Slashdot Log In
Will Linux Win the Next Presidential Election?
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:52 PM
from the vote-for-their-os-since-everything-else-is-depressing dept.
from the vote-for-their-os-since-everything-else-is-depressing dept.
i_like_spam writes "Douglas Karr has posted an interesting breakdown, complete with bar charts, of the operating systems and server software used by the websites for 23 declared and undeclared presidential candidates. The breakdown shows that there is nearly an equal split between Linux and Windows servers among the whole candidate pool. More interesting, all of the Democratic candidates except for Hillary favor Linux or FreeBSD. 69% of the Republican candidates, in contrast, prefer Windows. Is this preference for OSS or Microsoft a true reflection of differing political philosophies? And, more importantly, will Linux win the next election?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Even More Shocking (Score:4, Funny)
Makes you think, doesn't it?
And don't even get me started on Hillary, there's solid proof that her servers resolve to the IP address 66.66.66.66 and that good packets go in but only packets with the evil flag flipped to '1' come out.
I suppose that's politicians for you, though. 'Does not compute' with them, can't pretend we're living in a society where everyone feels equally represented without them.
Intelligent Design? Or Evolution? (Score:5, Funny)
These stories of a Finnish student designing Linux must be garbage. We all know that Linux is too complex to have evolved over time to its current state. It could only have been created by an Intelligent 'designer'
Parent
Re:Intelligent Design? Or Evolution? (Score:5, Funny)
Last time I checked, I didn't have the ability to replicate myself without human intervention either
Parent
Re:Intelligent Design? Or Evolution? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Even More Shocking (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Parent was funny, not insightful! :( (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, there is [christianubuntu.com]. It looks to basically be Ubuntu with some free Bible and other related software included. The link that the grandparent posted was a mock site.
Parent
Doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
And this still doesn't touch the individual candidates position, it could very well be some staffer telling them to vote this way or what ever. But it would still be interesting to see what these candidates would say if confronted with the question of open source verses closed and what makes the best tool for the job.
Parent
Re:Doubt it (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Perhaps your bias is showing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
What About Independents, Libertarians, socialists (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What About Independents, Libertarians, socialis (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Interesting omission (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
You're kidding, right? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You're kidding, right? (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Not the party but the supporters (Score:5, Interesting)
Democrats generally have a younger following then the republicans. More younger people know how to use Linux and know enough about it to use it properly. So Democrats will typically use Linux.
Republicans tend to have an older following and they will use what they know. If they don't know then they will use what most people seem to use. So that will be windows.
Also Open Source People tend to bereave in a more socialistic view that is more compatible with the democrats views so Linux and OSS People will be more likely to support Democrats.
Hillary Clinton is a more of a moderate candidate so bulk of the Linux supporters (who are typically more liberal) will not be as much encouraged to help her, while the general moderate population will be more willing to support her, so they will use what they know and the general population knows windows.
The candidates don't care (Score:4, Insightful)
Good to know (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Good to know (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, you meant the people who hate us and want to blow us up? Well, in the grand scheme of things (AIDS, cancer, automobile accidents, floods, tornadoes) I suppose there may be a small percentage of deaths attributed to such actions, and they also serve to scare portions of the population.
Yeah, there is terrorism out there, but mostly it's a smokescreen for larger, more expensive governmental oversight of the people who are unlikely to ever kill large numbers of people with the intent to scare a community or a nation.
Parent
Re:Good to know (Score:5, Insightful)
"If we think we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem. They don't come here to attack us because we're rich and we're free, they come and attack us because we're over there."
9/11 wasn't ideological. It was an attack plain and simple. They don't have troops, they can't win a war, they can't get us out, these are the things that are their only recourse. We call it terrorism because "No one would want to attack us for the things we do" even though we've been meddling with their governments and lifestyles for over 50 years.
Parent
Giant douche runs Linux, Turd sandwich Windows. (Score:5, Funny)
Used rubber runs BSD.
Vote Giant douche.
There really is a strong correlation! (Score:5, Interesting)
Perhaps this can be construed as a statement of American corporatism seeing as the fundamentals of a Republican viewpoint involve making sure there are plenty of jobs by making sure the corporations do well. This would mean that "buying American" is the way to go. The Democratic viewpoint however, encourages the little man to do well so saving money and being a savvy consumer on an individual level are preferred along with "giving the little guy a chance" so various flavors of linux and BSD come into play there.
Definitely an interesting find!
No and No (Score:5, Insightful)
No and No.
If you honestly believe that a candidate's webserver reflects their political leanings, you're sadly delusional.
If you're planning your vote based on the candidates choice of webserver OS, then you're really missing the bigger issues.
There is not a single thing done on any of the candidate sites that are platform specific. And I doubt any of them developed their sites "in-house" (within the campaign staff). I would bet that every single one of them found a developer and/or hosting company to design and build their site. And they probably went with whatever that developer/hosting provider recommended for a hosting plan.
While looking at the differences makes for an interesting exercise in alleviating boredom, it says nothing about the overall race or candidate's positions and abilities.
And I say this as a web developer who works on both Windows and *NIX servers and usually recommends Apache on Linux or FreeBSD.
Re:Given Diebold... (Score:5, Funny)
That's exactly the kind of uncertainty that Diebold's backers hope to eliminate.
Parent
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Except Obama... and Edwards... and Gore...
Parent