Yes, he did. His VALID point was that the church made a decision that the negative PR was worse than prosecuting all of those boy loving priests.
His comparison is that just as the church fostered an environment where pedophile priests ran rampant, the state today is that of bad software running rampant.
All of the posts on this review have been about grammar, and other secondary topics.
Why can't you focus on the topic at hand - a way to deal with informationsecurity from a experienced pro.
who cares if there are grammer errors? Don't shoot the messenger!
Raj
You need help deciding if he liked the book?
Let's see, first off, he gave it a rating of 10.
Golly gee, he wrotes 'In an important new book Brave New Ballot:......'
Then he writes: Brave New Ballot is to e-voting what Rachel Carson's Silent Spring is to the global environmental movement. It is a vitally important book that details the problem of e-voting and what can be done in the future to make certain that it can one day be carried out in a secure manner
And then concludes: As Brave New Ballot shows, there is a lot of shame going around.
Did he really read it? Well, let's subpoena him and find out:)
Did he like the book? Well, golly gee, he used a lot of nice adjectives, so he did like it.
You folks want book reviews for dummies reviews. When you don't have it blasted in front of you, you start accusing the reviewers.
Wake up, this is not high school.
>>Nice to see that spellchecking is still not a priority though
I did not see any spelling mistakes. Care to point them out?
Re:Excessive Complexity for a Simple Solution
on
Brave New Ballot
·
· Score: 1
>>Why do we need a 272-page book to elaborate further?
Actually, to make your solution work, you would need a 2000 page reference.
Voting security takes a lot of design, dont underestimate it.
>>>There's nothing to indicate that he did read the book actually.
Give me a break! Should we have a note from his mommy stating he REALLY read it??
>>There is almost nothing even about the book at all. Its just the "reviewer"s opinions on the topic of electronic voting and the security and fraud issues surrounding it. Book reviews are not soap boxes, if you want to post journal entries do it in your journal, not in a book review.
This is/. We all pontificate.
It is obvious he read it.
It is obvious that this is a topic near to the guy.
It is obvious that the anonymous cowards are always quick to knock others.
Emphasis on the coward.
Re:Voter Fraud, it doesn't require Debold!
on
Brave New Ballot
·
· Score: 1
Yes, election fraud is a real concern.
The big, big problem with e-voting is that it makes it much easier to do on a large scale basis.
Some dumb NASCAR mom from South Carolina who has worked a lot of elections can likely detect a voting booth that has been tampered with.
But do you think she can detect the that the e-voting machine does not have the latest mircosoft patches? Or the C code is full of bugs?
The reviewer obviously read the book in detail and wrote about it, what is your problem?
Do you prefer that style or this style:
Book X is a (good/bad) book.
In chapter 1, bla bla bla.
In chapter 2, bla bla bla.
In chapter 3, bla bla bla.
In chapter 4, bla bla bla.
In chapter 5, bla bla bla.
The conclusion states bla bla bla.
Therefore, Book X is a (good/bad) book.
Re:Harris Miller is not a good representative
on
Brave New Ballot
·
· Score: 1
Miller ran for senate in Virginia a few months ago and.... LOST!:)
Slashdot Mirror
The review never stated that Microsoft was on a completely even playing field.
The main point is that IBM and others could have easily beaten MSFT. But they did not.
Yes MSFT had advantages. But those advantages alone did not give them their monopoly.
Having lived in England, I can tell you the the unions are powerful. The beaurocacy is immense.
Yes, this type of disaster is easily done.
Tbe English have no Proj. mgmt. skills and the contractors simply took advantage of this huge project no one reaaly understood or defined.
Yes, he did. His VALID point was that the church made a decision that the negative PR was worse than prosecuting all of those boy loving priests.
His comparison is that just as the church fostered an environment where pedophile priests ran rampant, the state today is that of bad software running rampant.
If that is what you want, check out Robert Slade's book reviews: http://victoria.tc.ca/int-grps/books/techrev/mnbk. htm
He hates all books! Well, almost all of them.
Excellent comment, thank you!!!! _
at least people are now focusing on the main idea.
What is your point? A minor typo? Get a frikkin life dude.
Who cares of then/than.
This is not an English class. Give the writers a break.
Such an error makes zero change.
Why are so many of the comments about grammar and other silly issues.
Stay focused on the main topic - how informationsecurity is important. this seems to be a good book to help people learn from the mistakes of others.
at least we agree that auditors are slime.
Raj
All of the posts on this review have been about grammar, and other secondary topics. Why can't you focus on the topic at hand - a way to deal with informationsecurity from a experienced pro. who cares if there are grammer errors? Don't shoot the messenger! Raj
All you can do is harp on a grammar mistake? You guys obviously missed the point.
====those who can, do... those who can't, teach... and those who can't teach, audit...
I LOVE THAT COMMENT!!!!!!
kewl! thnanx! _!
Hey dude, I was on that. I was patel5golf. you?
ross anderson's security engineering is a great book. it is a classic.
one of the 5 best info sec books ever.
from what I have seen of this book, u can't compare the two.
Oh my gosh, everyone loves this book. See new review at http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?com mand=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9003579&source=NLT _PM&nlid=8
Never, he would never do that. u know that!
>>The fact of the matter is that grant-to-grant academics don't understand engineering, because they've never really had to engineer anything
Even the heads of engineering departments???
You obvisouly have an ax to grind.
You need help deciding if he liked the book? Let's see, first off, he gave it a rating of 10. Golly gee, he wrotes 'In an important new book Brave New Ballot:......' Then he writes: Brave New Ballot is to e-voting what Rachel Carson's Silent Spring is to the global environmental movement. It is a vitally important book that details the problem of e-voting and what can be done in the future to make certain that it can one day be carried out in a secure manner And then concludes: As Brave New Ballot shows, there is a lot of shame going around. Did he really read it? Well, let's subpoena him and find out :)
Did he like the book? Well, golly gee, he used a lot of nice adjectives, so he did like it.
You folks want book reviews for dummies reviews. When you don't have it blasted in front of you, you start accusing the reviewers.
Wake up, this is not high school.
>>Nice to see that spellchecking is still not a priority though I did not see any spelling mistakes. Care to point them out?
>>Why do we need a 272-page book to elaborate further? Actually, to make your solution work, you would need a 2000 page reference. Voting security takes a lot of design, dont underestimate it.
>>>There's nothing to indicate that he did read the book actually. Give me a break! Should we have a note from his mommy stating he REALLY read it?? >>There is almost nothing even about the book at all. Its just the "reviewer"s opinions on the topic of electronic voting and the security and fraud issues surrounding it. Book reviews are not soap boxes, if you want to post journal entries do it in your journal, not in a book review. This is /. We all pontificate.
It is obvious he read it.
It is obvious that this is a topic near to the guy.
It is obvious that the anonymous cowards are always quick to knock others.
Emphasis on the coward.
Yes, election fraud is a real concern. The big, big problem with e-voting is that it makes it much easier to do on a large scale basis. Some dumb NASCAR mom from South Carolina who has worked a lot of elections can likely detect a voting booth that has been tampered with. But do you think she can detect the that the e-voting machine does not have the latest mircosoft patches? Or the C code is full of bugs?
The reviewer obviously read the book in detail and wrote about it, what is your problem? Do you prefer that style or this style: Book X is a (good/bad) book. In chapter 1, bla bla bla. In chapter 2, bla bla bla. In chapter 3, bla bla bla. In chapter 4, bla bla bla. In chapter 5, bla bla bla. The conclusion states bla bla bla. Therefore, Book X is a (good/bad) book.
Miller ran for senate in Virginia a few months ago and.... LOST! :)