Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 6th Nov 2012 11:37 UTC
"This election won't hinge on technology issues. Just look at prevailing discussions this year at the national level: major candidates have sparred over Iran's nuclear ambitions, the role of government, inane comments on the female body, and to nobody's surprise, the economy. Despite that fact, many decisions will be taken up by the next US president and those in Congress that will affect the world of tech, and by consequence, the real lives of citizens and human beings around the world - from alternative energy, to the use of killer drones, the regulation of wireless spectrum, and policies that aim to control content on the internet. Your chance to vote is just around the corner. Here's what's at stake in tech this election, and how the major candidates could influence our future." Happy voting, American readers. Whatever you pick, please take at least a few minutes to consider that the implications of your choice do not end at the US border.
Thread beginning with comment 541201
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2009-04-08
Let me ask you, if you detest party A's policies, do you vote for party B who has the best chance of defeating party A? Or do you vote for party C who has no chance of winning in your states electoral vote AND increasing the odds of party A winning?
This is not rhetorical, I really want you to answer it. Voters face the same conundrum at the polls. Rank voting is a superior method of voting because it encourages people to vote for who they want, and not just who can win.
This is not rhetorical, I really want you to answer it. Voters face the same conundrum at the polls. Rank voting is a superior method of voting because it encourages people to vote for who they want, and not just who can win.
I do not vote for third parties because it is futile. That is the nature of politics in the USA. I also generally do not vote against things, I vote for them. Don't assume that all Americans are full of hate and tend to vote against the 'other guy' over voting for 'their guy'. It happens for sure, especially in this election but it isn't a constant.
Anyway third parties will never gain traction unless the entire system is rebuilt from the ground up. Congress is deadlocked with two parties and two agendas. Imagine the chaos of multiple parties and agendas.
RE[10]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Wed 7th Nov 2012 01:56
in reply to "RE[9]: Comment by shmerl"
Member since:2010-06-08
You see, you yourself admit that the system isn't healthy, since third parties can't even gain any traction. Electoral college is part of what prevents it.
The argument of deadlock doesn't justify the current stagnation of 2 parties which don't represent the interests of many, while people can't really squeeze in any alternative because of the current system.
Sergey Brin even thinks that removing all parties is a good idea:
http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/06/google-co-founder-brin-calls-on-po...
While this might not be practical, however his characteristic of the current system problems is very to the point.
Edited 2012-11-07 01:59 UTC
RE[10]: Comment by shmerl
by Alfman on Wed 7th Nov 2012 05:55
in reply to "RE[9]: Comment by shmerl"
Member since:2011-01-28
kenji,
I appreciate your answer!
"I do not vote for third parties because it is futile. That is the nature of politics in the USA."
Agreed, I think that's a big part of the problem.
"I also generally do not vote against things, I vote for them."
Fair enough, I guess you don't have this dilemma personally. But what of voters who aren't represented by the two party system? They cannot "vote *for* things" and "not vote for third parties" at the same time, they have to break one of your rules.
"Don't assume that all Americans are full of hate and tend to vote against the 'other guy' over voting for 'their guy'. It happens for sure, especially in this election but it isn't a constant."
That's not really what I meant. Consider that the green party aligns better with the democratic party than the republican party. If too many people vote green, it will split the democratic vote. Consequently republicans would win, but they are further from green party ideals than democrates are. Therefore voting for who you want can be detrimental to your cause. This is a terrible property of the US voting system. Many of us propose rank voting as a much better alternative.
RE[10]: Comment by shmerl
by demetrioussharpe on Thu 8th Nov 2012 14:39
in reply to "RE[9]: Comment by shmerl"
Member since:2009-01-09
"Let me ask you, if you detest party A's policies, do you vote for party B who has the best chance of defeating party A? Or do you vote for party C who has no chance of winning in your states electoral vote AND increasing the odds of party A winning?
This is not rhetorical, I really want you to answer it. Voters face the same conundrum at the polls. Rank voting is a superior method of voting because it encourages people to vote for who they want, and not just who can win.
This is not rhetorical, I really want you to answer it. Voters face the same conundrum at the polls. Rank voting is a superior method of voting because it encourages people to vote for who they want, and not just who can win.
I do not vote for third parties because it is futile. That is the nature of politics in the USA. I also generally do not vote against things, I vote for them. Don't assume that all Americans are full of hate and tend to vote against the 'other guy' over voting for 'their guy'. It happens for sure, especially in this election but it isn't a constant.
Anyway third parties will never gain traction unless the entire system is rebuilt from the ground up. Congress is deadlocked with two parties and two agendas. Imagine the chaos of multiple parties and agendas. "
Today's as good a day as any other day for them to get started on rebuilding the system. But they won't do that unless we force them to.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
At an event earlier today, Microsoft unveiled the next Xbox - the third model, but confusingly named Xbox One. The big focus was TV, integrated Kinect, and all the other stuff we all expected to be forced down our throats. I think it took them 25 minutes to actually come to what should be the core of the story: gaming. Nothing groundbreaking in the gaming department, except for how Microsoft intends to handle the used games market and borrowing games from friends: pay up, buddy!
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
The day has finally come! Jolla has finally announced the launch device for its Sailfish operating system - and by god this is a looker. It's decidedly different from other phones out there, but it has good specifications and carries a relatively reasonably price tag - EUR 399, and it's up for pre-order today, shipping in the fourth quarter of this year.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Why does Google get so much credit in the technology industry? Why, despite the company's many obvious failings, do many geeks and enthusiasts still hold a somewhat positive view on the all-knowing technology giant? A specific talk at Google I/O this week provides the answer.
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
OSNews is a sponsor of this year's O'Reilly OSCON in Portland, Oregon, USA. A lucky OSNews reader will win a free three-day pass, including two tutorials days. To win the pass, post a comment on this story saying something about Open Source Software or OSCON. We'll pick a winner at random next week. If you don't have an OSNews account, you may email us your entry. Part of the conference is the 9th annual Open Source Awards, and today the 16th is the deadline for nominations. If you'd like to nominate an outstanding open source contributor, do it here. Read on for more information about OSCON. Update: The 20% discount code for OSNews readers is "OSN."
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
"Windows is indeed slower than other operating systems in many scenarios, and the gap is worsening." That's one way to start an insider explanation of why Windows' performance isn't up to snuff. Written by someone who actually contributes code to the Windows NT kernel, the comment on Hacker News, later deleted but reposted with permission on Marc Bevand's blog, paints a very dreary picture of the state of Windows development. The root issue? Think of how Linux is developed, and you'll know the answer.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
This is one of those news items that's fun to write, fun to read, fun to comment on, and where no one will be able to say anything unkind. It's all just one big ball of awesome fluffiness. TuneTracker, the BeOS radio automation software, has just released something very special: TuneTracker System 5, the first version designed entirely and specifically for Haiku. In fact, it actually includes Haiku in the software package. Better yet, TuneTracker also unveiled several system-in-a-box products - which have Haiku and TuneTracker pre-installed.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Exactly twenty years ago, a document was published that played a huge role in establishing the web as we know it today. Twenty years later, and this simple and straightforward document is proof of an irrefutable fact: while closed technologies can change markets, open technologies can change the world.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Oh multitasking. That staple of computing that got thrown out the window with many modern smartphones. We got some rudimentary thing in its place - but even as multitasking on phone and tablets improves, its user-visible side remains cumbersome. Windows 8 has a neat implementation, and now it's time Android follows in it footsteps.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
They're here! Whether that excites you or not remains to be seen, but the Galaxy S4, which will most likely become the best selling Android smartphone of the year by a huge margin, has been reviewed by all the major sites, and there's lots of interesting conclusions in there - although I think most of you will get the gist.
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Nokia has posted its quarterly results for the first quarter of 2013, and just like the quarters that came before, there's not a whole lot of good news in there. The rise in Lumia sales still can't even dream of making up for the sales drop in Symbian phones, and when broken down in versions, the sales figures for Windows Phone 8 Lumias in particular are very disappointing. In North America, Nokia is getting slaughtered.More Features »
Sponsored Links
Member since:
2011-01-28
kenji,
"What's the point of doing that when it will not affect the outcome, even if the vote was entirely based and popular votes and the Electoral College was dissolved?"
http://www.chacha.com/question/what-three-elections-did-the-elector...
"The electoral college and popular vote differed when the Hayes/Tilden election of 1876, The Harrison/Cleveland election of 1888, and also occured in the 2000 presidential election, where George W. Bush received fewer popular votes than Albert Gore Jr., but received a majority of electoral votes."
It's been rare, but it means the majority lost with Bush. I think there's another disadvantage to electoral voting - independent parties get ZERO representation in the final election tally instead of getting what they deserve. Absolving the electoral college might cause a behavioural shift in voters who collectively avoid voting independent because they plainly see that independents always get zero representation in the end.
Let me ask you, if you detest party A's policies, do you vote for party B who has the best chance of defeating party A? Or do you vote for party C who has no chance of winning in your states electoral vote AND increasing the odds of party A winning?
This is not rhetorical, I really want you to answer it. Voters face the same conundrum at the polls. Rank voting is a superior method of voting because it encourages people to vote for who they want, and not just who can win.