Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

HBO's Hacking Democracy Available Online

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the it's-only-slander-if-it's-not-true dept.

prostoalex writes "HBO's controversial special 'Hacking Democracy' on issues with Diebold voting machines is now available in full on Google Video." Covered earlier on Slashdot, the documentary seems to have gathered quite a bit of heat from Diebold in addition to the one that didn't air.

7 of 350 comments (clear)

  1. No Talking! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Alright people, there should be no talking for 1 hr 21 min 57 secs after the post, or else you didn't WTFM!

  2. Re:It boggles my mind, it shouldn't by malsdavis · · Score: 4, Funny

    So if I keep telling myself that my software I write needs to make me money, it'll automatically make itself bug-free?

    Dammit! I have really been wasting a lot of time debugging software if all I needed was a little positive thinking!

  3. You'd be surprised by k12linux · · Score: 5, Funny

    You just go to your electronic voting machine and do a write-in vote for a candidate named:

    '; UPDATE votes SET type='W', name='Electronic voting is not ready yet'; :-)

  4. I hear that a live performance... by monopole · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is having a national release tomorrow! One day only!

  5. Weird Fact: Bozo is a compliment. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Funny

    "I stand behind the nation, not the bozo who happens to hang out at 1600 Pennsylvania."

    You called the President of the United States a bozo. For any other president, that would be disrespect. For George W. Bush, that is an improvement over what he is usually called, so I guess he can count you as one of his warmest friends.

    Check what comedians say about him: Funniest George W. Bush Comedy Videos. (I'm assuming that we can all agree that bozo is friendlier than "cretinous simpleton".)

    1. Re:Weird Fact: Bozo is a compliment. by Peyna · · Score: 3, Funny

      Bozo is not amused.

      --
      What?
  6. Re:Countdown by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Funny
    Proof of the complaint is moot. Certainly affirmative defenses need to be proven, they do not need to speak to the complaint however.


    Since this line of debate was started by your claim that there was no burden of proof with affirmative defenses, because proof was moot with them, your correction, while accurate, demonstrates that your original position was wrong.

    This has nothing to do with the legal framework under which the plaintiff has the burden of proof and retains that burden of proof if the case is to move forward.


    It has nothing to do with the burden of proof on the elemetns of the plaintiff's case, but it has everything to do with the burden of proof the defense has with regard to proving the elements of the affirmative defense.

    Deciding argument is now up to the judge, because you violated rule one.


    I think you are confused as to the context of this discussion. There is no judge.

    You had won.


    Well, we agree on that.

    By disputing that which had not been disputed you opened yourself to snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.


    Or, looked at a different way, I gave you an opportunity to either productively move the discussion forward, or make a fool out of yourself, and you chose the latter option.

    Did you know that you look extraordinarily like the judge's wife's lover?


    Ah. So your delusion about the mere existence of a judge is rather deeper than it initially appeared. Might I suggest you seek professional help with that?