Slashdot Mirror
Students, ISP Sue Diebold
Quixotic1 writes "The campaign against Diebold that began as electronic civil disobedience took an exciting turn today as the EFF announced that they were filing suit against Diebold for abuse of copyright claims. They will be representing Swarthmore College students and the ISP Online Policy Group, who hosted and linked to copies of controversial internal memos."
This is offtopic:
All the icons are broken and there are now dumbass smiley faces everywhere.
here are all the memos for your browsing pleasure:
http://tapdance.sourceforge.net/diebold/
hope this helps
Investing forum
If you agree with the EFF's decision to stand up to Diebold, then I may suggest making a small donation to the EFF to show your support.
Even if Diebold wins, the documents that were linked to might well end up as part of the public record, and won't be censorable, then. When the documents surfaced, the genie was already out of the bottle. Diebold's efforts to stop the spread of the documents has only resulted in more people taking notice of what's going on. There's no telling how a judge will rule in this case. The U.S. judicial system is a mess and has next to no consistency. It's entirely possible that Diebold will win. But in the process, the truth is already out there. You can't censor the public record. They've made what was a little mess into a big mess.
SEARCHING FOR SIG
SIG NOT FOUND ERROR
READY.
Not shaky at all, this is very similar to the petagon papers, except it is against a private company. However, since this involves voting rights, there is overwhelming public interest in the content given that this invloves election fraud. More on the pentagon papers.
Ah but what about the american revolution? Our dictatorship isn't exactly bloody...yet.
Afraid I'm not super familiar with the american revolution but I think I'd tend to classify it more as a liberation than a revolution. From what I understand British loyalists would of been a minority and probably socially segregated for the most part. Either way the actual battles would of generally been local militants against forgien military in a time when military technology was simple enough that both had an equal footing from an arms standpoint. Once the revolution was over the british military was not only gone but on the other side of an ocean (I suspect no practical chance to retake the colonies given that eras naval technology), some of the rest of the british loyalists moved up to Canada and in general the continent was relatively unsettled so places where local tensions were high people could find lots of open space to move to. As a result opposing sides who would have fought in what I would normally consider a revolution didn't haev to deal with eachother and to an extent were able to be removed from the country entirely, This effectively removed the major opposition that the US government faced so they didn't have to resort to a dictatorship to hold power as would of happened in a normal bloody revolution. These factors caused most of the post-revolution tensions that are normally supressed forcefully to be relatively small and not cause major problems (I don't know if any of this eventually helped cause your civil war) which is why I don't classify it as a true revolution.
All that being said the American government DID recieve a challenge of authority in the Natives and we all know how that turned out, whether you want to call that a "bloody dictatorship" is up to you...
I stole this Sig
And NPR just ran a story on it
9 09 01
http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=14
You might want to check out the recent article, http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/11/03/18 2226&mode=thread&tid=126&tid=172&threshold =0 , about the Aussie electronic voting system. (Also some comments from the designer of the system.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
The Constitution of NH includes as Article 10:
[Art.] 10. [Right of Revolution.] Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security, of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought to reform the old, or establish a new government. The doctrine of nonresistance ag ainst arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
This is one of the most clearly delineated passages anywhere in American law pertaining to the ultimate rights and, more importantly, RESPONSIBILITIES of citizens.
According to John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, etc. the 2nd amendment (right to keep and bear arms) existed to keep gov't in check so a revolution wouldn't be necesary, but would be possible.
If you are waiting for the NRA lead revolution, it is never going to happen. Over the last couple of years it has been very nicely demonstrated that the government can strip away or weaken portions of the constitution and as long as they leave the 2nd amendment alone, all those people who own guns and could rise up, simply won't.
"You don't need a weatherman/ To know which way the wind blows" -Bob Dylan: Subterranean Homesick Blues
NPR did about 10 minutes about the suit this afternoon on All Things Considered. They even had Wendy on. Also, a good overview about the problems with the machines. It appears the mainstream media is catching on to this. Shall we start a pool on when Faux News picks it up? (My guess is never!)