The Tech-Support Generation
Millions of young Americans will head home next week to give thanks, eat turkey ... and fix their parents' computers

I already have been asked to set up the WiFi router at my cousin's house. Fortunately his brother who will actually be staying at his house this week is also a geek and so that should limit requests for routine stuff. I also have the benefit of a geek brother-in-law who will be at my inlaws' place for our 2nd Thanksgiving to handle most of the tech support issues there. Of course at my Mom's for Xmas I'm really the only serious geek in the family* so I will have to do a lot of regular maintenance on her machine over that week.

How's the tech support workload look at your 'rents (or other relatives') house this holiday season?

* My older brother, however, is practically a textbook definition of a middle-aged nerd: mid 40's, never married, plays a lot of video games, attends Anime Film Festivals, Mensa member, ABD PhD candidate in Mathematics for about 20 years now doing database administration. We're getting him an EyeToy for his PS2 this Xmas so maybe he'll get his weight backdown to a healthier level.

This site seems to be pretty perky - please don't share it beyond our little circle for 24 hours.

Enjoy!

I don't know how it will go today - but for the Primaries many of the media sites were releasing the Exit Poll results much earlier than they were making calls (though I think usually not until the polls closed in a state). Anyway, the exit polls are often pretty clear (often blatantly clear) as to how the state will go (sometime they break down the results into just how men and women voted which if both groups are are 50% in the same direction is pretty much game/set/match). So anyone, as I locate them I'll be posting links to them here.

CNN

If you're seeing any clear winners in these and the Nets aren't making a call - please post your call here. Here is a link to poll closing times which should indicate when new numbers will be out. And here is a primer on how the system will work this year, and a link to the official site of the joint polling pool used by the Nets.

UPDATE: 2:15 PM
MyDD has leaked the early numbers for the battleground states:

_____ AZ CO LA PA OH FL MI NM MN WI IA NH
Kerry 45 48 42 60 52 51 51 50 58 52 49 57
GBush 55 51 57 40 48 48 47 48 40 43 49 41
===== GB GB GB JK JK JK JK JK JK JK ?? JK
e-v B 10 09 09 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28
e-v K -- -- -- 21 20 27 17 05 10 10 -- 04 114
e-v ? -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 07 -- 7

I think Bush is assumed to get 218 prior to this (assuming he gets NV - I don't know why LA is in this list but NV isn't) giving him 246
Which would mean Kerry is getting 285 - and will be our next President.

Iowa has a SUBSTANTIAL number of of early voters - and other polls have indicated they largely went to Kerry. If these numbers are true exit polls only then IA goes to Kerry, if these figures already have the early IA voters then I think it went to Bush.

UPDATE: 5:15 PM
Supposedly from a NY Times insider via a DailyKOS diary

National
Kerry 50
Bush 49
Nader

Florida
Kerry 50
Bush 49

Wisconsin
Kerry 51
Bush 48

Minnesota
Kerry 54
Bush 44

Iowa
Kerry 50
Bush 49

New Hampshire
Kerry 53
Bush 45

Michigan
Kerry 51
Bush 47

Colorado
Kerry 48
Bush 50

Pennsylvania
Kerry 54
Bush 45

New Mexico
Kerry 50
Bush 48

New Jersey
Kerry 53
Bush 48

New York
Kerry 63
Bush 38

Ohio
Kerry 50
Bush 49

West Virginia
Kerry 45
Bush 54

Connecticut
Kerry 50
Bush 48

Missouri
Kerry 43
Bush 54

No changes other than Iowa now showing a slim lead for Kerry (which would be a nice cushion if Ohio ends up in court - just flipping OH wouldn't be sufficient to produce a Bush win), and posting of National numbers with a narrow Kerry lead. All the newly listed states are as I assumed. Still no Nevada.

UPDATE 5:25
Real quick new numbers from Wonkette:
The Birdies Sing a Sweet, Sweet Tune
FL: 52/48 - KERRY
OH: 52/47 - KERRY
MI: 51/48 - KERRY
PA: 58/42 - KERRY
IA: 50/48 - KERRY
WI: 53/47 - KERRY
MN: 57/42 - KERRY
NH: 58/41 - KERRY
ME: 55/44 - KERRY

NM: 49/49 - TIE

NV: 48/49 - BUSH
CO: 49/50 - BUSH
AR: 45/54 - BUSH
NC: 47/53 - BUSH

puts NM in toss-up column - which if it ended up going for W would again bring an OH court challenge back into play.

OK - more when I get to Regatta.

Just broadcast on the top of the hour news on NPR.

Expect updates on probably biggest story of the week soon.

12:11 PM - CNN link

12:34 PM - AP Wire Story via ABCNews

  3:02 PM - The inevitable story that ties it to the campaign courtesy of MSNBC.

As you probably know, the DC Plastic MeetUp for November is being coordinated with a SlashDot meetup being held in honor of visiting zoo.pl (the journaling and friend system here) luminary Ethelred Unraed, which will begin at 7:30 PM at Capitol City Brewery's MetroCenter location.

Yesterday I went a checked out the location and it looks like it will be great for dinner.

However, for those of who have been waiting 47 months for this election, it isn't really ideal for following the results as they come in. They have a couple of TVs at the bar, but it is unlikely they would be viewable or audible from the dining area.

Therefore, I'm proposing that shortly before most of the Eastern US polls close at 9:00 pm, the Plastic group, and any interested SlashDot zoo.pl folks head just down the block to Regatta Raw Bar - the hotel bar and 'casual' (not in price tho) restaurant. The Regatta bartender told me their big screen TV (50"?) will be tuned to election coverage as well as (probably) the bar TVs. Also, being adjacent to the hotel lobby, the big-screen area of the bar gets excellent connectivity to the hotel's WiFi provider - STSN - which let users with STSN, GoRemote, or Boingo accounts connect. (of these, Boingo seems to be the only really targetted at consumers offering $22/month unlimitimed plans, or a 2-day, one location, trial for $8. As for beer, they have several major microbrews on tap for about $5 and feature Sam Adams Lager, Light, and Winter Lager which they are promoting with a $3.75 draft special.

So, who thinks they will make it, and does the plan need any further refinement? If you want to go the dinner (as I plan to) you should RSVP to Ethelred via the email he gives in this journal entry. I'm thinking I will probably go to Regatta right from work to ensure my wifi is setup right, then head over to Cap City a bit early - ordering dinner at the bar to ensure I get my food with enough time to leave by 8:45. Then back to Regatta, hopefully with enough time to get settled in and logged on before the 9:00 poll closings. An alternate strategy would be to eat dinner at Regatta before 7:30 and then head over to CapCity from 7:30 to 8:45 just for drinks with the SlashDot folks while they are getting dinner - but I would only plan this if there are a couple of Plasticians joining me right around 6:00 (both bars have happy hours ending at 6, see the links above for their deals).

UPDATE - 10/25/04
I had been under the incorrect impression that a majority of polls would be closing around 9:00 Eastern time. In fact at that point all of the 'big 3' battleground states will have had their polls closed for an hour - at least. Given this, I may have to drastically cut back on the time I spend at Cap City, So I'm now leaning toward being Regate welcome to come by Regatta before their event starts at 7:30, and any time ta essentially from 5:45pm on, with an occasional trip over to Cap City to pay my respects to the SlashDot folks. Of course the SlashDot folks are welcome to come by Regatta before their event starts at 7:30, and any time after that until Regatta closes at midnight, hopefully the bar will let us stay long enough to hear the AK Senate results if that race is clear enough to call at that point.

I'm sure these must be available elsewhere but because today's is just too damn long to type correctly I thought I should provide a working link as a service to my loyal journal readers. I will backfill these as I get time.

• October 11th, 2004
• October 12th, 2004
• October 13th, 2004
• October 14th, 2004 (I think this is what he meant to link to, the URL is little different).
• October 15th, 2004

This is AWESOME!

Bill O'Reilly and FOX News announced today that he was suing a female FOX News employee who was threatening to sue him if he didn't settle a sexual harrassment case out of court for $60M. Whether or not there was a shakedown in progress, he should have settled on some figure becuase she aparently has audio tape of his obscene phone calls to her - including one where O'Reilly is audibly getting off with a vibrator and she is reminding him that she is his employee and is not a willing participant in the phone sex.

The Smoking Gun has a copy of her complaint which details that call (page 17) and the rest of the harrassment.

Wouldn't lifting the sanctions have required that the US itself agreed to them being lifted? In other words, who has the power to lift the sanctions: the UN Security Council, the General Assembly, or some committee? If its the Security Council, isn't the latest spin that Saddam wanted to wait out the sanctions an implicit statement that at some point in the future, the US was going to act against its own best interest and let the sanctions be lifted?

The only American I'm aware wanting to lift sanctions against the 'Axis of Evil' was Cheney as head of Haliburton wanting to lift the ones against Iran so they wouldn't be restricted in how much business they could do there.

I read this argument that Saddam was waiting out the sanctions as Bush & Cheney being lobbied by big oil to either lift the sanctions so they could move in, or take the country over so they could move in. Post 9/11 it became clear that removing the sanctions wouldn't fly with the American ppl, but the second option could now be more easliy sold to them (us) if the rest of the 'facts' could be made to look right.

UPDATE 5pm 10/8/04

OK, it seems the Kerry team has taken up just this sort of posture. The confusingly named Susan Rice who is a top foreign policy adviser to Kerry uses it in this article

Rice argued that there is a different lesson from the report -- that the sanctions had prevented Hussein from acquiring weapons and had greatly weakened him. The United States, as a permanent member of the Security Council, could forever veto any attempt to lift the sanctions, she said. "What this means is that the sanctions had him in a box, and he couldn't have gotten out of the box unless the administration lifted him out of it," she said.

While I find Cyberdyne's arguments below fairly convincing, I think the landscape radically changed on 9/11 and that calls for lifting sanctions (which I do remember) were mostly quieted - though I think there was some argument thas as part of getting the inspectors back in, some of the harsher aspects of the sanctions might could be eased - for example less cash would have been provided for the oil, but more food and even consumer goods would be let in instead.

Aparently the WH doesn't want you to find some thing (or least not find it very easily) that has to do with Iraq. As a result they have structured their robots.txt file to exclude all directories named "iraq" from being searched by Google et al.

It looks like they generated most of it with a script to deliberately hide any directory with text (understandably if they want search engines to find the HTML version of pages and not the plain text ones) but also any directory about Iraq, including many many subdirectories on Iraq that don't exist in the first place such as "\Easter\iraq\".

While it's tempting to think the obvious reason would be obscure any files tying 911 to Iraq, and many directories that could potentially hold these are listed - it may just be they just catch your eye because 911 is listed first alphabetically in the file.

And it should also be stated that the intent can't be that nefarious or they wouldn't allow you to use their internal search engine to access the same pages blocked in robots.txt. But is there really a need for the WH to be preventing Google et al from fully archiving the entire site for posterity?

Any Google-sleuths out there tempted to try and determine the specific dirt that has been swept under the metaphorical carpet - please feel free to point it out here in the thread. Here is a list of pages that look like they should be blocked that Google still lists in its search. Note none of them have been cached though. Pages that aren't blocked by the WH - those in the /infocus/iraq/ aren't listed herebecause of the way I phrased the search - most of those are cached - so maybe Google ignores robots.txt except for purposes of caching?

UPDATE 11:18 PM - MORE CONFLATION DEFLATION

Rumsfeld has doubts about Al Qaeda - Saddam connection

Aparently this is news to some ppl in the Administration.

TUESDAY NOVEMBER 2nd, 2004 - ELECTION NITE

We plan on finding a mutually agreeable establishment with cable feeds and beer (and hopefully wifi) to follow the results as they come in and either celebrate or drown our sorrows (supporters of all candidates are welcome) together. (Vote before you get there)

Ideal location would be:
  - on the Metro,
  - sell a good variety of beer (plus maybe harder stuff and/or Champagne depending on the results come in)
  - Have multiple cable news channels on TV's in "sports bar" type format
  - Have free/cheap WiFi connection to monitor online returns/stories and/or discuss results on http://chat.plastic.com
  - Am I forgetting anything?

This will be the official DC Area MeetUp.com meetup for Plastic in November - and possibly a joint meetup with Ethelred Unread who will be in town around then and other SlashDot Journal / zoo.pl folks.

I'm also thinking of a trial run of the location during one of the latter debates to see how well it will work. So, what do folks think?

Under the radar of most of the US press, Tony Blair is taking a lot of heat over memos obtained by Pakistani press that show his advisors will telling him the Bush administration had not adequately planned for a post-invasion Iraq, that they didn't think the WMD's were a real threat, and that Bush's main motivation for Iraq was a personal grudge againt Saddam because of the first Iraq War.

======================================

Reminder - I will be going go the College Perk cybercafe in College Park to hear Ben Tabak. I hope other folks here in the DC and Balto area can come check him out. The venue has a bottomless cup of coffee for $2 (and the whole variety of *$ types psuedo coffee beverages as well at decidedly sub*$ prices), or bottled microbrews for about $4-$5 - the music and the WiFi connection are FREE. Starts at 8:13 PM - eat first, they pretty much only have pastries to eat except for some over-priced under-stuffed quesadillas.

WIN or LOSE! (Per Bob Novak's "Well-placed sources in the administration")

This is obviously a trial balloon the WH is putting out - if Bush came right out and said this the total hypocrisy of the decision (after a full weekend of conservative pundits criticizing Kerry SOFT FOUR YEAR GOAL of getting US forces out - as being a sop to the 'terrorists' by giving them a target to to holdout for).

The greatest frustation for me is here we are in war we shouldn't be in in the first - that is a huge diversionary tactic to make the American public think that W is doing something on the the War on Terror to avange 9/11 when in fact it has pulled resources away from Afghanistan and the hunt for Osama bin Laden. And the team that got us into now doesn't care whether we win or lose.

Please let this be the signal to the voting populous that the team in the WH has no idea what they are doing and EVERYTHING they do is for the sole purpose of staying in power and serving their corporate masters.

UPDATE 10:48 AM

via js7a's journal: It seems oure biggest ally isn't waiting. (note the fact that UK forces are only 5k NOW, is pretty telling as to how much of a coalition we really have - I think Australia had more troops in Viet Nam than that - and other than a few historians who considers that conflict as led by a "coalition"?)

UPDATE 9/22/04

It seems the White House has popped the trial balloon, in an Ask The Whitehouse webchat with the public Tuesday, Dan Bartlett says the following:

Scott, from New York, NY writes:
Many of us support President Bush chiefly because of his commitment to rebuild and bring democracy to Iraq. What truth is there to Bob Novak's article suggesting that the president will pull out of Iraq at the earliest opportunity?

Dan Bartlett
There is no truth to that story. The President and his team are committed to getting the job done.

More info to follow - but this month's Plastic Meetup will be at RFD in Chinatown, Thurday 9/16 at 7:00PM.

UPDATE 9/16 am

I will be wearing a marroon long-sleeve shirt, green khakis, and have a yellow and blue golf umbrella. We will probably be sitting at a table near the bar.

You may be able to contact me from about 4:00 pm to 6:00 PM today on Plastic chat f there is anything else you need to know.

Remember, if you can't make it this week, in lieu of the Sept Slashdot Meetup (9/23) I will be going go the College Perk cybercafe in College Park to hear Ben Tabak. I hope other folks here in the DC and Balto area can come check him out. The venue has a bottomless cup of coffee for $2 (and the whole variety of *$ types psuedo coffee beverages as well at decidedly sub*$ prices), or bottled microbrews for about $4-$5 - the music and the wifi connection are FREE. Starts at 8:13 PM - eat first, they pretty much only have pastries to eat except for some over-priced under-stuffed quesadillas.

I was waiting to at first hear this (I missed it), then read it, all day. Normally I just skim whatever Josh Marshall excerpts posts on TPM, but today he just paraphrased so I went to the source. So here are the relavant parts of today's gaggle RE: W's Guard service -

Q Why did the President defy a direct order to get a physical in 1972?

MR. McCLELLAN: Scott, these are the same old recycled attacks that we see every time the President is up for election. It's not surprising that you see a coordinated effort by Democrats to attack the President when Senator Kerry is falling behind in the polls. And we had a very successful convention, and that's what this is about. It was well known that the President was going to work in Alabama and seeking a transfer to perform equivalent duty in a non-flying status. And that's what he was doing.

Q Did he decline to take it because he was moving to Alabama?

MR. McCLELLAN: He was transferring to a unit in Alabama to perform equivalent duty in a non-flying status. That is nothing new.

Q This was a direct order he defied, right? I mean, he did have a direct order that he defied?*

MR. McCLELLAN: John, these issues have come up every year. This was all part of the records -- that he was seeking to transfer to a unit in Alabama because he was going there to work in a civilian capacity. And he was granted permission to do so. And he was proud of his service and he was honorably discharged in October '73, after meeting his obligations.

*The memos that were released, in fact, show the President was working with his commanders to comply with the order.

Q Do you think that the Kerry campaign was behind these allegations surfacing again now?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think you absolutely are seeing a coordinated attack by John Kerry and his surrogates on the President. The polls show Senator Kerry falling behind, and it's the same old recycled attacks that we've seen every time the President has been up for election.

Q Do you think it's retaliation for the Swift Boats attacks on Kerry?

MR. McCLELLAN: I think it's -- I think it's in response to Senator Kerry falling behind in the polls and a successful convention that we had last week in New York.

Q Scott, even if these are old and recycled, and he was --

MR. McCLELLAN: This -- there --

Q I'd like to ask --

MR. McCLELLAN: I would like to finish my answer.

Q But I didn't ask my question yet.

MR. McCLELLAN: But I haven't finished my answer to Steve. This race is about the future and the choices that the American people face. And there are clear differences on the issues. And I don't -- Senator Kerry will do anything he can to avoid defending his record and talking about the clear choices that the American people face. And this President -- the President will continue to focus on his agenda for the future. And that's what the American people want this election to be focused on. And that's where our focus has been and where it -- well, where it will continue to be.

Q Scott, I'm just wondering, even if these were old charges, and even if the President was honorably discharged, did he or did he not defy an order to get that physical?

MR. McCLELLAN: Holly, again, these are the same kind of recycled attacks that the Democrats are trying to engage in. The President fulfilled all his obligations, and that is why he was honorably discharged from the National Guard in October, 1973. He was given permission to perform equivalent duty in Alabama, and he met his obligations, and he met his obligations when he returned to Texas. And he met his obligations when he was in Texas, prior to going to Alabama.

So there you have it - the WH was asked a direct question - did the president violate military law while serving during the Viet Nam War - the WH reponse: No Comment. I'll take that as a yes.

UPDATE: Quick sidebar - why is /. posting a whole NEW version of the Guard Memo's story while the other is still quite active and has pretty much already addressed the new issues raised in the new version?

-----------

Belated MemoGate postscript 10/4/04: It seems the WH has had a 1971 Texas ANG document (Bush's promotion) in its possession since at least 2000, but withheld it until well after the MemoGate scandal had broken and been burned into the collective concious - it's doubtful this new info on the story will get any play unless Dan Rather himself presents it in his own defense on the CBS Evening News or 60 Minutes.

By the time you read this I expect the 1000th official US casualty in Iraq will be reported.

I really wish there is something tangible I could have done to have prevented this slaughter. All I can think of doing to prevent it being repeated in the future is to try ensure more responsible leadership in Washington.

Update 5:15 PM Eastern Time September 7th, 2004

The above link is currently reporting 1,001 US Soldiers lives lost in Iraq.

My condolences go out to their parents, children and spouses.