Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Politics Government

Inside Kerry and Bush's Technology Agendas 113

Posted by CmdrTaco from the informed-voters dept.
wbren writes "PC Magazine has posted an interview on its website shedding some light on the two major candidates' policies regarding privacy, The Patriot Act, outsourcing, Internet sales taxes, broadband taxes and other important tech-related issues. PC Magazine calls it an interview, but John Kerry was the only candidate to actually respond directly to the questions asked. Bush's camp referred PC Magazine to George Bush's website to find the answers. The result: detailed and informative responses from Kerry, and many missing responses from the Bush campaign due to lack of information provided by Bush's website."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Inside Kerry and Bush's Technology Agendas More

Inside Kerry and Bush's Technology Agendas

Comments Filter:

  • Who Cares? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by NetPoser ( 266960 )
    Who really cares what either think of technology. It's thier advisors that should be interviewed.

    • Re:Who Cares? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Who really cares what either think of technology. It's thier advisors that should be interviewed.
      But who hires the advisors?

    • Re:Who Cares? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by aderusha ( 32235 )
      you don't honestly think it was john kerry himself that answered those questions do you?

      here's my favorite bush quote from the "interview": "We can't return to the days of false hope" (in reference to the war on terror). the message? fear good, hope bad. be afraid goddamnit, terrorists and the french are everywhere!

  • Bush's website referral (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 23, 2004 @01:13PM (#10331565)
    Of course, nobody would actually expect Dubya to answer the questions himself. Thinking's not his strong suit. Particularly when it comes to science.

  • Kerry vs Encryption (Score:5, Insightful)

    by crackshoe ( 751995 ) on Thursday September 23, 2004 @01:27PM (#10331772)
    Kerry was in favor of outlawing certain levels of encryption (and classifying encrpytion related stuff as munitions for export purposes (ironically enough, John Ashcroft was against limiting encryption at the same time, and squared off against kerry). Democrats are also notoriously pro-censorship (its for the children). I'm not saying the republicans are a bowl ofpeaches, but they get plenty of bad press here as it is (and have a terrible civil liberties record recentlly)
    • Democrats are also notoriously pro-censorship.

      And hopefully, after Lieberman scared a bunch of people off and cost them the last election, they learned from this.

    • Re:Kerry vs Encryption (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Caseyscrib ( 728790 ) on Thursday September 23, 2004 @02:27PM (#10332644)
      What is your position on COPA (Child Online Protection Act)?

      Kerry: I supported the Child Online Protection Act in 1998 which would have made it illegal for commercial Web sites to make available sexually explicit content that is harmful to minors unless they restrict access to adults by using a credit-card or adult-access code. The courts have blocked enforcement of this statute. They have argued that there may be other ways, such as Internet filtering software, to protect minors from inappropriate material while ensuring that legitimate speech is not chilled or punished. Whatever the courts eventually decide, our nation must act to make the Internet safer for children by protecting them from harmful material in a manner that is consistent with the First Amendment.

      I think this answer is a good one, and I like that Kerry referenced the first ammendement in the last line. I get the impression that Kerry is saying, "Yes, I passed the bill because I wanted to protect your children, but the courts said it was unconstitutional, and I'm ok with that. However, I promise to find another method which the courts can agree with." I'm glad he's at least thinking about the first ammendment, which Bush has shown a total disregaurd for.

    • Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday September 23, 2004 @02:28PM (#10332666)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • You remember the congressional hearings with Frank Zappa and Dee Snider? Tipper and Al Gore? Any of that ring a bell?

      • Democrats are much less likely to promote censorship than Republicans are.

        You don't seriously believe that, do you?

        Kerry has used his power and influence as a sitting Senator and a Presidential candidate to attempt to effect a ban on two books within the last few months. The swift boat book, and Kerry's own "The New Soldier" book. He fortunately failed on both accounts.

        Democrats are proponents of politically correct speech. They want to outlaw what they view as "hate" speech. These two things are in

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion

          • So you're offended that he would try to stop the publication of a book that slanders him and one that he is the author of? Sounds like he was within his moral rights.

            Offended? Why would I be offended? It's nothing personal, just the facts.

            George W. Bush said: "They ought to get rid of all those 527s, independent expenditures that have flooded the airwaves. ... There have been millions of dollars spent. ... I signed a law that I thought would get rid of those (groups)."

            I did mention campaign finance re

      • It's under Bush adminstration that the FCC just levied record fines for Janet Jackson flashing a nipple on the television. It's been the Bush administration's FCC that has gone after Howard Stern for the sake of "the children." It was the Reagan Administration's Meese Commission that pressured 7/11 convenience stores to stop carrying adult magazines. The Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA), which required filtering software in public libraries was introduced by Rep. Bob Franks, a Republican from New

      • I don't consider the FCC regulation of television and radio broadcasters a free speech issue--airwaves belong to the people, and the people's representatives have spoken--no nipples. Sorry, Football is for kids too.

        Not that I like Bush's FCC. I'd like someone to punch Michael Powell in the face for what he's done to allow further media consolidation (DISCLAIMER NOT A LEGALLY BINDING THREAT JUST HYPERBOLE PLEASE DO NOT ARREST ME).

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion
          • So do public parks, but that does not mean that the government has the legal or moral authority to censor what people say in those public areas.

            Actually, it is illegal for a woman to expose a nipple in most public parks in the United States, but it's a state or local matter. The crime is called "indecent exposure". And yes, overzealous cops have arrested breast feeding women.

            AFAIK, the only exception is at designated nude beaches.

            Michael Powell is not my "representative."

            So who is your representative
          • There's a big difference between parks and TV specturm. Parks can be used by all, TV spectrum has been allocated to a handful of corporations. For their privileges of broadcasting, which most of us cannot enjoy, those corporations have an obligation to serve the public. Like I said, not a Free Speech issue at all. The Supreme Court agrees with me.
    • From the article...

      Kerry: I supported the Child Online Protection Act in 1998 which would have made it illegal for commercial Web sites to make available sexually explicit content that is harmful to minors unless they restrict access to adults by using a credit-card or adult-access code. The courts have blocked enforcement of this statute. They have argued that there may be other ways, such as Internet filtering software, to protect minors from inappropriate material while ensuring that legitimate speech

    • Re:Kerry vs Encryption (Score:3, Insightful)

      by justins ( 80659 )

      Democrats are also notoriously pro-censorship (its for the children).

      Really? The recent FCC hubub re:Janet Jackson seems to come from the republican side.

      I think your statement would have been a lot more valid back in the day, when the democrats were strong in the south, since the south seems to be the source of all things censorship (okay, MOST). With the GOP being both very southern and very Christian lately, I imagine most censorship is going to come from that side.

      I'm trying to think of some post-Ti

      • Joe Leiberman: Senator Joseph Lieberman, a vocal critic of the recording industry, liked the metaphor. "I'm not for censoring this stuff, but to me this music is the equivalent of yelling `fire' in a crowded theater." -- indicating that he felt it should be regulated as 'dangerous speach' that could be regulated severly while not violating the First Ammendment. Janet Reno: "I'm not condemning documentaries which teach us the lessons of war or sporting events that help society channel its competitive and a
        • Interesting. The thing that sort of sets those people apart from Tipper Gore is that Tipper Gore and her friends had a plan... though I guess I see your point. A couple of minor democratic players have recently had an interest in censorship. Odd coincidence that they should be a couple of the least liked, too, even by their own party. Go figure.

          They should start a nonprofit or something, "Ugly People for Censorship."

          I always thought the v chip sounded like a silly and expensive waste of money, rather than

  • am i the only one? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by araczynski ( 265221 ) <aer2NO@SPAMcox.net> on Thursday September 23, 2004 @01:28PM (#10331782)
    ...that thinks bush should be judged by what he HAS done in the last 4 years and not what he thinks he's going to do? HE'S HAD 4 YEARS to show me what kind of a president he's is/is going to be. I don't give one rat's ass as to what his promises are for the next 4 years, he's shown me everything i need already. since when is being a president of the USA a 4 year on the job training course, where you can then say, "umm, ok, i've been screwing up the last 4 years, NOW i'm gonna get serious" kiss my ass bush.

    • MOD PARENT UP (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Marxist Hacker 42 ( 638312 ) * <seebert42@gmail.com> on Thursday September 23, 2004 @01:35PM (#10331891) Homepage Journal
      Absolutely! From what I can see, none of the promises I voted for Bush on in 2000 (and yes, despite the name I did vote for Bush last time around) were accomplished. Abortion, Economics, Taxes, all of it was worse under Bush than under Clinton.
      • hmm everyone had their taxes lowered, the partial birth abortion ban passed, the No Kid left behind passed (and kerry voted for it)

        I am not a fan of Bush but he has done what he said he was going to do..

        • the partial birth abortion ban passed

          Yeah, and it lasted for almost 15 minutes [msn.com].

          It's naive for anyone supporting an anti-abortion candiate to expect him to really make any significant change. Abortion rights have been too cemented in the past decades to ever revert. Don't hold Bush accountable for things so far beyond his power.
          • Which is why I said he got the measure passed, he did what was within his power. But your right the Republicans use pro lifers like the Democrats use minorities. They dont actually want to fix anything or the voting block might go away..
        • hmm everyone had their taxes lowered, the partial birth abortion ban passed, the No Kid left behind passed

          Mod this up +5, (unintentionally) funny!
      • Taxes are worse? Abortion is worse? OK, so maybe the economy is not red-hot, but considering that we went through the Enron/Worldcom scandal, terrorist attacks and war, it's doing alright.

        I call bullshit on your assertion that you voted for Bush, because clearly you can't see that the issues that you supposedly voted for have actually improved.

        • Re:MOD PARENT UP (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Marxist Hacker 42 ( 638312 ) * <seebert42@gmail.com> on Thursday September 23, 2004 @03:16PM (#10333444) Homepage Journal
          Taxes are worse?

          For me, specifically, they are- the shifting of federal responsibilities to the states has specifically, in my county, caused an increase in property taxes to keep the schools open (yes, I'm in Washington County, Oregon- the same metro area that was blasted in Doonesbury for the "Every Child Left Behind" policy) and that more than ate up any tax benefits I got from the Bush tax cuts. The same story is going on nationwide in any state that has a balanced budget requirement written into the state constitution. (California is a notable exception to this- they're borrowing under the Governator to the point that they're at Junk Bond status).

          Abortion is worse?

          According to census data, there were 1.3 million abortions in 2000. According to Priests For Life (admitedly a pro-life organization) there were 1.6 million abortions in 2003. Yep, I'd call that worse. (Hinted at in the Priests for Life report is that the ballooning numbers of the uninsured may have something to do with this- 12% of all abortions are done for economic reasons). And as you say:

          OK, so maybe the economy is not red-hot, but considering that we went through the Enron/Worldcom scandal, terrorist attacks and war, it's doing alright.

          If a real unemployment rate (including the large numbers of people who went straight from unemployment to disability) is correct- we're heading towards a major depression in employment.

          I call bullshit on your assertion that you voted for Bush, because clearly you can't see that the issues that you supposedly voted for have actually improved.

          Really, how? My taxes are more, and there are more abortions now than before, and I spent more than half of the last 4 years unemployed. Nope- I can't say that anything I voted for is better. I also seem to remember a campaign promise against nation building...
    • kiss my ass bush ???? If this is the level of discourse that is going to get modded up in the Politics SIG then I don't see the point in having it. I was really hoping this would be a forum for serious adult debate.
  • Questions about spyware, hackers... are these really things to burden the president with? Thats someone elses problem.

  • What a Jerk! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GypC ( 7592 ) on Thursday September 23, 2004 @01:51PM (#10332136) Homepage Journal
    Can't take an hour away from being the President of the U.S. to answer questions for a journalistic pillar like PC Magazine?

    If I were POTUS, magazine interviews would be my number one priority!

  • It's true, Bush's responses were just excepts from his webpage or speeches or whatever. But Kerry's answers actually seemed TOO good--someone in the Kerry campaign who knew something about technology took the time to research each question and develop a decent answer. Now, that person probably DIDN't go on to brief Kerry about "Kerry's" answers in some computer magazine about issues Kerry has most likely never thought about and never will. Do you think the senator even knows what Spyware is? The answers

    • Re:Should we take the Kerry responses seriously? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by 0x0d0a ( 568518 ) on Thursday September 23, 2004 @01:58PM (#10332237) Journal
      Remember when Bush was getting voted in against Gore? And everyone said "yeah, Bush is inexperienced and maybe won't be so great, but he'll have great advisors and he's going to listen to them"?

      How does that same logic not apply to Kerry? You think he won't have technology advisors? That he personally makes all policy? Just because Kerry's following a technology platform that he personally didn't develop doesn't mean that one should vote against him.
      • And everyone said "yeah, Bush is inexperienced and maybe won't be so great, but he'll have great advisors and he's going to listen to them"?

        Yeah, I remember Colin Powell making fun of Madeline Albright for being an nation-building interventionist. I voted Bush last time for basically the reason you describe. The logic doesn't apply to Kerry because it shouldn't have applied to Bush. Advisors on topics the candidate doesn't particularly care about are easily ignored. And to be honest I didn't find anyt

    • Re:Should we take the Kerry responses seriously? (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Now, I'm a huge Kerry supporter, and to be honest I'm not even sure how a decent person could vote Bush--the candidate of bigotry, plutocracy, and jingoism. I'm a conservative, therefore I oppose all those plan to vote Kerry.

      Wow, with those two sentences in such close proximity, I really had no idea how you were going to vote. But I guess the violent flip-flop is a dead giveaway that you'll eventually identify with Kerry.

      Relax, just having fun.

  • These answers in the article... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tickticker ( 549972 ) <tickticker.gmail@com> on Thursday September 23, 2004 @01:54PM (#10332188) Journal
    seem an appropriate reflection on the intelligence of our candidates.

    Bush has no idea what's going on and can't answer our questions or uses "Your gonna die if you don't agree" answers.

    Kerry has thoughful answers whether you agree with him or not, and you know he's intelligent enough to change his mind if confronted with appropriate facts.

    --
    This sig voted for daddy, but not jr

  • Bush is pro file sharing!! (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    What is your position on unauthorized online file-sharing?

    Kerry: I don't condone illegal sharing of copyrighted material. Widespread sharing and downloading of music, movies, and software undermines the incentives for individuals and companies to create new content. We need to continue to enforce our copyright laws and combat piracy both here and abroad.

    Bush: (I couldn't find a specific comment on file sharing.)

    If he's not against it, he's for it!

  • Boiled-down version (Score:4, Informative)

    by dcmeserve ( 615081 ) on Thursday September 23, 2004 @06:11PM (#10335379) Homepage Journal
    I felt the urge to paw through the whole thing and put together a highly-abbreviated version:

    Do you think the federal government should be doing more to prevent or restrict the outsourcing of technical jobs to foreign countries? If so, what?

    Kerry: use tax incentives

    Bush: people should be educated more

    Do you think the federal government should have a role in expanding broadband usage? If so, what sort of role?
    Kerry: govt can't do it, but can encourage:
    - tax incentives

    - make more spectrum avail. for wireless services

    - R&D investments

    Bush: specific goal to have univ. access to broadband by 2007
    - don't tax b'band access

    - reduce regulations

    - "promote two promising technologies" -- b'band through power lines, wireless

    How do you feel about tax credits for companies investing in research and development?
    Kerry: it's good

    Bush: it's good

    What is your position on taxing Internet sales and service?
    Kerry: it's bad

    Bush: no answer

    What is your position on unauthorized online file-sharing?
    Kerry: it's bad. we need to enforce copyright laws. fortunately new technologies and business models are helping

    Bush: no answer

    What is your position on COPA (Child Online Protection Act)?
    Kerry: we must "make the internet safer for children by protecting them from harmful material in a manner that is consistent with the First Amendment"

    Bush: no answer

    Should the federal government be doing more to stop and prevent spam, viruses, and worms? If so, what?
    Kerry: "Absolutely." Especially viruses/worms.

    Bush: no answer

    How do you feel about the SPY Act and other antispyware legislation introduced in Congress last month?
    Kerry: May be needed, but would prefer combo of better enforcement of existing laws and more private-sector efforts (e.g. more-secure OS's, browsers)

    Bush: no answer

    Do you think the federal Wiretap Act should be updated in the wake of the recent federal ruling that e-mail stored on a provider's server is not protected by this act?
    Kerry: yes

    Bush: no answer

    That's it. Now I have to do a "lameness filter" workaround: asdf asdf asdf ajj;l asduiui sadfu asdfkhj werjh asd weruusda suds asdf asdf asdf ajj;l asduiui sadfu asdfkhj werjh asd weruusda suds asdfasdf asdfasdf asdfasd asdf wrth wrht ad sfty ag adrgerg rth zdfg adrg erg asdrgrdg xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx hggk drgrth dgjtyj nygbs tukuy sdsd tyj srtgser srthsrth arur u7hr wtgwe gewgr sdthsrh rsthsfg wergewrg wrtyerty zdfgwer g 76u356y5 dsfgdrger ergerg rthsrth rth fsth tj sfhf sdbbves ardt serg rdtyrty sdgerg errtuyertyrety sergwseg rtyertyr wegwg rtyertyerty tfyiyfuiyu stgwrtgwrgw dfuerterty tynteyn k8 b qevevr ergesvd rsrsrstgfgdgdhht shgshshsg srtiudfgergiuy erguysefjghw drgriufguy fghuihbfguf guyerguyegjk ergjkherghjkrkhjerg fsgkhjrtkhjrgejhef gfuhgfuherguyeruergjkhefvjhehjk fgjhegrjghwghjw efjhgfehgw
  • According to this, Kerry believes that the best approach to stopping worms and viruses are better anti-spyware software and FBI legal squadrons.

    Yet he believes that the solution to spyware is better anti-spyware software and more secure OSes and browsers.

    The solution to both is the same. Kerry would already have my vote (if I was old enough to vote) because he's not Bush. It'd just be doubly cool if he came out and said "The best defense against spyware, viruses, and worms is to use the more secure soft
    • He seems to know his shit somewhat -- better than the "Hackers are evildoers, let's train marines to hack and go hack them" I'd expect from Bush.

      That's exactly what Kerry is advocating for viruses, though. You said so yourself: FBI legal squadrons. Also, why is the gov't responsible for spyware/viruses if they're not responsible for instituting better broadband (Kerry says that's the responsibility of the private sector)?

      Both candidates want the gov't to stick their hands in way too many aspects of
  • Democrats vs. SuperDemocrats.

Slashdot Top Deals

To be is to program.

Close