Just when I thought I knew who I was voting for...
91% Mike Gravel
89% John Edwards
88% Dennis Kucinich
86% Chris Dodd
86% Barack Obama
86% Bill Richardson
84% Hillary Clinton
79% Joe Biden
37% Rudy Giuliani
33% John McCain
25% Ron Paul
25% Mike Huckabee
21% Mitt Romney
21% Tom Tancredo
15% Fred Thompson
2008 Presidential Candidate Matching Quiz
I also matched Gravel 91% on a blind poll put up at VAJoe.com -- the cool thing about this one is you have simple choices, no prioritization, no slant to the questions, and no clue how it will come out 'til it's done. http://www.vajoe.com/candidate_calculator.html
Anyone I agree with 91% of the time hasn't a hope in Hades of actually winning at the federal level.
10 January 2008
09 January 2008
Video Ungeek
I'm not computer illiterate, but I'm not a 22-year-old gaming fanatic either. This is why I was surprised when the video card in my 18-month-old system unexpectedly died with no warning last week.
My idea of built-in obsolescence is that the technology in question is doomed to deteriorate or become outdated within 5-7 years, not less than 2.
I looked all over the internet for consumer or customer reviews on the WinFast nVidia card I had in the machine, and all the initial, first-page reviews I found were glowing. Of course, when you read glowing reviews you wonder if it was something that you did which caused your machine to die on you. It took several sites and pages within them to find posts by people with the same expectations and difficulties that I had.
Apparently, when it comes to video card drivers, I shouldn't have been shocked. 2-3 years is a really good life-span for a card in the video gaming world and, even if your card could last longer, you will have upgraded it by then anyway.
This seems insane to me. We wouldn't buy or keep a car that required a new carburetor or radiator every 2-3 years. We wouldn't invest in any home improvement that was likely to break down after 18 months. Why do we accept this for computers?
My idea of built-in obsolescence is that the technology in question is doomed to deteriorate or become outdated within 5-7 years, not less than 2.
I looked all over the internet for consumer or customer reviews on the WinFast nVidia card I had in the machine, and all the initial, first-page reviews I found were glowing. Of course, when you read glowing reviews you wonder if it was something that you did which caused your machine to die on you. It took several sites and pages within them to find posts by people with the same expectations and difficulties that I had.
Apparently, when it comes to video card drivers, I shouldn't have been shocked. 2-3 years is a really good life-span for a card in the video gaming world and, even if your card could last longer, you will have upgraded it by then anyway.
This seems insane to me. We wouldn't buy or keep a car that required a new carburetor or radiator every 2-3 years. We wouldn't invest in any home improvement that was likely to break down after 18 months. Why do we accept this for computers?
06 January 2008
I {heart} Huckabee
... but I ain't voting for him.
As most people who know or read me are aware, I'm only "conservative" when it comes to things like green space, energy, and other environmental issues. Which means I'm even more progressive than Teddy Roosevelt. Which is why I was appalled to find Mike Huckabee doing so well in the polls.
After watching Stephanopolous this morning, I am no longer surprised that Huckabee won in Iowa. He's a personable guy, and more intellectually honest than many politicians at the federal level. It was refreshing to hear him calling George out on his lack of ability to recognize a nuanced stance--not once but twice. I like nuanced stances. It means the man has thought through several possible scenarios, has considered more than a bottom-line approach, integrates information well in his analysis of a situation. These are all good indications.
Nope, can't vote for him; he's too ideologically opposite from me. But it sure was nice to listen to a Republican candidate without wanting to throw something at the TV for a change.
As most people who know or read me are aware, I'm only "conservative" when it comes to things like green space, energy, and other environmental issues. Which means I'm even more progressive than Teddy Roosevelt. Which is why I was appalled to find Mike Huckabee doing so well in the polls.
After watching Stephanopolous this morning, I am no longer surprised that Huckabee won in Iowa. He's a personable guy, and more intellectually honest than many politicians at the federal level. It was refreshing to hear him calling George out on his lack of ability to recognize a nuanced stance--not once but twice. I like nuanced stances. It means the man has thought through several possible scenarios, has considered more than a bottom-line approach, integrates information well in his analysis of a situation. These are all good indications.
Nope, can't vote for him; he's too ideologically opposite from me. But it sure was nice to listen to a Republican candidate without wanting to throw something at the TV for a change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
