charges have been elevated beyond what they would have been for just committing the act itself. This is a direct violation of every U.S. citizen's right to freedom of speech (and possibly even freedom of religion).

    We assess motivation in criminal cases to help determine whether an accused person is guilty or innocent of committing a criminal act. The motivation itself is not criminal, but the act is. What we have really done is politicized crimes committed against certain groups of people. Mixing politics into the criminal code is a bad idea.
    --

  • Re:Hate crimes (Score:3)

    by Sxooter ( 29722 ) on Wednesday November 17, 1999 @11:52AM (#1524724)
    I'm a bisexual, polyamorous pagan. There are many people for whom I am on the short list of "people who the government could haul away and I wouldn't say anything."

    I think the hate crime legislation is wrong mainly because it tries to take the decision of sentence length away from the judge and jury and tries to give it a pre-defined standard that cannot consider all the possibilities.

    I prefer the jury and judge have large leeway in sentencing of crimes based on ANY motive or circumstance, not just one or two.

    I imagine that most of us would agree that someone who killed hundreds of school kids just for fun should be put away forever, or to death. Another man kills a man he finds in bed with his wife in rage. Whould that guy be just as screwed if the other man happened to be another race? I could see racially motivated sentencing guidelines becoming 1984ish in nature over time.

    Let the jury decide, not congress.

  • Then I suppose you would support reduced sentences if you killed someone you really, really liked?
  • The scary part is, I now live in a world where I use CTRL-ALT-DELETE on my Windows machine to log in, and CTRL-ALT-DELETE on my Linux machine to reboot it.
    • Sure wish we could get VP Gore to do a Slashdot interview, but every time we ask we get fobbed off on a different campaign staffer.

    Did you remember to include the promise of a fat campaign contribution?

    You can bet that Microsoft didn't forget!

  • The menu key is the equivalent of a right click with the mouse. Go ahead. Try it.

    Could be sorta useful if you were using just the KB to navigate.

    Pete
  • You're looking for equity in a system where there is none. We have already acknowledged gradations of criminility with proportional punishment.

    So, because the system has no equity, we should not attempt to rectify this in the hopes of actually achieving equity?

    To answer your question: Premeditated murder vs. other murders acknowledges the dual, competing natures of man -- his reason vs. his emotion. A murder out of passion is considered an act committed by a person given over to their emotions -- one who essentially stopped thinking at that point in time. A premeditated murder, OTOH, means the accused was acting with their faculties fully intact. They knew the difference between right and wrong (or more precisely, they knew what is and is not considered a criminal act). Given this information and the presumption that they are able to reason, they nevertheless chose to commit the act, thus deliberately flaunting society's mores. So, why should this be worse than any other murder? Because we can control our reasoning, but we sometimes cannot control our emotions.

    As to your other question, I don't agree that cop murderers should be more likely to face the death penalty than someone who drives a cab. I think this is another example of an error in our justice system. The act is murder. Murder is the crime. The punishment should be for the crime, not for who it was committed against.
    --
  • Frankly, I'm of the opinion that there shouldn't be a distinction between murder and attempted murder. If Byrd had somehow survived his attack, I would still hope to see his "attempted" killers put to death.
  • Who says we need a 'technically aware' staffer? Geeks sometimes grek the political process, and obviously the staffer knows a thing or two about presidential politics.

    Anyone know if the 'Socialist' party is running a candidate? And who he/she/it might be?
  • BTW, I'm curious. Why on earth would a distro default to rebooting on ctrl-alt-del. To me it seems like an outmoded artifact of single user, single task OS's. I can understand having the option, but it seems like this should be turned off by default...or at least require root privledges.

    --GnrcMan--
  • "Creating" != "inventing".

    It's still an exageration, but if you're going to mock people, it works better if you mock them for what they actually said. It also works better if you don't mock them about the same damn thing every single time their name is mentioned. Most people learn that in junior high school. Aside from political pundants and many geeks, evidently.

    He was relevant to its beginnings by being instrumental in changing the early funding in a way that kept it funded.

  • On your point 4:

    You should take into consideration that the election is still almost a year away. If you are 17 now, you will be 18 in time for the election unless your birthday fell within about the last two or three weeks. So get your posterior down to the courthouse or wherever you can get a voter registration form and get yourself registered to vote. Most counties will let you register to vote if you are 17 but will turn 18 before the next election.

  • Aside: When I titled my post "I hope he comes through" I meant to make a comment about hoping he would do a Slashdot interview...

    I listened to a speech and Q&A he gave before Microsoft employees. He wouldn't comment on the case, but he said that he believed that "anti-trust law [was] good," and that "protecting the marketplace from dominance by a single player [is] an American value." I do not believe he's a Microsoft lapdog.

    BTW, I am not even remotely endorsing Gore. I assure you that he is not my personal choice. Neither is Mr. Bush. I'm not saying who my choice is, but neither of these gentlemen is it.

    I posted my original remark because I have read comments on /. dismissing him comepletely because of his boneheades remark about "taking the lead in creating the Internet."

    My interest was in encouraging people to look deeper, not in encouraging people to support a particular candidate!

    Anyways, please carry on...
  • Be very careful when dealing with the topic of hate crime laws. Remember we have laws in the US that dictate the penalty for crimes. A person can commit murder for a variety of reasons, and hence we have various penalties and charges, manslaughter, 2nd and 1st degree murder to deal with the motivation of the murderer. The penalty phase of a criminal conviction is the appropriate place to deal with a criminals motives. To often we are finding that Hate Crime Statutes are being used to circumvent the double jeopardy clause of the Constitution. The prosecution fails to convict a person on the criminal charge (murder, assault, rape, etc.) and therefore proceeds with a second trial using a Hate Crime Statute. In other words, the person is absolved of the crime, but convicted for motive. This smacks just a little too much of the Thought Police. Committing a violent act against another individual is abhorent in the extreme. Yet it happens everyday. But no amount of legislation can change the way people think, nor should it. People need to come to the realization that hating others for their differences is wrong on their own. Lets try to avoid legislating how people should think.
  • 1) A jilted lover plans to kill his ex-girlfriend and does so.

    2) A white racist plans to kill a black and does so.

    Most people (including me) would say these two crimes deserve the same punishment.

    Do you have statistics to back that up? I for one would be surprised to hear that most people feel the punishment should be identical. The second crime not only harms the obvious victim, but an entire segment of the population. What is more, it harms our entire society by tearing at the social fabric and stirring up hatred between the races that could, if unabated, lead to America resembling Kosovo or Bosnia. Based on the added threat to our society that hate crimes represent, versus similar crimes without the "hate" aspect, it is not unreasonable that the punishment is harsher.

    This is easier to see if you consider crimes less drastic than murder, such as, say, intimidation, assault, or vandalism. Burning a cross does allot more than deface one's yard -- it terrorizes an entire household, a neighborhood, indeed (with enough press coverage) an entire segment of the American public. Not quite the same as a couple of malicious kids who light a bush on fire playing with matches because they don't like the old lady who won't let them eat her apples, nor should it be treated the same.

    If motiviation is truly irrelevant, than one should have identical punishments for all murders (for example), whether deliberate, accidental, premiditated, or spontaneous. As another noted, the difference isn't in the act, but in the degree of thought that went into it. I leave it as an excersize to the class to recognize the aburdity of that approach.

    On the other hand, if motivation is relevant, the motive of terrorizing an entire segment of the population (be it based on race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, or whatever) and the associated social and cultural damage that does to our entire society as a whole, must be taken into consideration, which is precisely what hate crime legislation does.
  • By default, if you're sitting at the keyboard and want to reboot a Linux computer, you can yank the plug whether you're root or not. It seems to me that giving non-root local users a way to avoid pulling the plug is a good thing.
  • I am totally grown up. It's the kiddies who think "being a human being" is an excuse to lie to Congress, lie to a Grand Jury, lie to the American people, get the entire cabinet to lie on TV for you, put your friends through legal nightmares, and be an international embarassment and joke.

    Anyway, my comment never mentioned his shenanigans. By "his legacy" I was referring to his awful record as a President. What is his political legacy? Name one serious poilitical accomplishment of his, besides getting himself elected. Name one significant piece of legislation he got passed.

    With respect to your comments about Bush and Reagan, everybody is welcome to their ignorance. You just got a bigger helping.

  • I know a lot of staffers who might say Alt-Ctrl-Delete. And it's not that Gore could have found the time to write it. It's that it would be very very unlikely that he would.

    By the way, you overestimate the abilities of staff who ghostwrite articles and op-eds for politicos.

  • Spoonerisms aside, did anyone actually get the metaphor? For those of you who can't endure the pain of reading the piece (really, I do empathize) lemme repeat it here:

    And even though national security policy didn't come up, I suggested that one crucial issue for voters to ponder is this: Whose finger do you want on the ALT-CONTROL-DELETE button?

    I keep flashing back to that In Living Color skit where an embittered, lame duck President Bush finds out he lost the `92 election and pushes a giant red button affixed to his desk, which launches nukes at half the Western world. WTF is he talking about? The whole idea of the 3 fingered salute seems a bit despotic - we have the unchecked power to reset our computers at will. It basically clashes with the whole concept of democracy :) I think I've got it - Gore is a commie!
    --
    "Some people say that I proved if you get a C average, you can end up being successful in life."
  • The school thing is simple enough, if not controversial. School uniforms, and no book bags. [...] So, why do I suggest school uniforms? Again, the core of the problem is classism. Like racism, it stems from SURFACE PERCEPTIONS. As you strip those away, you have less resistance to solving the more basic problems inherent in human nature.
    While I agree with most of the rest of your post, I can't say I agree entirely with this. I spent grades 1-8 in public schools, with all the cliquishness that is often (and correctly, IMHO) attributed to those environments, especially Jr. High. Once my parents and I were thoroughly disgusted with the public school system - both of my brothers suffered because of it, and I guess that when it started with me they'd had enough - I went to a boarding school, which had uniforms.

    Did that school have the social classes and cliques that are found in many public schools? No. But I really don't think this was because of the uniforms. The uniforms may have helped, but what made the greatest difference was the size and the environment. When I graduated, the school was at record size: 200 students in total, grades 6 - 12 inclusive. In a school that small, you generally get to know everyone, at least by sight if not by name. Each year, the school would have a day or two of Sports Camp before classes began in September, and by the end of this the headmaster always made a point to know every student by name, and he succeeded. The school was by no means perfect, but was socially a far better place than the public schools I've gone to, and I think the main reason for that is that before long you get to know almost everyone, whether you try to or not. My graduating class was 50 people in total; there just aren't enough people to support cliques, whether they're in uniforms or not. Even if you do just look at someone and judge them based on your surface perceptions, in a school that small eventually you'll probably run into that person enough that you'll get a truer feel for what they're like.

    I really don't think that uniforms in public schools with 1000+ students in three grades will help much. I'm fairly sure that all the school shootings in the states happened in large schools (at least hundreds of students per grade); IIRC, Columbine had something like over 3000 students. Put everyone in uniforms, and they'll eventually find other ways to split off into groups. But put them in schools of, say, less than a hundred students per grade, perhaps with uniforms as well, and I don't think social rifts of that kind would occur. Now, finding enough good teachers to staff that many schools and the money to fund all of them is an entirely different matter..

    --Raereth
  • "How, exactly, could "hate crime" legistlation possibly affect these crimes? "

    um- more minority and gay votes for politicians that support it?

    I wish I had a nickel for every time someone said "Information wants to be free".
  • Al Gore, who helped enable the CDA, Echelon, the consideration of wiretap tech built into IP, ADA restraints on web publishing, and every other recent evil thing that's happening on the policy side of tech, is not sufficiently different than Jesse Helms or James Exon in this respect.

    I'm not Al Gore fan, (I'm a Republican), but how can you say this? The VP doesn't vote on legislation, doesn't sign legislation, and doesn't enforece legislation. None of the votes on any of these issues were 50-50 in the senate, so what influence did they guy have on any of em?

  • If the perpetrator mistakenly identifies the victim it can still be considered a hate crime. For example if you get beat up coming out of a gay bar with a friend, but you are not gay, but the person beat you up because they thought you were gay (they usually have to verbalize this during the attack or admit to it later), that person can be prosecuted for a hate crime.
    --
  • I'm frankly more concerned with who has their finger on the Stop+A buttons.
    --
  • How, exactly, could "hate crime" legistlation possibly affect these crimes?

    It couldn't. When people do things like this, they aren't thinking about consequences. Those who are able to commit crimes of this nature aren't removed from society as a -punishment-, per se, they are mostly removed so that that society is safe from them. All persons who commit crimes like this, no matter the motivation, should be removed from society.

    The very term "hate crimes" should set off some sort of logic circut in everyone's head. How often do people kill someone because they love them? How often is it that a sane, well-adjusted individual beats up someone else and hangs him with barbed wire because he thought the person was just a swell guy? Race, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, and yes, even job of the victim should be ignored when in the penalty phase. Sure, maybe it shows motivation or something. But if one person is messed up enough to hang a white hetro male with barbed wire, another who hangs a black gay male from barbed wire should get the same treatment. ALL crimes like that are "hate crimes."


  • Hypertext Webster Gateway [ucsd.edu] Error
    No match found for ergonometric

    What a chump. And he wants to be President? Yeah, right...

    ======
    "Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16

  • Well, given that a friend of mine works at Slate, and sat OVER HIS SHOULDER while he wrote the article, on my friend's laptop, using his "ergonometric" keyboard, I can confirm that he did indeed write the article, and not some schmoe working in PR for the Whitehouse or for Microsoft.

    Cool huh?

    Simon
  • If Gates had stayed in college, he'd have been studying for exams instead of stealing Basic and CPM, porting them to the 8088, and landing a one-sided contract with IBM to supply software for IBM PCs.
    From what I've heard, Seattle Computer stole CP/M and re-implemented it for the 8086/8, and sold it to Bill as QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System). QDOS was label-engineered into MS-DOS 1.0. There were some legal maneuverings between Seattle Computer and Microsoft about royalties, if I recall correctly, but by that time Microsoft had re-written MS-DOS and eliminated all the original code. Bill didn't steal CP/M, he just bought a half-assed OS (no I/O redirection whatsoever, not even CP/M's brain-dead version) which had the same API (right down to "CALL 5").
    --
    Advertisers: If you attach cookies to your banner ads,
  • >Nixon was the last President to write a significant number of his own speeches.

    I've heard that Clinton writes almost all of his own speeches himself. His writers feel lucky if he uses one or two of the lines they wrote out of an entire speech.

    And as much as I don't care for his politics, or his character, I do have to admit that he has mastered the art of rhetoric.

    LL
  • No casualties unless you count the poor folks hit by the missiles. Most of them were civilians. At least Bush whupped up on a real threat to regional peace. And he aimed his guns at the soldiers, not the civvies.
  • If Gore's staffers were technically inclined, do you really think they'd let him get away with some of the stuff he says? No. They'd beat it into him through course after course of 'No, Al, say it THIS WAY.'
  • Well, he spent some of his adult life at least as a basketball player. Only later was he drawn to a political career by his personal interest in social issues, etc. My impression of Gore on the other hand is the son of a senator who when to college to follow in the footsteps of his father and explicitly to "study" government and become a politician. Bill Bradley seems to be more true to the original conception of a politicial...namely an ordinary citizen, with concerns, originally for his local community, and later for the broader national community. Bill Bradley seems to be a peoples' politician while Gore seems a politicians' politician. Bradley seems a bit more level heading and less hypsterish.

    And fyi, I don't read puff pieces from Time Magazine...I watch PBS and CSPAN.
  • To be more specific that is over a decade in sports...and to be fair @19 years in political office, about the same as Gore.

    For some reason Gore feels like a Republican in Democrat clothing to me...
  • While I dislike cops just as much as the next guy, the point is that by killing a cop you are not only trying to commit murdur, but in some way disrupt the abilities of the government to catch criminals. Its sorta for the same reason that I would be charged with treason if I killed the president. The point is that its not the cop who is more important than the cab driver, its the office of civil service that the cop holds is important. And the fact that you are probably trying to 1 resist arrest 2. make yourself the law 3. make less and less people want to become cops and help enforce the law 4. kill someone
  • Unlike what the media may try to lead you to believe, up until the whole Bush quiz thing, I seriously doupt even Gore would have known those exact questions. Canidates honestly have better things to do than spend all their time memorizing facts, they will have plenty of time for that during the presidency. And from what I heard, thats one of the things a new President spends the first couple of months in office doing. Anyways the media loves trying to push their own agendas. If they want to just hurt Bush a little bit, either to get him to do something, or hurt his image, its really easy. I'm sure all slashdot readers remember (or have effectivly blocked) their public school days, think of the media as that big guy, who made a point of destroying your public image, and increase that potential a thousand fold.
  • HEHE Ok I did laugh, but I still have to swear, the thing about republicans being the opposors is just a bad rap they got (almost said we, but hey, I'm independent -chuckle-) I look at it too ways you can try to work for the good of society, or you can look like your working for the good of society, but its really hard to do both.
  • Well sure, Microsoft can contribute to his campain however they want. But remember they have to compute the cost of the equipment, internet bandwidth used, and labor time, as campain contributions. Well looks like thats all the contributions your allowed Billy boy. Sorry!
  • And I still say John McCain.. HEHE so what your point (okok, so he was involved in the whole SL thing, but it wasn't his fault, and he was found "not guilty" -grin-)
  • He was in the process of a divorce. Maby its just me, but someone who has already started divorce procedings, I honestly could care less about who they have sex with. Oh and btw he's now married to that woman. Whoa... SO SCANDULUS!
  • Let me put it this way. I have a tendency towards liberalism (which is not, despite a concerted effort, a dirty word). Of the field of serious candidates, I have a lukewarm interest in Mr. Bradley.

    I find my policy priorities tend to intersect with mine. He seems (note seems) interested in actually debating policy and staking out positions that do not necessarily fit entirely with polls.

    The truth is, American politics of late has, to steal a famous Shakespearean line, been "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

    Alas, there is a party apparatus that will rally quite heavily behind Mr. Gore. As for the Republican party, well, they've been too far away from me for nearly twenty years.

    Truth be told, I think the last President this country had that impressed me very much held office well before I was born. Harry S. Truman. And the last Republican for whom I have had any particular admiration would be Theodore Roosevelt (who was smarter than he seemed).

    The rest of the field leaves me cold.
  • Of course, that should read, "I find his policy priorities tend to intersect with mine." It would be strange indeed if my policy priorities did not... Preview doesn't help when you read what you meant to say...
  • I cannot comprehend how some can argue that hate crimes are no different from all other crimes.

    Do you really want someone this mentally unflexible as president? Do you really want someone who is willing to prosecute you for what you think to be president?


    Well, I certainly don't want someone who can't tell the difference between a hate crime and free speech. The creation of hate crime law was, in my opinion, a reasonable legal response to make a particularly pernicious form of threat and intimidation that would otherwise be misdemeanor vandalism or property damage into a more serious crime with a more serious punishment.

    Go ahead, publish all the hate literature you want. March in public. Hold rallies. That's your right. That's free speech. But when you burn crosses on a black family's lawn or spray paint swastikas on a Korean church, then you have moved beyond free speech into a form of harassment and intimidation that is far more pernicious than mere vandalism. If you can't see that difference, then, sir, I weep for you if your skin color or religious belief are ever in the minority.

    As for the rest, I say again, I've never been a big fan of Mr. Gore. But I hardly think he's who we need to worry about when it comes to the erosion of constitutional liberties. I'm a bit more worried about things like product defamation laws. When agricultural goods have more protection than citizens, I think we're in trouble. I'd worry more about that than I'd worry about some "jack-booted government thug" coming to take away my 12-guage.

    We all get so het-up about who's President when Congress is the one doing the meddling with liberty...

Slashdot Top Deals

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Close