Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Have you heard about this?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Have you heard about this?

    There's this really cool thing which we, as faithful MURCers, should do to help out the Matrox Users team in the world rankings.

    All it takes is a simple download and tiny account setup (only needs an email address) to get going.

    It's called <a href="http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu">SETI@home</a> (as some of you may have guessed by now) and your friendly website Admin, Ant, has permitted us to go recruit new members across all the forums!

    I myself have created a <a href="http://www.setiatmurc.f2s.com">SETI @ MURC</a> website dedicated to getting you up and running Seti and improving it's performance. We've got guides from myself, Guru and Ees covering stuff like <a href="http://www.setiatmurc.f2s.com/articles/guides/gettingstarted.htm">installing</a> Seti, Windows and BIOS <a href="http://www.setiatmurc.f2s.com/articles/guides/optimising.htm">optimisation</a> and doing it all in <a href="http://www.setiatmurc.f2s.com/articles/guides/seti_linux.html">Linux</a>.

    So get yourself up and running and check the <a href="http://forums.murc.ws/cgi-bin/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&number=12&SUBMIT=Go ">Seti Forum</a> for more conversation and tips.

    This post has been <a href="http://forums.murc.ws/ubb/Forum12/HTML/000529.html">repeated</a> in the Seti forum so please respond over there!

    Regards,

    Paul.

    ------------------
    Pace3000 Network: (early stages)
    Computer Solutions | Arena | Seti | P3K | TechSupport | Portal | Pace Central
    Matrox Users / SETI@MURC
    Join the team! | Crunch faster! | View the stats!
    Meet Jasmine.
    flickr.com/photos/pace3000

  • #2
    Before we start searching for extraterrestrial intelligence, why do we have such a job to find any terrestrial intelligence? To illustrate what I mean (very non-exhaustive list):

    Why do the Israelis and the Palestinians have to knock hell out of each other?
    Why does man have to eliminate flood plains by levees and canalisation and thereby cause a helluva sight more problems with flooding where it causes most damage(cf Italy and Spain)?
    How come the USA can find as presidential candidates only an empty-head and a wooden head, out of 250 megapersons?
    How come so many countries actually WANT to join the European Union?
    Why do so many people think they can do better than experts?
    Why did Slobberguts Milosevic think he could get away with it?
    Why did a local bankrobber wannabe pass over his demand note written on the back of an envelope addressed to him?
    why?

    ------------------
    Brian (the terrible)
    Brian (the devil incarnate)

    Comment


    • #3
      I can't answer most, but I can answer about the US Presidential candidates: we don't want one that's either too smart or too capable of geting their way with the Congress.

      The reason: the fewer "bright" ideas they can come up with and enact the less likely they are to screw things up. Therefore we like 'em dumb and without too much support.

      For the same reasons we also don't like legislation to be easy to enact. This is why we tend to elect mixed governments consisting of a President of one party and a Senate & House of the other, which is the current state of affairs. Sometimes we even elect to have one party controlling the Senate and the other the House.

      Another restriction on runaway lawmaking is the ability of 1/3 + 1 vote of the Senate to bottle up a bill, preventing its passage. Since both the Senate and House have to pass a bill this kills it.

      Talk about confusion....

      Dr. Mordrid


      [This message has been edited by Dr Mordrid (edited 25 October 2000).]

      Comment


      • #4
        I know this is a video forum but I have to respond to the post by Brian and the Doc:

        We are a victum of the silent killer that is odorless, colorless and sneaks up on you without warning. It is a widespread problem that affects the majority of the population in this (USA) country. The symptons are subtle and worse yet denial makes the treatment to cure us even harder since it can strike collectively and together we have the capacity to make this problem even stronger. Ironically enough the very strengths of this affliction have to be the way we rid ourselves of this horrible thing.

        So how do we rid ourselves of the disease called APATHY? My idea for the "cure" is simple: Get off your lazy butt and cast your vote to do something about it! After the individual effort is completed we will all reap the collective benefits!

        And by the way, isn't it ime to come up with a better solution than the electoral college? Casting votes has got to be easier in this electronic age.

        My apologies for the clumsy and off topic response.

        [This message has been edited by IM_Riktar (edited 26 October 2000).]
        Perspective cannot be taught. It must be learned.

        Comment


        • #5
          Actually that Americans have been electing Congress and the President in a manner to produce legislative paralysis is NOT apathy. It's self defense

          As far as the Electoral College goes that had, and has, a specific purpose: to prevent domination of the Presidency by the larger states.

          If you elected the President just by popular vote the entire country could be dominated by California, New York and a few other New England states. That would go over real big in the south and west. It also goes along with why the Seanate has 2 Senators per state regardless of population: the limitation of concentrated power, which is a consistant theme throughout the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

          If you read Alexander Hamilton and James Madisons writings on this (Hamilton: Federalist Papers #68. Madison: Federalist Papers #10. Together: Federalist Papers #20.) it's all laid out very well and the logic still holds. Thomas Jefferson agreed with them, which is enough for me.

          Dr. Mordrid


          [This message has been edited by Dr Mordrid (edited 26 October 2000).]

          Comment


          • #6
            Honest, guv, I didn't mean to start a debate on the US Constitution (the USS Constitution, I think in Baltimore Inner Harbor - note the spelling! - is possibly of more general interest!).

            However, I can't resist asking whether one of the Presidential candidates has even heard of Hamilton and Madison (the latter, maybe, because he thinks that he planted a square garden where pugilists knock the bejabers out of each other). Have any journalists tried asking him who the new Yugoslav president is?

            Sorry for my intrusion into US politics

            ------------------
            Brian (the terrible)
            Brian (the devil incarnate)

            Comment


            • #7
              Actually the intimations of Bushs low intelligence are a bit politicaly based. In point of fact Bush graduated from law school while AlGore is the one who flunked out

              AlGore also quit divinity school because of grades (or lack of same).

              Where GW is weak is as a scripted public speaker. Where he is VERY strong is as an UNscripted public speaker. When he speaks his heart he nails it.

              Bush also flew Convair F-102 Delta Dagger fighters in the Air National Guard, which took smarts and lots of guts given that planes characteristics. A lot more than typing stories for Stars & Stripes (the US Army newspaper) in a fortified Saigon military compound (AlGores "Senators Son" job in 'Nam).

              Dr. Mordrid


              [This message has been edited by Dr Mordrid (edited 26 October 2000).]

              Comment


              • #8
                We are a victum of the silent killer that is odorless, colorless and sneaks up on you without warning. It is a widespread problem that affects the majority of the population in this (USA) country. The symptons are subtle and worse yet denial makes the treatment to cure
                Riktar,

                And all along I thought the "silent killer" was a seething inaudible flatulence. It is colorless and sneaks up on you without warning, but is definitely not odorless

                [This message has been edited by A_BIT (edited 26 October 2000).]
                Anthony
                • Slot 1 Celeron 400, Asus P2B, 256MB PC-100
                • AGP Marvel-TV 8MB NTSC
                • Turtle Beach Montego PCI sound card
                • C: IBM 10.1, 5400, Primary on 1, System, Swap, Software
                • D: IBM 13.5, 5400, Primary on 2, Dedicated to video
                • E: Memorex 48x CD, Secondary on 1
                • F: Yamaha CD-RW 2x2x8, Secondary on 2
                • Win98, FAT32 on C: & D:
                • MediaStudio Pro 5.2

                Comment


                • #9
                  Doc

                  As you seem to be the Constitutional expert here, I have a serious question. If one candidate holds a majority of States in the Electoral College and the other a majority vote, I presume the first becomes Prezzy, even though he is not democratically elected? Who has the casting vote if there's a dead heat in the 500-odd members of the College, or do they toss a coin or choose the democratic majority?

                  Guess I don't need to ask you which candidate you suppport

                  ------------------
                  Brian (the terrible)
                  Brian (the devil incarnate)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Yes, the Electoral College actually selects the President and not the popular vote. There is one elector for each House (435) and Senate (100) seat and a number equal to that of the least populous state is apportioned to the District of Columbia. For now this gives DC 3 electoral votes. The total number of Electors the is 538.

                    The Electoral College and the popular vote have diverged in the past. I believe the last time was in 1888 when Benjamine Harrison (Republican) beat Grover Cleveland (Democrat).

                    Benjamin Harrison got 5.4 million popular votes and won the Electoral College with 233 votes

                    Grover Cleveland got 5.5 million popular votes, but only 168 Electoral College votes.

                    Another quirk of the Electoral system is that Bill Clinton (Democrat) won a majority of the Electoral College in both 1992 and 1996 without winning 50% of the total popular vote in either year. In '92 he only won 43% and in '96 he won 49%. This was because of the infuence of a major third party candidate in each of these elections: Ross Perot of the Reform party. Perot took 19% of the popular vote in 1992 and basically stole the election from George H.W. Bush since most of those votes came from Republican ranks.

                    Making things even worse was that the voter turnout those years was less than 50% of registered voters. This all came to a head in '92 with Clinton winning with the support of less than 21.5% of the registered voters. Wonderful....

                    The Electoral College votes are reflective of the House districts plus the number of Sanators and are apportioned by states. Michigan, for example, has 16 Congressional districts and two Senators making a total of 18 Electoral votes.

                    What we are actually voting for is the Elector for a given candiate in our congressional district. That Elector is NOT bound to vote for the candidate his states popular vote chooses unless state law dictates. Not all do, however the parties the Electors belong to enforce this strongly.

                    The divergence comes because in 48 of the 50 States the winner gets ALL of it's Electoral votes. The Electors are not split proportionately between the candidates in that state. Therefore a candiate may win Michigan by 1 vote and yet get all 18 of its Electors. The exceptions to this are Nebraska and Maine which do split the Electors proportionatly to the popular vote.

                    Another quirk is that each state can determine independently WHICH candiates are on that states ballot, even in a Presidential election.

                    Example: in Michigan this year the Reform Party's Presidential candidate was refused a place on the ballot because he showed insufficient support in statewide polls. His appeal was turned down by the Supreme Court two weeks ago.

                    The Electors meet on Dec. 18, 2000 for voting. They then pass the results on to a joint session of the House and Senate on Jan 6, 2001. IF the Electoral College cannot come to a decision then the election is thrown into the House of Representatives. It is given to the House because it is the only of the two Congressional houses apportioned by population. In the Senate each state has 2 votes regardless of population.

                    IF the House cannot reach a decision in the alotted time then the Speaker of the House of Representatives becomes Acting President. If he refuses then the President pro tempore of the Senate takes on the role of Acting President.

                    George Washington was the first ever chosen by the House of Representitives. Thomas Jefferson was the second in 1800 when the House chose him over John Adams on the 36th tally.

                    US Presidential elections can be a very complex affair

                    Dr. Mordrid


                    [This message has been edited by Dr Mordrid (edited 27 October 2000).]

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      small SETI speak..

                      I joined!!, and I'm slamming my way up the leaderboard to 466th with a whacking 9 WU's, just 10975 short of breezers Cray. Christ what's he got the entrire Home office (well its topical) working for him?


                      ------------------
                      evilC
                      evilC

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Not quite the replies I was expecting! So, er, dare I ask...but anyone wanting to join Team Matrox Users?

                        Paul.
                        Meet Jasmine.
                        flickr.com/photos/pace3000

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I likedRichard Fienmanns comment (VERY clever American philosopher), when asked what government should do to improve the situation/life/the universe etc.

                          Replied - "the problem is how to STOP the government".
                          - - - - - - -
                          This may take a bit of explaining to some, but i am sure most of you guys get the gist without me pondering into loads of gibberish and waffle. - I liked his point.

                          ------------------

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Thanks, Doc, for the comprehensive explanation. I'm much wiser, but more perplexed than ever at the complexity

                            I've only voted in a national election once in my life, in the late 1950s, I think. Mainly because I have been an alien (back to the initial subject of this thread???) since 1963 and have therefore been disenfranchised. Having lived in Switzerland for 35 years, before moving here, I'm full of admiration for their system which has the beauty of it working without the hiccups and upheavals I see in other countries. Not without its disadvantages, of course, but very practical.

                            Contrast, to my present abode, but I won't go into that!

                            Thanks again.



                            ------------------
                            Brian (the terrible)
                            Brian (the devil incarnate)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The complexity of our system, particularly in relation to the legislative process, has its merits.

                              The main advantages are that the built in slowness of our system tends to eliminate decisions made in the heat of the passions of the day. Once the protracted debate's stettle down cooler heads prevail and everyone wonders why there was such a hassle to begin with.

                              I think it just exhausts everyone out to the point where they're too pooped to fight any more

                              Also the ability of 1/3 + 1 vote of the Senate to bottle up controversial legislation helps stop ill timed or badly written laws from being rammed through the sytstem. Very much a feature that forces concensus.

                              Dr. Mordrid

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X