Again, NO. The Secretary of State is ultimately responsible. Or did you think it was a coincidence that there is just one state run site that tells you where/when to vote and that all of the counties just happen to use the same voting machines, have the same workflow, and same requirements?
Simply wrong. The responsibility goes to the Secretary of State. Some of that is delegated to the counties, but like any delegation, the buck stops at the top. The counties do not handle voter registration though, and that is one of several controversies in Ga.
Yes, it is the judge's responsibility to set aside a guilty verdict if he sees that the jury got it wrong. Similarly, the Secretary of State is responsible to make sure the counties haven't screwed up the election process and to correct it if they have.
In the '60s, there was usually just one job to consider per family. In the '70s, there was one primary job and a secondary job that was fairly easy to replace or even do without for a bit. That made things a lot easier logistically.
Given the crazy amount of vendor tie-ins, it can be a hard problem. But in general, the only readily available answer is reject DRMed software whenever it's vaguely feasible to do so. Keep in mind that DRM means they have already decided you are a dirty crook before you've even paid for the software. Consider what that means for the chances at a cordial; business relationship.
"Rights management" software is intrinsically bad software.
Good software is designed in such a way that it runs if at all possible. If a file is missing and it can still do something useful, it still runs. If a permission is wrong, gives the user a chance to change it or save the file somewhere else. If a non-fatal error comes up, keep going. Where possible, re-try. If something isn't ready, sleep for a bit and try again.
Rights management is the opposite of that. It has failure on a hair trigger. It looks for the slightest excuse to fail if anything at all isn't exactly right. It checks for things that aren't necessary to run. It is by it's very nature BAD software.
Of course he wasn't actually there at the time, that's strictly amateur hour crap. He already purged the voter rolls based on demographics, made sure other demographics would have a harder time getting registered, closed polling places with unfavorable demographics to reduce turnout, etc. The manipulations happen in the days, weeks, and months before election day.
OH, and made sure Ga continued to use a system that leaves no paper trail where there have already been security and integrity concerns.
No, but the Secretary of State is responsible for making sure the entire process of voting does count all of the votes, records the votes securely, provides polling places accessible to everyone who wants to exercise their right to vote, etc. Also responsible for investigating any cases where the integrity of the election is questioned, before or after the fact.
Kinda like a judge isn't responsible for deciding guilt or innocence (that would be the jury) but is responsible for running the process the jury works within, and IS expected to self recuse where there may be a conflict of interest that might raise questions in anyone's mind.
A scribe wouldn't make that particular nag go away, since it would be a prescription order rather than just notes and complaints about a field not filled in. It would be one of the things the doctor would have to review and sign off on.
The problem is that since he is actually on the ballots in question, he has an intrinsic conflict of interest. He absolutely should have reused himself. Especially since the margin in that race is less than 1%.
In other words, they have no idea if the grand kg is too heavy or too light. They also don't know exactly how much too heavy or too light since the other references may also have gained or lost mass.
Sure, none of that suggests that resources wouldn't be better spent having a medical scribe deal with the filling in as it happens with the doctor signing off at the end of the visit.
Slashdot Mirror
Again, NO. The Secretary of State is ultimately responsible. Or did you think it was a coincidence that there is just one state run site that tells you where/when to vote and that all of the counties just happen to use the same voting machines, have the same workflow, and same requirements?
Same here.
Nothing to rip out, just install the wanted GUI and select it when logging in.
Simply wrong. The responsibility goes to the Secretary of State. Some of that is delegated to the counties, but like any delegation, the buck stops at the top. The counties do not handle voter registration though, and that is one of several controversies in Ga.
Yes, it is the judge's responsibility to set aside a guilty verdict if he sees that the jury got it wrong. Similarly, the Secretary of State is responsible to make sure the counties haven't screwed up the election process and to correct it if they have.
In the '60s, there was usually just one job to consider per family. In the '70s, there was one primary job and a secondary job that was fairly easy to replace or even do without for a bit. That made things a lot easier logistically.
Given the crazy amount of vendor tie-ins, it can be a hard problem. But in general, the only readily available answer is reject DRMed software whenever it's vaguely feasible to do so. Keep in mind that DRM means they have already decided you are a dirty crook before you've even paid for the software. Consider what that means for the chances at a cordial; business relationship.
"Rights management" software is intrinsically bad software.
Good software is designed in such a way that it runs if at all possible. If a file is missing and it can still do something useful, it still runs. If a permission is wrong, gives the user a chance to change it or save the file somewhere else. If a non-fatal error comes up, keep going. Where possible, re-try. If something isn't ready, sleep for a bit and try again.
Rights management is the opposite of that. It has failure on a hair trigger. It looks for the slightest excuse to fail if anything at all isn't exactly right. It checks for things that aren't necessary to run. It is by it's very nature BAD software.
Get out of the MS mindframe. In Linux, if you don't like the UI, choose another one.
Agreed about Gnome 3, that's why I don't use it.
Of course he wasn't actually there at the time, that's strictly amateur hour crap. He already purged the voter rolls based on demographics, made sure other demographics would have a harder time getting registered, closed polling places with unfavorable demographics to reduce turnout, etc. The manipulations happen in the days, weeks, and months before election day.
OH, and made sure Ga continued to use a system that leaves no paper trail where there have already been security and integrity concerns.
No, but the Secretary of State is responsible for making sure the entire process of voting does count all of the votes, records the votes securely, provides polling places accessible to everyone who wants to exercise their right to vote, etc. Also responsible for investigating any cases where the integrity of the election is questioned, before or after the fact.
Kinda like a judge isn't responsible for deciding guilt or innocence (that would be the jury) but is responsible for running the process the jury works within, and IS expected to self recuse where there may be a conflict of interest that might raise questions in anyone's mind.
A scribe wouldn't make that particular nag go away, since it would be a prescription order rather than just notes and complaints about a field not filled in. It would be one of the things the doctor would have to review and sign off on.
And yet they're not generally released in the form of an address list suitable for choosing homes to burglarize.
And FOIA is involved how? I was specifically addressing a claim that FOIA is somehow to blame.
The problem is that since he is actually on the ballots in question, he has an intrinsic conflict of interest. He absolutely should have reused himself. Especially since the margin in that race is less than 1%.
Don't blame FOIA. One, FOIA wasn't invoked. Two, it has exceptions for personal information of people who aren't public officials.
You do realize this was an attack specifically against people who did make the effort to vote, right?
In other words, they have no idea if the grand kg is too heavy or too light. They also don't know exactly how much too heavy or too light since the other references may also have gained or lost mass.
Probably not as expensive as having the doctor do the charting.
And in an instant, literally every recorded mass in the world is wrong.
Tiny, yes. Known direction, no.
Unfortunately, the reference kilograms and the master no longer agree.
Sure, none of that suggests that resources wouldn't be better spent having a medical scribe deal with the filling in as it happens with the doctor signing off at the end of the visit.
So Obama did do something in spite of lack of legislative support but Trump undid it?
No. Per Godwin, Godwin's law is suspended until the political climate changes.
Uptight stress ridden type a that nopes everything? NOPE!