Slashdot Mirror

The article lists about 9 websites that provide various types of this service. If you just can't read the article, then you might find some listed here or here.

All your event are belong to us.

D. Piner, J. Zhu, F. Xu, and S. Hong, C. A. Mirkin, "Dip-Pen Nanolithography", Science, 1999, 283, 661-63.

Go here for their web page. The are able to write the word 'NU' 50% smaller than what Mr. Hubert was able to accomplish. In addition, they are also trying to do this in parallel, using individually addressable AFM probes.

BTW: the probe tips that was used, can simply be bought here. It's a very established technology dating back more than a decade ago. It is also quite irresponsible that the MSNBC story here and Mr. Hubert's web site gave absolutely NO credit to the work by Northwestern. I guess to the media and the un-knowning public, an invention from MIT sounds a lot sexier than one done by Northwestern. By the way, I'm someone doing research in Micromachining, but I'm not affliated with Northwestern University. In case someone want's to flame me.

Why has NO ONE mentioned Micro$of~'s Windows XP?
Alright, allow me to point out what Windows XP has to do with this:

Quote: One totally new feature is the ability to allow one XP user to take control of another XP user's computer through the Internet, something Gates said would make it a snap to diagnose and fix problems.

Here is the link to the original article: Windows XP review

"just connect this to..."
BZZT.

MSNBC seems to spin it differently too, saying No Napster Reprieve.

I don't think it's media bias, though. Over the years I have acquired more respect for the professionalism of news agencies such as CNN and MSNBC over agencies such as Fox News to a degree and more so over ZDNet and CNET et al.

For the link-fearing:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/528921.asp

For the cut-and-paste impared:

Click Here

- JoeShmoe

That's why it has now decided to limit its free phone from MSN to 5 minutes, considering that free phone is going to be the practice and it will not get much mileage of it. Or is Microsoft and its partner totally unaware of the coming revolution and still hoping to make money off it's customers.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/521884.asp?cp1=1.html not with the slashdot.org

:)

No, I was talking about this.

Here's and article from this week's Newsweek that explains how CA failed (both due to planning and implementation) and what it might mean for other states on the brink (like my home state, TX.)

an interesting read...summerized, they say CA failed due to 2 things:

1. But then the economy jumped into high gear and demand spiked, thanks in part to power-hungry dot-coms.

2. Because of a thicket of state regulations, it takes up to seven years to plan and build a power plant. Finding a place to build one is even tougher in California....

the article seems to feel that TX will be a better implementation b/c it doesn't suffer from as much of either of these problems...Austin is our only Dot-Com city and we'll let ya' build almost anything anywhere b/c we have so much space!

Okay. The cops in Salem, New Hampshire--after a month-long investigation--determined that this kid had copied the text from several web sites related to the police department, modified the text, and had replaced photos on one site with rotating porn pictures.

This is clear, and compelling, proof of two things:

• The Salem, New Hampshire police are idiots. They evidently can't read simple documents like, say, the U.S. Constitution.
• The Salem, New Hampshire police evidently aren't just stupid--they're incompetent, too. Think about it: it took them a month to figure out that the guy had parodied their site. An entire month of investigation. Kinda makes you think these bozos might just deserve some parody, wouldn't you think?

But something stuck in my mind about "police" and "New Hampshire"...

Of course! The ultra-Libertarian legislator who got elected in November, before anybody noticed the outrageous comments he'd posted on the Web about cops. I looked up the article, figuring I'd post a link to it here. Here's the MSNBC article. But the article includes a neat little point right at the bottom--it turns out that the cop-killer wannabe isn't the only state legislator in trouble. It seems that while the Salem cops were busy with their month-long investigation of a parody web site ("Uh, sarge--how do you spell 'freedom of the press'?"), the town elected an ex-con living under an assumed name to be their legislator:

In a separate case, state Rep. Ron "Tony" Giordano has revealed a criminal past he didn't disclose to New Hampshire voters. The Republican from Salem said this week that he did two stints in jail in Massachusetts during the early 1980s for five check-forging convictions and one handcuff-stealing incident. He was known as Ron Gordon at the time.

"We all make mistakes. I've turned my life around," Giordano said.

Giordano, who moved to Salem six years ago after changing his name, said he would step down only if his 6,000 constituents demanded he quit.

Whatever parody this kid put up had better be hilarious--because the officials clowns are pretty funny all by themselves....

It's nice to know we can count on honest reporting- from *one* of our news providers. Eenie meenie miney moe...

Kamen doesn't predict the future, he produces the future! If "Ginger" is only half the quality of his previous devices, then "IT" is gonna be HUGE!!!

Kamen doesn't predict the future, he produces the future! If "Ginger" is only half the quality of his previous devices, then "IT" is gonna be HUGE!!!

a picture was cited from a response on msnbc's 'bbs'
--

MSNBC, Wakefield, MA - Linux user MICHAEL McDERMOTT, 42, was held without bail after being charged with seven counts of murder in the shootings Tuesday morning at Edgewater Technology. He entered innocent pleas on all seven counts. McDermott stood silently during the brief court appearance. He displayed no emotion as the prosecutor outlined graphic details of the rampage at Edgewater Technology.
The innocent Microsoft users were earlier identified as: Jennifer Bragg-Capobianco; Janice Hagerty; Louis Javelle; Rose Manfredy; Paul Marceau; Cheryl Troy; and Craig Wood. All worked on the first floor of the company's offices, located in a converted factory building, where the shootings took place. Two were believed to be receptionists and the other five worked in the company's accounting department, authorities said.

POSSIBLE MOTIVE
Co-workers said McDermott was a user of Linux and other Open Source Software, about 6-foot-2 with a long, flowing beard. He was friendly but "a little frightening," said Mike Stanley, a project leader.
McDermott recently had been coming in late and his performance wasn't as good as it could have been, Stanley said.
Prosecutors were investigating whether McDermott was upset about an Internal Revenue Service request to withhold some of his wages to cover software licensing fees, Middlesex District Attorney Martha Coakley said.
She said Edgewater had agreed not to begin taking out money from McDermott's paycheck to pay for the software until after the holidays. However, McDermott had an angry outburst in the company's accounting department last week over the prospect of losing some of his wages, according to an employee who spoke only on condition of anonymity.
"He was like a wild animal, screaming something about a cathedral and a bazaar," said the anonymous employee. "We told him that it was illegal to not pay for software, but he would have none of it."
Coakley said the shootings were apparently not random, since the suspect bypassed several people during the rampage. None of the victims was among McDermott's supervisors. They were all, however, innocent Microsoft users.

SUSPECT HEAVILY ARMED
McDermott had an AK-47 rifle, a shotgun, a semi-automatic handgun, and a stuffed penguin when police burst into the building and found him sitting silently in the reception area with his weapons. He made no attempt to shoot police and was described by authorities as "unresponsive."
Police found McDermott sitting silently in the reception area, a body nearby, his weapons within reach. He was arrested without gunfire.
"They made a split-second decision to hold their fire to try to effect an arrest," said Stephen Doherty, the police chief in this city 10 miles north of Boston.
Authorities said McDermott, an employee with Edgewater Technology since March, came to work as usual Tuesday morning. Around 11 a.m., however, he walked into the building's reception area, shouted "I love you Stallman!" and opened fire on two co-workers. He then proceeded to another wing of the building and shot five more employees at their work stations, police said. Shell casings and bullets were found all over the office.
."There was an enormous amount of firepower, considering the guy was a dork," said Coakley. The entire shooting rampage lasted from 5-10 minutes, she said.
She said McDermott did not have a permit for any of the weapons he was carrying, but had no prior criminal record, other than being a Linux user.
"I thought I was going to die," said a 29-year-old innocent Microsoft user, who declined to give his name. He was one of up to 70 people who were at work in the building at the time, officials said.
Frank Harrington, a contract consultant for the company, said he was in the building at the time of the shooting and heard eight to 10 shots.
Mike Brownson, who works across the street from the office complex, watched as police arrived and surrounded the building.
"When police are ducking behind their own vehicles, it's not something you see every day," said Brownson.
.Darren Emery, the manager of a store across the street, told MSNBC Cable that 14 innocent Microsoft users took cover in his store.
One witness said McDermott had "gone Columbine."
McDermott lived alone in Haverill, Mass., also a suburb of Boston, said police.
Kevin Forzese, who lived upstairs from McDermott in Haverhill, said the suspect had never mentioned money problems. He also said McDermott had mentioned that he collected japanese hentai, Furry fetish artwork and costumes, erotic anime Lego sculptures, and Star Trek memorabilia, but he had never seen any weapons in McDermott's apartment.
"He never talked about the company," Forzese said. "I talked to him about money and he said he was doing really well, but he refused to pay for his software like an honest consumer, which sorta bothered me."
Jonathan Oldham, a 35-year-old carpenter, said McDermott moved out of a six-unit apartment complex in Weymouth, south of Boston, at the end of October. Oldham was surprised to learn the man he said was a dork was accused of the rampage.
"I freaked," he said. "You never know if someone has problems with their life, especially if they are a criminal or a Linux user. It could have happened here."

EMPLOYEES 'SHOCKED AND DEVASTATED'
Bill Gates, Microsoft's chief executive, released a statement of sympathy. "Everyone at Microsoft is shocked and devastated by the loss of our valued users," the statement said in part and added, "We extend our deepest sympathies to the victims' families at this tragic time, and a coupon for a $49 upgrade to Windows ME."
."The company was scheduled to be closed through the end of the week.
Survivors of the attack were in shock, said the Rev. Tom Powers, who helped with grief counseling at St. Joseph's Church, where about 100 Microsoft users gathered after the shooting. They left sporadically, their faces stained by tears and holding each other for support.
"There's nothing you can do to take the grief away, except lock these Linux users up before they hurt more people!" Powers said.
Nancy Pecjo, a software developer with the company who is on maternity leave, was not at work at the time of the shootings but went to the building after hearing the news.
She said 30 to 40 employees worked at the Wakefield office. She did not know who had been shot.
"It's a great company, a wonderful company," she said, adding that she didn't know of anyone who'd been fired recently or was disgruntled.
"It's a small company, you get to know everybody there," she said. "When something like this happens it's very distressing."

The shooting was the latest in a string of criminal acts perpetrated in recent years in U.S. workplaces by Linux users.

As a now former Egghead customer I thought I would check out my statement. Much to my surprise I discovered a $10.25 charge from 12/21 to "GLOBAL TELECOM MOSCOW RUS". The MSNBC article mentions Global Telecom so it kinda looks like I've been had.

Anyone else notice any recent oddities on their statements?

Well, MSNBC is now running the same story. You can click on the link here.

So now that the liberal media is saying it (with the same unconfirmed sources) and Jay Leno is making jokes about it, you are now allowed to believe it.


Viv
-----------
I Use Napster. I use DeCSS. I buy over $1000 a year in CD/DVDs.

You're right, the laws aren't the same from country to country. But that isn't stopping countries like Germany from going after the ISPs. An MSNBC article reports that

It may be better to resolve this through education, but it looks like governments are trying the regulatory route. It will be interesting to see what happens...

A quote from Chris Hansen, a senior staff attorney for the ACLU: "More than 100 years of local control of libraries and the strong tradition of allowing adults to decide for themselves what they want to read is being casually set aside."

Here's something I tried to post: an article on MSNBC (already grounds for rejection) talking about how VALinux is being investigated by the SEC. Haha! Gee, I wonder why this was rejected...

http://www.msnbc.com/news/503556.asp

No registration required


--

It would be pretty easy to encrypt them using a cookie that's stored on my browser. [...] It's time to move towards a more cryptographically secure way of making payments.

Well, just as long as you're not the one designing the system...

Having strong crypto or good technology is only one part of the equation when it comes to a payments system. The organisational aspect has to be addressed as well, along with issues of liability, non-repudiation, infrastructure, etc.

Take PayPal as an example. I've heard (well, read) PayPal's praises sung by Americans I communicate with on the 'Net, some of whom (who really should know better) even said that it's safer than using a credit card online. From the technical point of view, that might be the case, but as an overall payments system, it's not perfect.

The main problem is that most techies know fuck all about the realities of doing business, and most business people know fuck all about the realities of implementing technology.

Anyone can have a good idea. It's making it happen that counts. That's the difference between boo.com and Amazon.com

Financial stuff isn't easy or straightforward and I can say this with authority, because I work for one of the biggest banks in the world, doing ecommerce stuff. But, if you don't believe me, take a look at what happened to Digicash and First Virtual.

D.

"(Slip Opinion) Cite as: 531 U. S. ____ (2000) 1

Per Curiam

NOTICE:

This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 00- 836

GEORGE W. BUSH, PETITIONER v. PALM BEACH COUNTY CANVASSING BOARD ET AL.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT [December 4, 2000]

PER CURIAM. The Supreme Court of the State of Florida interpreted its elections statutes in proceedings brought to require manual recounts of ballots, and the certification of the recount results, for votes cast in the quadrennial Presidential election held on November 7, 2000. Governor George W. Bush, Republican candidate for the Presidency, filed a petition for certiorari to review the Florida Supreme Court decision. We granted certiorari on two of the questions presented by petitioner: whether the decision of the Florida Supreme Court, by effectively changing the State' s elector appointment procedures after election day, violated the Due Process Clause or 3 U. S. C. 5, and whether the decision of that court changed the manner in which the State' s electors are to be selected, in violation of the legislature' s power to designate the manner for selection under Art. II, 1, cl. 2 of the United States Constitution. 531 U. S. ____ (2000).

On November 8, 2000, the day following the Presidential election, the Florida Division of Elections reported that Governor Bush had received 2,909,135 votes, and respondent Democrat Vice President Albert Gore, Jr., had received 2,907,351, a margin of 1,784 in Governor Bush' s favor. Under Fla. Stat. 102.141( 4) (2000), because the margin of victory was equal to or less than one-half of one percent of the votes cast, an automatic machine recount occurred. The recount resulted in a much smaller margin of victory for Governor Bush. Vice President Gore then exercised his statutory right to submit written requests for manual recounts to the canvassing board of any county. See 102.166. He requested recounts in four counties: Volusia, Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami- Dade.

The parties urged conflicting interpretations of the Florida Election Code respecting the authority of the canvassing boards, the Secretary of State (hereinafter Secretary), and the Elections Canvassing Commission. On November 14, in an action brought by Volusia County, and joined by the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, Vice President Gore, and the Florida Democratic Party, the Florida Circuit Court ruled that the statutory 7- day deadline was mandatory, but that the Volusia board could amend its returns at a later date. The court further ruled that the Secretary, after "considering all attendant facts and circumstances," App. to Pet. for Cert. 49a, could exercise her discretion in deciding whether to include the late amended returns in the statewide certification.

The Secretary responded by issuing a set of criteria by which she would decide whether to allow a late filing. The Secretary ordered that, by 2 p. m. the following day, November 15, any county desiring to forward late returns submit a written statement of the facts and circumstances justifying a later filing. Four counties submitted statements and, after reviewing the submissions, the Secretary determined that none justified an extension of the filing deadline. On November 16, the Florida Democratic Party and Vice President Gore filed an emergency motion in the state court, arguing that the Secretary had acted arbitrarily and in contempt of the court' s earlier ruling. The following day, the court denied the motion, ruling that the Secretary had not acted arbitrarily and had exercised her discretion in a reasonable manner consistent with the court' s earlier ruling. The Democratic Party and Vice President Gore appealed to the First District Court of Appeal, which certified the matter to the Florida Supreme Court. That court accepted jurisdiction and sua sponte entered an order enjoining the Secretary and the Elections Canvassing Commission from finally certifying the results of the election and declaring a winner until further order of that court.

The Supreme Court, with the expedition requisite for the controversy, issued its decision on November 21. Palm Beach County Canvassing Bd. v. Harris, Nos. SC00- 2346, SC00- 2348, and SC00- 2349 (Nov. 21, 2000), App. to Pet. for Cert. 1a. As the court saw the matter, there were two principal questions: whether a discrepancy between an original machine return and a sample manual recount resulting from the way a ballot has been marked or punched is an "error in vote tabulation" justifying a full manual recount; and how to reconcile what it spoke of as two conflicts in Florida' s election laws: (a) between the time frame for conducting a manual recount under Fla. Stat. 102.166 (2000) and the time frame for submitting county returns under 102.111 and 102.112, and (b) between 102.111, which provides that the Secretary "shall . . . ignor[ e]" late election returns, and 102.112, which provides that she "may . . . ignor[ e]" such returns.

With regard to the first issue, the court held that, under the plain text of the statute, a discrepancy between a sample manual recount and machine returns due to the way in which a ballot was punched or marked did constitute an "error in vote tabulation" sufficient to trigger the statutory provisions for a full manual recount.

With regard to the second issue, the court held that the "shall . . . ignor[ e]" provision of 102.111 conflicts with the "may . . . ignor[ e]" provision of 102.112, and that the "may . . . ignor[ e]" provision controlled. The court turned to the questions whether and when the Secretary may ignore late manual recounts. The court relied in part upon the right to vote set forth in the Declaration of Rights of the Florida Constitution in concluding that late manual recounts could be rejected only under limited circumstances. The court then stated: "[ B] ecause of our reluctance to rewrite the Florida Election Code, we conclude that we must invoke the equitable powers of this Court to fashion a remedy . . . ." App. to Pet. for Cert. 37a. The court thus imposed a deadline of November 26, at 5 p. m., for a return of ballot counts. The 7- day deadline of 102.111, assuming it would have applied, was effectively extended by 12 days. The court further directed the Secretary to accept manual counts submitted prior to that deadline.

As a general rule, this Court defers to a state court' s interpretation of a state statute. But in the case of a law enacted by a state legislature applicable not only to elections to state offices, but also to the selection of Presidential electors, the legislature is not acting solely under the authority given it by the people of the State, but by virtue of a direct grant of authority made under Art. II, 1, cl. 2, of the United States Constitution. That provision reads:

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress . . . ."

Although we did not address the same question petitioner raises here, in McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U. S. 1, 25 (1892), we said: [ Art. II, 1, cl. 2] does not read that the people or the citizens shall appoint, but that 'each State shall' ; and if the words ' in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct,' had been omitted, it would seem that the legislative power of appointment could not have been successfully questioned in the absence of any provision in the state constitution in that regard. Hence the insertion of those words, while operating as a limitation upon the State in respect of any attempt to circumscribe the legislative power, cannot be held to operate as a limitation on that power itself."

There are expressions in the opinion of the Supreme Court of Florida that may be read to indicate that it construed the Florida Election Code without regard to the extent to which the Florida Constitution could, consistent with Art. II, 1, cl. 2, "circumscribe the legislative power." The opinion states, for example, that "[ t] o the extent that the Legislature may enact laws regulating the electoral process, those laws are valid only if they impose no ' unreasonable or unnecessary' restraints on the right of suffrage" guaranteed by the state constitution. App. to Pet. for Cert. 30a. The opinion also states that "[ b] ecause election laws are intended to facilitate the right of suffrage, such laws must be liberally construed in favor of the citizens' right to vote . . . ." Ibid.

In addition, 3 U. S. C. 5 provides in pertinent part: "If any State shall have provided, by laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by judicial or other methods or procedures, and such determination shall have been made at least six days before the time fixed for the meeting of the electors, such determination made pursuant to such law so existing on said day, and made at least six days prior to said time of meeting of the electors, shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the

6 BUSH v. PALM BEACH COUNTY CANVASSING BD. Per Curiam

counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution, and as hereinafter regulated, so far as the ascertainment of the electors appointed by such State is concerned."

The parties before us agree that whatever else may be the effect of this section, it creates a "safe harbor" for a State insofar as congressional consideration of its electoral votes is concerned. If the state legislature has provided for final determination of contests or controversies by a law made prior to election day, that determination shall be conclusive if made at least six days prior to said time of meeting of the electors. The Florida Supreme Court cited 3 U. S. C. 1- 10 in a footnote of its opinion, App. to Pet. for Cert. 32a, n. 55, but did not discuss 5. Since 5 contains a principle of federal law that would assure finality of the State' s determination if made pursuant to a state law in effect before the election, a legislative wish to take advantage of the "safe harbor" would counsel against any construction of the Election Code that Congress might deem to be a change in the law.

After reviewing the opinion of the Florida Supreme Court, we find "that there is considerable uncertainty as to the precise grounds for the decision." Minnesota v. National Tea Co., 309 U. S. 551, 555 (1940). This is sufficient reason for us to decline at this time to review the federal questions asserted to be present. See ibid.

"It is fundamental that state courts be left free and unfettered by us in interpreting their state constitutions. But it is equally important that ambiguous or obscure adjudications by state courts do not stand as barriers to a determination by this Court of the validity under the federal constitution of state action. Intelligent exercise of our appellate powers compels us to ask for the elimination of the obscurities and ambiguities from the opinions in such cases." Id., at 557.

Cite as: 531 U. S. ____ (2000) 7 Per Curiam

Specifically, we are unclear as to the extent to which the Florida Supreme Court saw the Florida Constitution as circumscribing the legislature' s authority under Art. II, 1, cl. 2. We are also unclear as to the consideration the Florida Supreme Court accorded to 3 U. S. C. 5. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is therefore vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered."

Here's the ruling. (The decision is in the last few lines.)

First off, I think you put this in the wrong category--I'm pretty sure this isn't an Internet issue. (Okay, I see you fixed that while I wrote this. Good.)

Second, the Supreme Court did not overturn the Florida Supreme Court. They remanded the decision. The proper headline is "SCOTUS Sends Case Back to SCOF" (since /. should be using wonkish acronyms, don't you think?)

Third, as others have pointed out, it wasn't a "unanimous ruling", it was an unsigned ruling.

Fourth, "meaning that Bush is the winner" is misleading and vague, particularly since it doesn't say what he is the winner of. And he didn't really win anything, except more PR fodder.

Fifth, you should present some justification for your conclusion about the transference of power; I expect you can't, particularly since the news about this decision is vague and incomplete. Even if SCOTUS had ruled against the Florida Supreme Court, that wouldn't have transferred power away from the states to the federal govt., it would have transferred power away from the people and the courts to the legislative and executive branches.

However, I want to say that I don't particularly blame CmdrTaco for being so misleading, since the coverage has been confused--as the story first came out on the Net, the one-line reports were changing. General media coverage has been confusing, but they're starting to fix their sites and get the story right--I hope CmdrTaco will correct his post as well.

Finally, I want to say that I am very thankful that CmdrTaco posted this, because for anyone who cares about the long-term health of the republic and believes in the ideals of democracy this election is of utmost concern.

So, thank you, but get your facts straight.

Get your head out of Sally Struthers' a**. Think about what you are saying. Or rather think about what you might not have been able to say, because you do realise that it is foundations like EFF that promote your electronic freedom of speech. Stay with me, now. There are ideas floating around Washington, D.C. RIGHT NOW that would make sharing bugfixes, security loopholes, and workarounds illegal to share on the internet. This means sites that periodically post bugs and security information will be outlawed. If they can conceive of something like that, what stops them from outlawing open source? (it entails a certain level of security info-sharing between developers.) no open source? no linux? no /.? wake up. make a difference. vote. don't let the lemmings take away all of yoru rights.

Nice try, but you missed the mark. Yes, Texas does have a state wide procedure, and it's more liberal than anything proposed in any county in Florida. In Texas, even "dimpled chads" count, that is, cards where there isn't even penetration of the ballot. Yet in Florida, we're told by Republicans that even votes that are hanging by one corner of a chad don't represent a voter's intent, such is the shamelessness of the Bush campaign. If Florida went by Texas standards, we wouldn't even be having this conversation, and Gore would already be the president-elect.

Second, the main reason that the counties couldn't get their votes in on time were due the delaying tactics of Katherine Harris. She did her job well and no doubt will get a rich reward from Dubya should he succeed in his swindle.

While we're on the topic, care to tell me how she was justified in throwing out the ballots already counted in those counties that missed the deadlines? According to this article from the Washington Post, Gore had picked up 157 votes in Miami and 210 in Palm Beach, which leaves Bush's lead at 120 votes with over 10,000 "undervoted" ballots uninspected. Harris was wise to pull the plug when she did, since it's pretty clear a full recount will give the presidency to Gore.

You dismiss my concerns about the co-chair of the Bush campaign in Florida being the ultimate arbiter of this election as "crap", but you notably leave out any reason for this dismissal. Does the phrase "conflict of interest" not mean anything to you? This is about the most blatant abuse of power I've seen in a long time. Apparently, Republicans want their guy to win so badly that it doesn't bother them. So much for "restoring honor and diginity to the white house".

As for the voting machines, who do you think controls which areas get upgraded first? Here's a hint: it's the state government headed by Bush's little brother.

I am a Republican, and voted for Bush, so obviously I'm biased.

Tell me about it!

However, I clearly think that if Gore continues to go ahead with his lawyers in front of Democrat judges (who already have rewritten the law, in effect changing the rules of the game after the ball has been put in play), he's going to destroy his party.

I'm not sure of how clearly you think but this sure isn't an example of clarity in though. While the majority of the judges in the Florida supreme court were appointed by the democrats (6 out of 7) the court ruled unanymously in favor of extending the recounts. This means that the republican appointed judge voted for it too.
Bush has also been to court. In fact he was the first one to go to court. He even went to the federal district court in Gergia which is very much a republican leaning district court.
The reson gore has won the majority of the court decissions is that he has much firmer legal ground than Bush and what he is asking for as a general rule is more level headed than what Bush asks for.

I believe that at this point he doesn't stand much of a chance of succeding... Surprisingly, weeks of recounts being done in Democrat counties that voted OVERWEALMINGLY for him, using hand recount rules made and remade on the fly by DEMOCRATS didn't change the results.

This is clearly not true. From one county alone Gore gained over 500 votes placing him within 400 votes of Bush. If the Miami-Dade and Palm Beach recounts were allowed and counted Gore would probably win the election by 600-1000 votes.

Gore going any further proves that Gore thinks more of himself than the country to continue to be the cause of damaging faith in the Constitution, law, and fairness. And he is the SOLE cause of all this. Some day, when less biased historians write of this era will paint this election and Gore's actions as the final chapter of the corrupt Clinton machine.

Are you serious? Please do some reading so you know what is actually happening in Florida. I think these articles are pretty interesting maybe you should check them out and broaden your mind:
Winning by intimidation
Patriot missile
Raising the Stakes

BTW, Gore's lawyer, Boyd, is the lead government lawyer in the Microsoft case, don't know if anyone's mentioned that yet. This shakes my faith in the Reno case against them, IMO, he has damaged his credibility severely by arguing specious cases on Gore's behalf.

BTW, David Boies, Gore's Lawyer, was the lead government lawyer in the M$ case. He left the DOJ months ago. He is Napster's lawyer now. Why would any of this "shake your faith" on what you call "Reno's" case? First of all the M$ case isn't Reno's case. She just happens to be the Attorney General but it isn't as if this is some sort of vendetta that she has embarked upon. There was a findings of fact an M$ didn't come out so well. The judge was not compromised in any way and he still sided with the DOJ. Just because a legal decission isn't what you would like it to be it doesn't mean that the ruling is a bad one.

ABC News and MSNBC both had the election results seconds after they came out, while CNN languished for years over the "Florida recount looms" front-page story.....

...use the balance sensor to keep the robot upright

To add to the question, there are balance mechanisms available (as used in the IBOT), are these employed by this robot?

But that wasn't my point. My point is that in any situation where it comes down to a civilian's word against a cop in a court of law, the cop will come out the winner, every time, no questions asked.

The conviction of three Los Angeles police officers on corruption charges represents a watershed for the city, legal observers said Wednesday, because it signals that jurors here no longer automatically give credence to the men and women who are sworn to serve and protect.

"In Los Angeles, a badge is no longer a shield," said Santa Monica defense lawyer Gigi Gordon, who has followed the Rampart case closely.

No - an old schoolmate of mine got posted a 1 million dollar bond for robbing a bank. Stop watching movies.

and delaware has 3 electoral votes:
http://www.msnbc.com/d/d2k/g/state_DE. htm

Pat Buchanan went on the Today show and "agreed [that] the ballot was confusing and that many of
his votes there were meant for Gore -- enough, he added, that had they gone to Gore he would have won the presidential election." See this article.

Seems as if he also buys the statistical argument.

MSNBC's version:
http://www.msnbc.com/news/466882_asp.htm

cnn.com's version:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/09/ election.president/large.ballot.ap.jpg

salon.com's version:
http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/11/07/r esults/index.html

Here is a link to a picture of what the ballot looks like. How can you NOT understand this?!?! You FOLLOW THE ARROWS.
Jeez.
One woman said, "It was so hard to tell who and what you were voting for. I couldn't figure it out, and I have a doctorate."
Now, maybe my vision is better than the average Floridians(or whatever you call them =), but c'mon folks, a third grader could have filled this thing out.

I guess maybe it is true that the candidates up for election are a good indication of the intelligence of the majority. Heh, of course, I can't say anything either. Canadians are just as guilty.
Our Prime minister is about as thought-provoking as a pet rock...And he was elected twice. :P

But still, how can you not understand that ballot?! The only thing more idiot-proof would be to put each candidate on their own ballot. But, knowing people, they'd find a way to screw that
up too.

The majority of Americans I've met offline and off were for the most part pretty intelligent people, which makes me wonder why someone can raise such a fuss over something like this.
It's not like you need to be a brain surgeon to fill out a voting ballot. =)

LOL, I'm half asleep and lookin' for trouble, so feel free to fire away! *grins*

"The good thing about Alzheimer's is that you can hide your own Easter eggs"

check this out at msnbc.com. from the article:

Three people filed a lawsuit Wednesday seeking a new election in Palm Beach County, claiming the punch-card ballot was so confusing that they accidentally voted for Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan instead of Vice President Al Gore

This is an argument between those who favor strict process and legal rule making versus those who believe that the constitution protects all citizen's voting rights.

A good example of this was St. Louis Missouri, where long lines of voters were turned away at the voting booths after the polls closed. This was after a local judge had ruled that the polls should remain open until after voters had their chance to cast their ballot. However, attorneys for the Bush/Cheney team appealed this decision in Federal court and got the polls closed while voters waited in line.

So, here we are. Choosing between strict rules, such as parsing what the meaning of "is", is versus trying to do the right thing, which I define as giving EVERY registered voter their opportunity to vote.

Bush/Cheney should welcome voters, even those who may vote against them. Why? Because their status as elected officials are now on the line. If they win this election after having turned away voters and misrepresented ballots with a confusing selection process, our very voting process is in jeopardy. And that is a real constitutional crisis.

many people read /. that aren't from the U.S. or aren't citizens.
So, just in case all this election B.S. leaves them in the cold, I thought I'd post this article
explaining the electoral college sytem and why we should get rid of it.

While it's true that the entire election hinges on Florida right now, it's incredibly interesting to note the role that Nader played in the margins. these states below were considered "swing states" that really could make a difference. consider how thin the margin was in each, compared to the total votes Nader drew:

(# electoral votes - State - Gore's margin of victory/loss - Nader's total vote)

=== Gore Wins ===
23 - Pennsylvania (PN) - 196,000 - 102,000
11 - Wisconsin (WI) - 5,000 - 28,000
7 - Iowa (IA) - 4,000 - 28,000
11 - Washington (WA) - 89,000 - 69,000
18 - Michigan (MI) - 204,000 - 81,000

=== Gore loses ===
11 - Tennessee (TN) - (-79,000) - 20,000
6 - Arkansas (AR) - (-40,000) - 12,500
11 - Missouri (MO) - (-79,000) - 38,000

=== in play ===
7 - Oregon (OR) - (-21,000) - 54,000
25 - Florida (FL) - (-1800) - 97,000

main points:

1. Nader wasn't a real threat in Pennsylvania, which was a critical state for Gore. Gore won a decisive victory.
2. Nader almost cost Gore Wisconsin and Iowa - Gore's margins were so thin there that he probably won only by "Green Guilt" (Nader voters thankfully convinced that their vote for Nader was indeed a vote for Bush). Also, it is VERY likely that "vote swapping" played a KEY role in the results from these states, because the various swapping sites on the internet report a combined total of ~10 - 15,000 participants.
3. Gore grabbed Washington and Michigan despite the Nader threat, a large enough margin that Nader probably wasn't a real threat.
4. The three states that Gore lost which he had been counting on (TN, AR, MO) were lost by large enough margins that even Nader's votes woudln't have helped. Had Gore managed to win these states he woudl have not needed Florida.
5. Oregon is being slightly spoiled, according to latest results. But Oregon isn't as critical now since WA and MI went to Gore.
6. Florida is being HUGELY spoiled! look at the tiny margin - less than 2,000 votes - and compare it to Nader. This is also exactly how WI and IA could have gone, except that even taken together they only have 18 votes and FL has 25.

Assume that 40% of Nader votes were spoiled from Gore and 60% were not going to vote for Gore anyway (these estimates are conservative, based on some exit polling info on TV). Then in Florida, that means Gore could have had (Nader votes x 40%) = (97,000 x .40) = ~35,000 votes. That's nearly *20 times* as many votes as the margin.

What does this all mean? It shows how close the election hinged. Gore could have easily lost WI and IA as well, which would have cost him the election right there. It's very possible that vote-swapping is what saved WI and IA for Gore. Florida is still in play by the thinnest margin in history, because of SEVERE Nader spoiling.

So, if Gore loses, it's because of Nader (who publicly promised to not campaign in swing states, but broke his word). If Gore wins, it's quite likely that it was won in WI and IA for him by vote-swappers :)

(data from MSNBC. conclusions and analysis from mybutt.com)

ooh, another cool article from New York Times:

Why?

Because while his 90,000 voters in Florida would easily have tipped the scales, we're failing to place blame where blame is due. Gore. Loser. Not able to prove himself statesman material to the uneducated or uncaring masses.

Who was backing him? According to MSNBC's list of exit polls (if that link isn't working, find the map of the US for the election on their site, enter Florida, click on exit polls for that state's Presidential Race), the answer to the following question sums it up: Which was more important in your vote for President today? (issues vs. personal qualities)

Nearly 40% of Florida voters chose personal qualities. (approx. 2.3M voters). Of them, 59% chose Bush (approx 1.3M voters). Compare that to a meager 96K Naderites and you see what's wrong with american democracy. At least the Nader voters overwhelmingly (2 to 1) voted the issues at stake.

I personally feel that leaving the decision of policy up to how nice or seemingly honest someone appears to be in their propaganda, er... campaign means that the vote can be decided by folks who either didn't understand or didn't care about the issues at stake. Not to sound elitist, but I don't want my nation's policy decided by these people. I prefer those who understand the issues & vote their opinions on how these issues ought to be approached by whomever ends up running my country.

Disclaimer. I realize these are just numbers. Numbers can do what people want them do. Ask a statistician.

-Matt

- MSNBC:
* Down frequently
* Eventually became updated hourly
* Took a while for the map to update

"Technical problems at MSNBC.com early Wednesday resulted in some users receiving outdated content about the presidential election. In other cases, users saw data and stories that conflicted with other information on the site."

Check out cnn.com and check out Nevada and the total.

Now Go To msnbc.com and do the same.

This is has been like this for about an hour now.

Here's a good Florida Link at MSNBC.com

Wow What a close election!

Well, I was bored so I ran some netcraft server lookups and here's what came out:

www.MSNBC.com running Windows 2000 with IIS5, greatest server uptime ~60 days.
www.CNN.com running Solaris with Netscape/Enterprise-4.1, greatest server uptime ~90 days.

Interpret it however you wish, I'm not starting any OS debates tonight...
BRTB

salon has many AP and salon articles, and a map, too. politics section of salon.

salon has many AP and salon articles, and a map, too. politics section of salon.

Here

2000-11-07 17:58:35 GOP Website Hacked (articles,news) (rejected)

Go figure.

Ch eck it out

"One day after sounding an alert, astronomers said additional data had eliminated any chance that a recently discovered space object would collide with Earth in 2030. The revised forecast shows the object passing no closer than 3 million miles. "We're still watching it, but the 2030 event is not a concern anymore."

News changes quickly these day, eh?

George!

I have my own browser which makes it very easy to debug things like this. Not only does it never follow redirects and naver take cookies, but it makes it easy to examine the raw data returned by every HTTP transaction. I also use Linux Netscape 4.72, and have cookies enabled there all the time.

I discovered that expedia and msnbc have common GUIDs in my Netscape cookies file, and furthermore the expedia site uses the same triple-redirection technique shown on the pc-help.org article. It routes through expedia.msnbc.com and then back to expedia.com after attaching the GUID to the URL.

- Robert Munafo