Slashdot Mirror
Electoral-vote.com Under Heavy Load; Attack?
An anonymous reader writes "Electoral-vote.com (and mirrors electoral-vote2.com through electoral-vote8.com) seem to be very slow at the moment. Votemaster ( A. Tanenbaum) just posted 'All the servers appear to be under attack now, also DNS. I added another large multiprocessor but it doesn't seem to help much. I don't this is going to work. Sorry.' Massive attack or just a large flash crowd? Anybody up for some mirroring so votemaster can concentrate on the polls?"
Reader fishwack writes with word that as of 3:46GMT (10:46 PM Eastern time in the U.S.) "the Federal Electoral Commission's Web site is down."
Wow, suppressing the black vote really works.
Also, it looks like Kerry is set to take Nevada and New Hampshire; if you give Bush every other state that he had the last time, that puts it at 264-274, Colorado, New Mexico, and Ohio are all close enough that if any one of them goes to Kerry, he will probably win.
So there you have, it's down to Ohio (which everyone expected), or Colorado and New Mexico, which no one expected to be much of a deciding factor.
Don't expect this to end tonight; absentee ballots are very likely to be needed in a few states.
What?
Check out the exit polls. Scroll down to what people believe are the most important qualities in a president. Only 7% said intelligence!!!!! HOLY FUCK!!! JESUS CHRIST, is this the country that I'm living in?!?!?!?
I don't understand why Slashbots assume that people who support Bush are dumb. I don't support Bush; I voted for Kerry. But I don't think that people who voted for Bush are dumb. They just have different priorities, values, and opinions than I do. I just don't get it: I understand Bush bashing (he's a public figure after all), but why bash people who voted for him? Attacking someone who holds a different opinion than you does not help your cause...
And it looks like he'll win the popular vote too. I know this won't be a popular decision on slashdot, but the fact is that America has spoken. If only techies had a right to vote then yes, Kerry would have won, but to become President you have to have widespread support.
To everyone pi$$ed off - the world isn't coming to an end, Bush isn't Hitler, the US isn't turning into Nazi Germany. Actually I think this country is pretty awesome, and I'm proud to be an American.
Is it just me, or is this guy (who's supposed to be this networking guru) is a little too careless with interchanging the words "attack" with "under heavy load"...
Look, your site just got posted twice to Slashdot, not to mention Fark a few times, and is trumpeting itself as one of the best statistical predictors. Who knows how many other people have it hotlinked (since it had been promoting a Kerry win for a while), and are just clicking Refresh to see what you've changed... That doesn't correllate with a malicious attempt to block usage of your website by hogging network resources in a denial of service style "attack"... besides, it's not like the information you're presenting is all that unique, it's just your opinion after all, an opinion shared by 48% of the voting public. And at the end of the day, he's seeing network load because he just doesn't have the monetary resources that a CNN or Yahoo does to throw another server or 6 up when under heavy usage...
But it doesn't matter anyways, since the content of the site isn't updating today with what we're learning of the polls... New Jersey for Kerry (as he predicted), Florida has gone Bush (which he didn't), which puts Bush as the winnner. His site still reads Kerry, which I'm not surprised, as he freely admits he's a Kerry supporter. We'll probably have it all sorted out in a few hours.
just some of the problems that went down today.
It won't be over at least a week if not longer. So long as it's decided by inauguration day, we'll be okay.
What?
There's a variety of reasons one could vote against the President. It's pretty apparent that Bush is relatively anti-science, anti-technology, and and anti-environment. I don't care about his campaign speeched, I'm talking about his actions over the course of four years. It's also clear that he failed with foreign policy and the economy. He pissed off almost all our allies and has failed to provide the necessary stimulants to improve the economy and unemployment. I don't think I need to quote the worldwide polls or the unemployment rates compared to past presidents. He sat on the assault weapons ban (Even if it was rather worthless) despite his campaign rhetoric of supporting an assault weapons ban.
Ultimately, I think most Americans believe that America should be better off than it is now and that they are not better off now than they were four years ago. Sadly, most Americans don't understand the concept and symbolism involved in voting against incumbent to signify their displeasure with the current state of the country. A vote for Kerry, no matter how similar his views may be, is still a vote for change and Americans seem to have decided that we don't need change.
Intelligence has not much to do with the above, though it can definitely help there. Can you imagine a wise person lacking intelligence though ?
The bad news for Kerry is that while majority of voters in the 18-25 age group voted for Kerry but that group also had the worst voter turn out as well. I guess getting drunk or playing games all night is more important than voting for their future.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
Last election I watched an exit poller. He had no method of randomly selecting people to poll as far as I could tell. The only pattern I could see is that he seemed to be more inclined to ask pretty young woman.
Conspiracy theories aside, I think it is just bad polling. Democrats are generally younger. Younger people are generally prettier and look more approachable. It might be a small effect, but do it a few thousand times and it adds up. I am not saying that it isn't worth looking into, but my gut guess would be that it is simply poor random selection.
Yup, do what the bully says, he might not beat you up and take your lunch money.
Kerry is down by 120,000 votes in Ohio, yet he still won't give it up. Anyone who has ever taken a statistics class will tell you that the probability of 120,000 of 175,000 votes going one way given that the sample of votes is split 50/50 is ZERO. And of course that doesn't take into account how many of these provisional ballots will even be accepted... a bunch of the provisional voters probably weren't even registered. Anyway, Kerry is finished.
Did anyone else think Edwards' "non-concession" speech was retarded?? He tried to pump up the crowd... but they knew it was over. Then he decided to dance around the stage giving thumbs up signs!!! LOL.
So the question now is how to remove him from office. Impeachment?
With both an electoral and Congressional majority that's hardly likely.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
The only problem there is this: we will never know for sure if Ohio was delivered to Bush by the voters ... or by Diebold Inc.
olls for kerry, hate america, more polls for kerry, F9/11, more pools for kerry, wrold thinks we dumb.
Result: Bush wins.
PS. Fok U World.
You are probably trolling but I was afraid this might happen as the world pushed harder and harder to influence the US to dump Bush, never expected him to get over 50% of the vote though.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
for ensuring 4 more years of George W. Bush. Yech!
Simple.
We're doomed.
Thomas-
And obviously there is no research benefit to delibrately linking the site to Slashdot over and over again.......
"We survived an unprecedented triple flash crowd and logged it all," writes Tanenbaum. "As it turns out, two of the faculty members in my department, Maarten van Steen and Guillaume Pierre, are doing research on coping with flash crowds. The research issues include how many replicas to set up, where to place them, how fast to deploy them, and how to do it automatically, in real time, and at minimum cost. To simulate proposed algorithms, you need data about real flash crowds and real attacks, preferably at the same time. And boy oh boy do we have data now."
According to CNN, your most important presidential were set on
- Will bring change 25% (Kerry voters)
- Clear Stand on Issue 17% (Bush voters)
- Strong Leader 17% (Bush voters)
- Honest/Trustworthy 11% (Bush voters! WTF?)
- Cares About People 9% (Kerry voters)
- Religious Faith 8% (Bush voters)
- Intelligent 7% (Kerry voters)
Bush voters strongly favored the following qualities in him according to vote percentage (in that order)- Religions faith, 91%
- Strong leader, 86%
- Clear stand on issue, 78%
- Honest/Trustworthy, 70%
Those who favored other qualities voted in majority for Kerry.In short, America voted for the Fuehrer, the only difference lies in Bush's religion (Methodist, if you believe CNN) and Hitler's "religion". Both were/are very devoted to their own belief. If Bush is honest and trustworthy, Hitler was a nice guy for a family picknick.
Welcome to our class of history repeating, ladies and gentlemen.
Todays topic: how Germany was converted to national-socialism without anyone noticing.
Strong charismatic leadership, stubbornness on any and all issues, strong beliefs in his own ideologic with a sharp division between us=good and them=evil made him popular. Followed by an invasion of other countries for the sake of own safety, profit and glory combined with a willingness in the population to be deceived made Hitler's fascist reality possible.
Thank you and have a nice day.
Tomorrows lesson: how mass internment and industrial genocide begun in Nazi Germany without anyone noticing.
All states demonstate some elemtents of facism, marxism etc. You have picked out a number of isolated and frankly insigifigant areas where your country conforms to Marxism.
I have studied the rise of Hitler in some detail. It parallels the current administration pretty closely. That should be a concern. A very big concern.
But I guess you are content in your viewpoint.
meh