On reading the article, the aspect that really caught my eye was the thread visualization. How I've longed for something like what's shown in the screenshots (and in the linked paper). The other two visualizations are interesting, but I'm ambivalent as to their utility. However, a mechanism for viewing only the most recent mail in a thread with a built in visualization to let me navigate to previous mails in the thread - that sounds really rather cool and useful.
Re: comments on IBM and the UI's they "own" (e.g. Lotus Notes). Keep in mind that IBM is rather a huge organization. Even if they don't necessarily have the best UIs in existence, their research departments do some novel and exciting work (viz IBM Alphaworks) in many areas.
The quote: "If voting could really change things, it would be illegal" from the message, is, in my opinion, poorly taken as significant. As the link shows, this is clearly a signature line - in which people put all sorts of things they find to be particularly "cute". I've seen countless emails from colleagues which include quotes that are quite deprecating of the business of their organizations - they're not meant to be taken seriously, but they do have _amusing_ relevance to most of the people who receive the emails (recall that this is an internal email to other Diebold employees).
To put any weight into a quotation which the author of the email included as an afterthought (if any thought was ever given to it after the sig file was first set up), and which was definitely never mean for public consumption, seems a waste.
There are serious issues raised by these memo's regarding Diebold's approach to the voting process. Focusing on this quote, however, simply occludes those issues.
It's only the acceleration sensing technology that this device shares with airbags.
In a vehicle, when the sensor detects sharp acceleration (60+ -> 0 in very little time), it triggers the explosive charge which deploys the airbag.
Here, a similar sensor is used to actuate a different operation - "parking" the drive.
Re:Check out Internet Mail 2000
on
Replacing SMTP?
·
· Score: 1
> But if everyone were to use Bayesian I swear > we wouldn't even have to propose a new > protocol, talk about new legislation, etc.
Wish that were true.... I've received a lot of spam recently that simply points one to a website:
e.g.
Hey Arun,
Take a look at www..com.
Cheers,
I've also received several variations on a theme. Given that I (and others I'm sure) often send out and receive notes which look VERY similar when I find an interesting site or tidbit on the web, it's unlikely that Bayesian filters will be good at picking these out.
I think you could safely do that without fear of criminal punishment. However, I don't know what the civil response might be - all those people (or even some small number of them) may choose to sue.
I have to agree with Katz here on most of the points he's raised. However, I don't think the argument is so much about what to do in this particular situation. I think many people would be agreeable to giving up many of their rights if it would help to identify those responsible for this particular act. However, as other respondents have pointed out, privacy rights and the like are not elements that are really in the forefront of the public eye. If laws/regulations are passed/eased in order to resolve this particular situation, without a careful examination of the duration of the new laws or easments, we could end up giving up those rights for far longer than we might desire.
The key point I take from Katz's note is that we need to avoid "knee-jerk" responses. Simply because a particular solution potentially deprives us of some protection with respect to civil rights does not mean that the overall level of safety or protection will not go up in the long run. It's just essential that we keep the long term in sight while attempting to resolve issues in the short term.
Slashdot Mirror
On reading the article, the aspect that really caught my eye was the thread visualization. How I've longed for something like what's shown in the screenshots (and in the linked paper). The other two visualizations are interesting, but I'm ambivalent as to their utility. However, a mechanism for viewing only the most recent mail in a thread with a built in visualization to let me navigate to previous mails in the thread - that sounds really rather cool and useful.
Re: comments on IBM and the UI's they "own" (e.g. Lotus Notes). Keep in mind that IBM is rather a huge organization. Even if they don't necessarily have the best UIs in existence, their research departments do some novel and exciting work (viz IBM Alphaworks) in many areas.
The quote: "If voting could really change things, it would be illegal" from the message, is, in my opinion, poorly taken as significant. As the link shows, this is clearly a signature line - in which people put all sorts of things they find to be particularly "cute". I've seen countless emails from colleagues which include quotes that are quite deprecating of the business of their organizations - they're not meant to be taken seriously, but they do have _amusing_ relevance to most of the people who receive the emails (recall that this is an internal email to other Diebold employees).
To put any weight into a quotation which the author of the email included as an afterthought (if any thought was ever given to it after the sig file was first set up), and which was definitely never mean for public consumption, seems a waste.
There are serious issues raised by these memo's regarding Diebold's approach to the voting process. Focusing on this quote, however, simply occludes those issues.
It's only the acceleration sensing technology that this device shares with airbags.
In a vehicle, when the sensor detects sharp acceleration (60+ -> 0 in very little time), it triggers the explosive charge which deploys the airbag.
Here, a similar sensor is used to actuate a different operation - "parking" the drive.
> But if everyone were to use Bayesian I swear
> we wouldn't even have to propose a new
> protocol, talk about new legislation, etc.
Wish that were true.... I've received a lot of spam recently that simply points one to a website:
e.g.
Hey Arun,
Take a look at www..com.
Cheers,
I've also received several variations on a theme. Given that I (and others I'm sure) often send out and receive notes which look VERY similar when I find an interesting site or tidbit on the web, it's unlikely that Bayesian filters will be good at picking these out.
I think you could safely do that without fear of criminal punishment. However, I don't know what the civil response might be - all those people (or even some small number of them) may choose to sue.
I have to agree with Katz here on most of the points he's raised. However, I don't think the argument is so much about what to do in this particular situation. I think many people would be agreeable to giving up many of their rights if it would help to identify those responsible for this particular act. However, as other respondents have pointed out, privacy rights and the like are not elements that are really in the forefront of the public eye. If laws/regulations are passed/eased in order to resolve this particular situation, without a careful examination of the duration of the new laws or easments, we could end up giving up those rights for far longer than we might desire.
The key point I take from Katz's note is that we need to avoid "knee-jerk" responses. Simply because a particular solution potentially deprives us of some protection with respect to civil rights does not mean that the overall level of safety or protection will not go up in the long run. It's just essential that we keep the long term in sight while attempting to resolve issues in the short term.