|
CliveatFive
|
read my profile
sign my guestbook
Name: "Clive at Five"
Country: United States
State: Minnesota
Gender: Male
Interests: Ultimate Frisbee, Cooking, Politics, Trivia, Writing, Music, Writing music (go figure), Computers (especially Macs, duh), "Hacking", getting pwned at StarCraft, Rollerblading, Caribou Coffee, arson... the usual.
Expertise: Physics, Math, restaurants, finding awesome places, scaring away the ladies
Occupation: Aspiring awesome person
Message: message meEmail: email me
Member Since:
3/6/2003
 True
|
|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| Fascinating things are happening, politically, these days. The Republican party, suffering a brutal defeat last election season, is "lost in the wilderness" trying to find ways to legitimize itself. This has resulted in a significant broadening of the party "principles" ("big tent") and, subsequently, birthed what are known in the Republican party as "RINOs:" Republican In Name Only. While most of the heads on talk radio talk about extracting the RINOs as the way to reestablish the Republican party as the party of Conservatism, I believe there is a better way to bring Conservatism back to the masses.
DISCLAIMERS: Firstly, as you know, I am against parties altogether. A party's first priority is to the well-being of the party instead of to the principles on which the party is founded. Secondly, most of you know that I am not strictly a Conservative. I consider myself an "Egalibertarian," which has elements of modern conservatism and classical liberalism. That being said, it may be none of my business to counsel Conservatives, but when has that every stopped me from opening my big mouth? Never, so here we go:
Steps to creating a viable alternative to the Democratic Party:
1) Abandon the Republican party. Why?
a) RINOs care about the Republican Party solely for the potential of party power, thus will do whatever they can to save it... but
b) In their attempts to save it, RINOs have made the Republican Party stand for as many things as possible, and in doing so, have made it stand for nothing. A party that stands for nothing cannot stand long.
c) The Republican Party has a tarnished image, thanks to faux-Conservatives like McCain, Bush, and Bush Senior. While true-blue Conservatives would know better than to vote for a faux-Conservative-Republican, many Democrat voters simply vote for the non-Republican candidate (the reverse happens, of course, but the Democrats obviously aren't having trouble with votes at present). A "non-Republican" voter will now have a choice to make.
2) Reject "Social Conservatism," in the name of advancing personal freedom. Anyone who alleges to stand for freedom should not also endorse Government social engineering. It should, instead, focus on ensuring people have the resources to make good decisions on their own. Democrats and Republicans have really failed in the "social engineering" arena recently (and by that, I mean that they've SUCCEEDED at social engineering recently). "Liberals" of the 1960s would be ashamed of the Democratic Party today! It has become the very imperial body the countercultures rallied against! Social "liberalism" is an area where freedom-loving Conservatives can take a solid stand.
3) Propose citizen-centric solutions to the issues raised by Democrats and Republicans. In other words, end corporate favoritism and deny special interest groups. Offer free-market-tweaked solutions for existing social programs, i.e. a competitive teacher's market in public schools (more on this topic in a later post).
As the Democratic party races south on the Nolan Chart, never has the opportunity for a modern Libertarian party been more viable. It will begin with the disenfranchised, freedom-loving Conservatives and Independents. It will easily differentiate itself from the increasingly Big-Brother-esque Democratic party and the increasingly directionless Republicans. It should combine elements of the anti-authoritarianism movement of 60s, but with the fiscal and personal responsibilities of Reagan's Conservatism. It will be the best of both worlds, and yes, they can coexist. It is, in fact, the (lowercase-"L") libertarian spirit under which this country was born, and it will go a long way in maximizing both freedom and equality.
A common saying goes, "with great power comes great responsibility." I prefer to think that "with great responsibility comes great power." We must give people the responsibility to manage their own lives and destinies and in doing so, we give people great power! Government's role should be to ensure that every individual has the tools and resources to achieve their goals. Democrats won't give people the responsibility, and Republicans won't give people the tools. It's about time there's a party that does both.
-Clive | | |
| "... the Constitution allows for many things, but what it does not allow is the most revealing. The so-called Founders did not allow for economic freedom. While political freedom is supposedly a cornerstone of the document, the distribution of wealth is not even mentioned. While many believed that the new Constitution gave them liberty, it instead fitted them with the shackles of hypocrisy." -- Barack Obama
Government distribution of wealth and economic freedom are mutually exclusive, Mr. Obama. In other words, you cannot have economic freedom if government manages the distribution of wealth.
The "shackles of hypocrisy" come from corrupt douche-bag politicians who crumble to special interest groups for the almighty dollar, while at the same time, telling his/her constituents that he/she is fighting for their best interests. YOU, Mr. Obama, have done more to betray the economic freedoms of this country than all of our most corrupt companies combined.
...and what do you mean by "so-called" founders?
-Clive | | |
| This is my new computer...
...case.
It was purchased as a new home for my poor xHack, who has been having an identity crisis living in her pitiful PC case ghetto. This transplant has several challenges in store, some of them due to design differences and some of them self-induced.
First of all, the motherboard mountings in the G4 are not ATX-compliant, meaning that I will have to find some way to mount the thing. With this comes the challenge of aligning the PCI slots and well and the external ports. This will require extensive use of the rotary tool.
Secondly, from others who've done this conversion, I've heard that there is a "conflict of interests" between the position of the RAM on most ATX mo-boards and the optical bay in the G4 case. I absolutely do not want to sacrifice a front-loading DVD drive... in fact, on my wish list is the conversion of the vacant 2nd bezel into another working drive bay.
Another "conflict of interests," from what I read, is between the CPU heatsink and the PSU. This is not so much of an issue with me, as I will just put in the "low profile" water cooling I've always wanted.
The next hurdle is a self-inflicted one: I bought a gorgeous PSU - the Kingwin Mach1 (700W) - and it would be an utter shame to only see it on the rare occasions I open my case. I'd like to install a window in the top of the G4, exposing the lit interior and water cooling system, should I decide to install it. Even better than a window would be recasting the entire top piece in clear acrylic, but I know nothing about casting molds or how difficult a cast of that shape would be. (Anyone out there have tips for this?)
checklist:
☐ mount motherboard
☐ front-loading optical drive
☐ working power & reset buttons
☐ fit the heatsink, or replace with water-cooling system
bonus objectives:
☐ install a secondary optical bay
☐ interior visibility
Suggestions and comments are appreciated!
-Clive | | |
| For just over a year now, my Hackintosh ("xHack") has been running brilliantly! The only thing, though, is that my poor computer is having an identity crisis! Is it a Mac? Is it a PC? Or is it some half-breed Frankenstein?
Well, I have sympathy for my poor compy and I'd like to help it establish its identity, once and for all.
Fact is, she spends most of her time in OS X mode, only switching to Windows to play an occasional bit of GTA IV. It's pretty obvious that on the inside, she's a Mac. The problem is that she lives in an ugly, boxy, 5-year old PC case. The solution is, simply, to put her in a bright, shiny, new case, right? Well, it can't be just any case. It has to be a case that makes her feel at home. It has to be a Mac.
The most obvious answer is to put her in Apple's current tower case, the PowerMac G5/Mac Pro, which, thanks to the abundance of ATX-conversion kits out there, would make the transplant a breeze. Unfortunately, the Mac Pro looks like a cheese grater, and I happen to find it literally disgusting to look at:
On the other bookend of stylish Mac towers, we have...
... the blue and white G3, which, unlike the cheese-grater G5 actually looked awesome at one time. Unfortunately, it is pretty tacky by today's standards.
I need something between these two styles. Something that has the sleekness of the G3 but the class of the G5. Enter the G4.
Apple's entire line of G4 Desktops (the iMac, PowerMac, and G4 Cube) strike the perfect balance between the curvy & colorful G3 series, and the minimalist & professional-looking G5/Core 2 series. As you know, I already own a G4 iMac (iLamp) and I recently modded a G4 Cube with an Atom mo-board & processor. It is only appropriate that I complete my collection of G4 computers with a PowerMac.
...but which model do I pick?
The first of the G4s was the "Sawtooth." Basically, a silver version of the blue & white G3:
It's nice, but comparatively bland.
The second was the G4 "MDD" (Mirror Drive Door):
It's worlds ahead of the Sawtooth, but its main design feature - that mirror on the front - is downright bizarre!
Lastly, there's the G4 Quicksilver:
Now THAT is a beautiful computer. Simple and elegant, yet sleek and modern. That, my friends, is my next computer case.
...and I just received one that I bought on eBay for $40, shipped. You'd be hard-pressed to find a quality case on NewEgg that cheap.
Plus, it does this:
Let's see your PC do THAT!
More to come.
-Clive | | |
| In an interview with Brian Williams, aired yesterday, former president Jimmy Carter outed himself as a pathetic race-baiter:
"I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African-American."
YOU FAIL, Mr. Carter.
The overwhelming majority of the opposition to Obama has nothing to do with his race. It has everything to do with the American people wanting to live their lives without a bloated government smothering them.
Racism as it was once known is dead. Racism today is found in the drivel spewed by the race-baiters in the media and the patronizing, pandering, politicians in Washington.
I HATE race-baiters.
-Clive | | |
|
