McCain vs. Obama on Tech Issues 877
eldavojohn writes "Ars is running a brief article that looks at stances from Chuck Fish of McCain's campaign and Daniel Weitzner from Obama's in regards to technical issues that may cause us geeks to vote one way or the other. From openness vs. bandwidth in the net neutrality issue to those pesky National Security Letters, there's some key differences that just might play at least a small part in your vote. You may also remember our discussions on who is best for geeks."
Barack Obama's Plan (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/technology/ [barackobama.com]
Re:Do you really think they have opinions? (Score:5, Informative)
I can't speak for McCain, but go watch Obama at Google [youtube.com] and tell me that he has no passion for tech issues. Half of his broader economic plan boils down to putting our faith in science and technology again -- we'll never be competitive with China at building toys out of injection-molded plastic -- we can be competitive in the technological arena.
Half the reason I started following him back before it was popular was because he was one of the few candidates that I heard that even acknowledges the war on science and all the ill effects that we've suffered as a result.
Re:Has Obama been selected (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Sorry, but I'd prefer their voting records (Score:5, Informative)
Both of these candidates, however, are abstaining quite a bit in the recent votes to avoid alienating any swing groups.
Re:Has Obama been selected (Score:4, Informative)
Those who can't think, spout cliches (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Do you really think they have opinions? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:What about the other candidates? (Score:5, Informative)
Obama has indicated a willingness to halt the DEA raids on dispensaries in California. He and Bob Barr (Libertarian) favor letting states handle the issue. Obama still wants the FDA involved somewhere; I'm not sure about Barr. McCain has waffled but apparently endorses the current Bush Administration policy. link [sfgate.com]
Re:Send These Clowns a Message! (Score:5, Informative)
our situation is just like the upper post... sigh...
we've even called (nation-vide) the 2 candidates "Veltrusconi" ( Veltroni + Berlusconi), since they're just the same....
they had the same program, their parties have almost identical names (pd vs. pdl), and the "opposition" actually said that they won't oppose...
uhm...time to change country, i guess...
Re:Has Obama been selected (Score:5, Informative)
Re:A lot can be seen from their choice of advisor. (Score:5, Informative)
Death of NASA (Score:2, Informative)
Re:A lot can be seen from their choice of advisor. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Do you really think they have opinions? (Score:4, Informative)
As a whole, no. I'm talking about specifics, not political philosophy. Many specific points have been settled for a long time, but are being reopened by people operating under false pretenses.
True, there are many laws that need updating for technological reasons, but these laws need to be strengthened and extended, not weakened. For example the Pen Register act requires a warrant for the use of a Pen Register -- a device which records the impulses in an old analog telephone switch, and thus who you are calling. This isn't philosophically different from demanding the email logs of an ISP, which is not covered by the act.
Technology is reopening some of these issues, and the argument is that things have changed so much that the old concerns for the freedom and privacy of the citizen aren't as important in the face of new and unprecedented threats.
Really? The threats coming from people who are acting against the law's proscriptions don't look all that new. Today we're worried about Al Qaeda; thirty years ago we were worried about the KGB, as well as domestic subversives and radicals.
The argument is that the people are more technologically empowered to commit crimes. That is true. They're also much more dependent upon technology. That means that on balance the government (and its private sector agents -- another new development) has gained more power to meddle and pry than people have gained to transgress.
So on balance, things have changed in a fundamental way, but not so that we should avoid restoring the protections of, say the Pen Register Act. On the contrary, we should go well beyond those protections.
Re:H-1b is the real tech jobs issue (Score:3, Informative)
Seriously, H1-B visas can only encompass a relatively small percentage of the work force (something between 15-33% depending on company size for H1B dependent employers.) Yes 1/3 of jobs is a high percentage, but most companies don't qualify for that level of H1-B employees, and furthermore, most can't afford the fees associated with the paperwork, even if you consider reduced wages, which are technically not allowed.
Link for my info here: http://www.murthy.com/h1bwrkr.html [murthy.com]
FUD:He wants to kill the Manned space program. (Score:3, Informative)
In fact, it seems he wants to explicitly *continue* the important programs.
But don't let a little thing like facts get in the way of your FUD campaign.
Hillary is a lying sh*thead. Obama is a well reasoned smart guy. Get over it.
Re:Has Obama been selected (Score:3, Informative)
Well, there's been a fair number of off the record interviews with Hillary staffers. There's also been a fair number of comments recorded by Hillary supporters -- not the least of which came from my Governor [wikipedia.org], whom said that she's acting pretty desperate -- hardly a ringing endorsement of her chances.
Re:Do you really think they have opinions? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:corporate interests? (Score:4, Informative)
In fact, a corporaiton's charter and bylaws determine what the goals of the organization are. Most public corporations include shareholder value and profits among the goals of the organization (why else would someone invest?), but many privatecorporations are not-for-profit; some actually exist to *lose* money (such as some incorporated charitable trusts with a schedule for payout).
At any rate, it is not a legal requirement to try to make money; it is a contractual obligation, which is different. You can't face charges for steering a company poorly, unless your acts themselves are illegal. You can, however, face a tort action for violating the company's charter if some of the shareholders feel there was gross negligence or willful wrongdoing.
Re:All I need to know (Score:5, Informative)
Contrast that to Obama's adviser, who's from MIT -- and supports net neutrality. That, and Obama's whole campaign shows quite a lot more technical savvy than anyone else's, on either side.
(To clarify: I'm using the proper definition of net neutrality; that is, I believe the network should be neutral, and that we should probably legislate this.)
While I'm at it, McCain did say that he'd pick Steve "The Chair" Ballmer for his cabinet. [pcworld.com] In an ambassadorial role. That does not inspire confidence.
*headdesk*
Maybe they like Obama for other reasons?
Maybe you don't have any statistics at all for that, and you'd rather scream against the (imaginary) Slashdot groupthink?
Re:Vote Hillary! (Score:3, Informative)
Umm Bullshit.
Unemployment below 5%, inflation below 4%, and up until the past 2 months, 3-5 percent annual economic expansion (down to something about 0.8% the past 2 months, but still expanding and unemployment still very low by historical standards).
And this has been sustained in spite of a partial war-footing draining the economy of productive workers and money, and trillions of losses fromt he WTC and subsequent economic shutdown.
So Economy in a gutter? Idiot. Did you eject your mind when you signed up for your political beliefs?
I dont like Bush all that much, but to say the economy is "in the gutter" is an out and out lie.
Its every bit as good as Clinton's good years in the mid 90's.
Seems it doesn't really matter who the president is in terms of economic growth - just keep the government out of the way of the economy as Clinton and Bush II have done, on purpose or by accident.
Re:Has Obama been selected (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Has Obama been selected (Score:5, Informative)
Fact - Hillary Clinton signed a pledge that said:
"THEREFORE, I (Hillary Clinton), Democratic Candidate for President, pledge
I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential
election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa,
Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as "campaigning" is defined by
rules and regulations of the DNC."
Note the "or participate" part.
Re:Has Obama been selected (Score:2, Informative)
Wow, your ignorance is truly amazing in a terrifying sense.
the "current crop" isn't an expression referring to every Republican administration since Reagan was elected.
The Bush Administration != Republicans. The democratic party has been more in favour of big government, and therefore anti-civil liberties.
The Bush administration is typical of the modern Republican party. They like even bigger government than the fucking Democrats. Bush is a clone of Reagan in all of his policies. He's just a sleazy liar as opposed to an actor who was good at making you wingnut extremists happy to munch shit right out of his hand while he sold out your country.
In short, if this were 30 years ago, you'd have a point. As it is not 30 years ago, you look like an ignorant fool who chooses a political party like he'd choose a football team and hasn't given it one scrap of thought since then.
The Democrats are no prize, but the Republicans have proven to be far worse at everything you claim is a concern.
Grow up, pull your head out of your ass and spend at least 5 minutes out of your life looking at your chosen, treasonous team and keep in mind, "actions speak louder than words".
Obamaâ(TM)s Apple McCainâ(TM)s Microsoft (Score:3, Informative)
While the United States prepares to elect a new president, candidates on both sides have made interesting comments about their affiliations with tech companies and their perspective on issues facing the tech industry.
Here's a look at Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain compare, looking first at how each relates to Apple and Microsoft, how corporations are leveraging money and political power to shape public policy to fit their own interests, and followed by a look at each candidate's stance on issues related to technology.
Obama's Apple, McCain's Microsoft: the Politics of Tech [roughlydrafted.com]
Re:hmm (Score:3, Informative)
The fact of the matter is that economies are cyclic. Both Bill Clinton and the Republican Congress of the 90's benefited greatly from both an upturn in the economy and the technology boom. To blame Bush for the economy at the beginning of his term is wrong as he and the rest of his administration has had to deal with both an economy that was slowing and the aftermath of 9/11.
We've actually been doing pretty well since the recovery of the technology bust and the rebuilt after 9/11, but the recent credit bust is another challenge. Likewise, it is not his fault as the bulk of the blame can be place squarely on both people irresponsibly taking loans and banks irresponsibly lending loans, both of which were facilitated by the Federal Reserve driving rates so low for as long as they did.
As for your point on food and energy, this is a mixed bag for Bush. Bush wants to get the drilling companies to work, but that is politically unfeasible and too unpopular in general. So we can't drill off of some of our coasts or in ANWR where we have plenty of oil and natural gas. This is a remedy to the energy problem that we have now, but people don't want it. He has also worked to push ethanol, which I think is a disaster. Corn-based ethanol is simply not viable because it doesn't really work from multiple perspectives. It's too hard to make from corn. Ethanol works so well in Brazil because they use sugarcane. Corn-based ethanol also takes food from the food supply for obvious reasons, causes farmers to plant corn instead of other crops, and then that drives up the cost of the other crops. This is a total mess and we need to do something about it.
If you want to cheer against the Republicans for this, don't bother. Both Clinton and Obama support corn-based ethanol. McCain is thankfully against it. Truthfully, I don't really have a problem with gasoline and diesel fuel being this high. I am able to afford it for the amount that I drive in and around Philadelphia. It's starting to get harder, but living in a city is just so much better because the amount of driving you need to do is drastically cut down. High fuel prices are fit punishments for decades of suburbanization and disregard of mass transit and freight systems like rail. Don't get me wrong, I love to drive, but we don't need to be so spread out. I do worry about how the high price of crude is going to squeeze people when the winter comes because of how expensive heat is going to be.
We can fix these problems though. The main issues are going to be whether or not we can fight a special interest groups and change our lifestyles. The reality is though that doing the right thing isn't easy typically. We need to make our choices better now so that we don't have bigger problems down the road.
Re:Has Obama been selected (Score:4, Informative)
Link [yahoo.com]
Re:probably a slight majority of americans (Score:3, Informative)
And here's the methodology: http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/votes.htm [nationaljournal.com]. Some of those are quite head scratchers, for example, voting for "94/SConRes21: Raise the tax rate on income over $1 million and use the revenue to increase funding for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. March 22. (38-58)" earns you conservative points. Who knew?