Well, at least they have started their education in not trusting authority, and learning that those in authority will lie to you.
Yes, because it is intelligent to distrust authorities to the point that you disregard danger. There is nothing wrong with a healthy dose of skepticism if authorities are laying down fascist laws. But willfully disregarding an evacuation is not a smart move.
I'll admit I have a very sick, slimy feeling defending the RIAA in this regard. Perhaps I should commit honorable Seppuku after this post.
Where they are(were?) located what they were doing WAS NOT ILLEGAL.
First of all, it was illegal where they were located. If I recall correctly, it was the methods used to seize the servers that led to problems. They seized, and did not give back, servers that were unrelated to the site. Perhaps a Swede lawyer can correct me on the finer points of the law there.
Second, an "Information is free" battle cry does not make distributing protected digital content gratis legal in any country. It isn't. The only difference is that many countries have protections against the draconian tactics that the RIAA employs.
The site was not offering anything illegal, nor were they providing anything illegal.
Hypothetically, I have toured and employed the site many times. It is well designed and easy to use. There are some nice indy projects on there; but the majority of the content my indigent friend, is illegal. It is the THE PIRATE BAY, and not in an ironic or misleading sort of way.
They had ALL THE MORAL GROUND there is
A starving man stealing bread has moral ground; a digital pirate does not. No one is a hero for downloading the latest movie without paying. But no one is a major threat to society for doing so either.
While I have sympathy for the distaste others might have for American legal exports, I gotta say that if you have the brass balls to call yourself "The Pirate Bay" and offer 95% illegal material...you probably don't have a lot of moral ground to stand on.
If our legal heft is threatening your iraqquagmire.co.uk website, then I think I'd feel the outrage a bit more.
Who wants a hard drive full of music/movies/books?
Many people do despite the illogic of it. Of my considerable book library at home, I may only re-read a fraction of the novels again. A smaller fraction of those books are read over and over again because they are favorites. Similar behavior surrounds any audio book, software package, or other thing I purchase.
Your suggestion attempts to rewrite our conception of ownership and property rights on consumer goods. Rentals have always served this niche of temporary ownership, but the larger balance of consumers prefer to posses unlimited rights to their property. Divx and related schemes failed for many reasons, but among them is that people didn't like property rights that are later revoked.
This is not to say that your method will not see adoption. Cell phone extras like ringtones often take this route. You get a background or ring for some trifle that gives you access for 90 days. I find nickel and dime practices like this annoying, but I also find leasing cars a bad practice while some people love it. I subscribe to Safari, which terminates my right to view their content if I drop the subscription.
There is space for your idea and similar propositions, but I hope there is always an outlet for persistent content.
The RIAA is a cure that is worse than the disease, piracy, that it fights. Frankly, I hope they do end up paying out the ass for their McLawsuit business model. That said, it always seems that arguing fairness on digital media is like arguing abortion: It is difficult to find middle ground, let alone win, an argument with a true believer.
My own stance is often conflicted on digital media. I've never deluded myself into thinking I'm striking a blow for justice by downloading a game, software, song, show, etc. gratis. But the often clumsy DRM does sometimes make me regret a legitimate purchase. With BT games, I can take my machine to a LAN party without bringing a single disc. With a legitimate game, I'd either have to bring the discs or patch it as if I had obtained an illegal copy. Hell, I wanted a few songs right away to exercise with, so I downloaded the MSN service and bought a few bucks worth of songs: Easy as pie...until I restore my system, or until MSN folded into URGE without properly supporting legacy customers.
Even this far into the Internet age we still haven't developed proper analogues to physical media. You can loan a book to a friend; the only DRM is the security sticker removed at the store. How do you easily loan an audio book to a friend, without making it easy to endlessly provide perfect copies? The business model needs updating, but to what? As it stands, we are buying encrypted paper books that can only be read with a cipher key licensed to an individual.
But even that metaphor breaks down easily, since paper books employ near-universal formats that anyone literate in the language can read. Since the format is interpreted by the human mind, not a computer, any irregularities in the format (i.e. manga style graphic novels) can be adapted on the fly. We don't have to consider if a book comes in.doc,.avi,.mp3, or other format and choose the correct interpreter in addition to the language barrier.
Ease of use is key to adoption, but what is the balance between business and consumer? Is it fair that iTunes limits players or is it fair to demand that iTunes support an open format? Damned if I know the answer.
The Prius was never for real environmentalists anyway. It's for lazy yuppies who want to put out an environmentally conscious image. Real environmentalists live close to work, bike, or take the bus.
Please don't forget cheap bastards like me that want a tax break and fewer stops to the Gas station.
True and witness the recent post on Penny Arcade. You have everyone on the planet buying an iPod, but one of the dynamic duo buys a Zune. One influence was a horrible experience with a Nano. But a minority of failures doesn't mean consumers are going to flock to the Zune.
Sony's battery failure started a few fires; but most people just got a fresh free battery out of the mess. And the rootkit is off most consumer's radar. Sony may be proprietary, but in general they are well known and trusted. Hey, if Microsoft can stumble so often and recover in their core business...it's not so shocking that Sony can too.
That doesn't give them a win in the console war, but it means that launch problems are not the death knell.
Despite the bad press and some very questionable marketing and business choices (Rootkit, batteries, betamax, et. al.) they remain a very reliable brand for most products. I have a DVD+R drive I purchased back when they first came out from Sony and it's still going strong. Likewise, I have a DVD player, subwoofer, and PS2 from them. Only the PS2 started to glitch after 5 years, and I cleaned that up by adjusting the laser level and cleaning off the lens.
My 34" XBR TV got top notch reviews from Consumer Reports and unlike most companies, it has a 24 month warranty. Although I didn't go with the extended warranty, a 5 year coverage is $99 and covers shipping. That's far from the anal rape most stores charge.
Of course, that's my experience. You get a few sour ones like a replaced battery or a DOA PS2 and you might have a different opinion. What I can't deny is that they need to hire a marketing department worthy of the name. And declare that Sony BMI is dead to them.
Got it in one, though sadly I did not get the points when I said it myself. Maybe I'll have better luck in the next Sony thread when I tell everyone that The PS3 is the best system evar!
Good for you, I'm a republican myself too. But talk about mixed metaphors, Hippys generally don't like to be told what to do and good communist think what the central committee tells them what to think
Congrats and yes, I'm aware of the difference between many competing social philosophies. Personally, I favor fascism though. Republicans are too soft.
My previous post was a small nugget of personal belief wrapped in a thick layer of juicy humorous hyperbole. If that humor was stupid so be it, but I didn't really intend for it to be taken seriously. Ease up, it's an OS not the fate of the free world.
"Meanwhile Wal-mart now refuses to carry any games with too extreme of a rating, effectively brow-beating the game authors into self-censorship if they want to have any hope of enough sales to recoup their investment."
Isn't that how censorship is supposed to work in a free society? Rather than the angry fist of government, you have the soft hand of coercion. I mean Wal-Mart is not barring the extreme ratings to be a shining moral example; they do it because their customers want family friendly content. Want your Killer Rapist V game? Go to an adult bookstore. Yeah, it'll be a crappy game with little budget, but them's the breaks.
Jack Thompson is a douche, but that doesn't mean that society can't moderate it's view of acceptable behavior. I suppose you could sue Wal-mart to offer Anal Sluts IV, but somehow that doesn't seem as solid a right as the proper access to vital medicine. Like it or not, free speech earns you the right to be a dick, it doesn't earn you the right to sell products that the community at large deems inappropriate.
Frankly, I don't believe that Grand Theft Auto causes crazy gunmen, but I think it is proper to retrench and consider what is necessary for a good game. I'd rather not see O.J's "How I did it" end up as a Take Two interactive game.
Why? Well first of all I'm a masochist: TMI I know. But they suckered me in with the free year long trial of Vista RC1. It's shiny, pretty, and unfinished but it's more than usable.
Plus, I like to experiment with the new features and see what's under the hood. Switch to Gentoo you say? I could, but then I'd have to get my hands gooey at levels that I'd rather remain a mystery (the kernel should remain distant, angry, and invisible like a God).
I'm Microsoft's ideal early adopter: Easily impressed and willing to try new things along pre-arranged paths. Yeah, Apple did most of it before them and others before Apple...but I'm not a communist and don't believe in that hippy crap. Like Sony and consoles, the next generation doesn't arrive until the biggest behemoth in the industry says so. Finally clarity is brought to my world.®
They've voided our bedrock right to habeus corpus, which means they can arrest you for anything and hold you indefinitely just on their say-so.
You are remarkably free and not dead for someone so opinionated in a totalitarian regime. The good points you make are being buried beneath an avalanche of bravado and wanna-be warrior talk.
I believe the shopper's right to get to the Disney Store on 5th avenue is covered under the "pursuit of happiness" clause of the Constitution. If you're object is to voice your opinion and peaceably assemble then you can exercise your rights with a little forethought without bothering other people. Irritating the "sheep" by blocking their way is not necessarily a constitutional right. Expect resistance if that is your intent and need.
I don't really think this device is intended for normal crowd control. It seems more effective in situations where control has been lost and the alternative might be lethal force.
If a crowd tries to overwhelm a convoy, would it be better to use a device like this to convince them it's a bad idea? Or would it be better to add to the body count? The memory of pain can ease with time, but it's harder to bring the dead back to life. Non-lethal weapons are not necessarily good alternatives, but except in rare cases they earn their name for being non-lethal. Yeah, they can be overused because the devices aren't fatal, but at least the victims are around to complain.
As for torture...
Hell, my details are sketchy on the utility of the device, but anything can be perverted into a torture device. Men were torturing without leaving outward marks long before this device was a gleam in the inventor's eye. There are groups watching US actions like hawks; if soldiers start joy buzzing random people or using it to gain information I'll wager you hear about it quickly.
Finally, if the device is used while you and your fellow "patriots" are assembling peaceably then I'll have a fight with the system as well. But if your automatic weapon toting militia is trying to drown the tree of liberty in blood...well I might be less inclined to believe you are exercising your "rights". Take that action without just cause and you may find "The Man" is the least of your opposition.
Infidel, you have signed your death warrant with your disrespect of our proud interface traditions. You gamepad people are all alike in your arrogance and shameful teabagging Halo ways. You brag of superiority while auto-aim decadence erodes your skills. Your heathen controls corrupt our young and lead them away from the instruments of our forefathers.
Keyboard and Mouse are forever, peace be upon them.
I'm a Sony whore turning cheap tricks to make my Final Fantasy come true; however, I can't make myself descend to the Craigslist level and debase myself for launch day.
Wait few months and you'll be able to get it without humiliating yourself. Plus, if the console does break, there might be a chance in 7 hells you'll be able to get a replacement.
Why in seven hells would anyone buy an IBM Personal System 2? I wouldn't wait even a minute for it, let alone pay someone for that antiquated piece of crap.
Pfft! As a Sony fanboy I can declare that this particular slander is unjustified. The Xbox has, what, 180 something watts to cook with? Might as well use an easy bake oven nancy-boy!
The PS3 has 380 Watts of pure power to sear delicious hunks of meat. If you're civic minded, you can load up folding@home to generate the needed power. Thus, you have your steak and cure cancer too.
The difference is that we can go back and check the count against the physical votes cast with paper ballots. A computer only system doesn't let me check the count against anything.
True, I just dislike the cry of "paper ballots" as if that alone was enough to ensure 100% fair elections. In my own county, we use Scantron election systems; a combination of electronic tabulation with a paper trail. Maybe the Scantron corporation is missing a vast PR coup by introducing this revolutionary technology to the entire nation.
The problem with paperless voting machines is that fewer people can possibly commit fraud with a finer degree of control. So demand a better machine or a better system. But don't give me a cry for "paper ballots" like they will solve problems by themselves.
I totally agree with this poster and cannot imagine why he was modded as redundant. I feel the slight as if it were my own post.
Or better yet, have a hybrid system that has an electronic tally back up to verify against the paper system. But the unordered system isn't necessary I think. Someone on a different site said that they were more worried about the accuracy of the system rather than the privacy of it. If we're at a state where retaliation for voting is likely, then we have more serious problems then voting integrity.
Not that having a modicum of privacy isn't important, but the priority is lower than ensuring that vote counts are correct.
Paper ballots... you can count them... You can check them, you can verify them.
Have you ever read your history? The Democrat bosses in the Kansas City Organization, Chicago, and elsewhere voted multiple times, stuffed ballot boxes, etc. Do you even remember the whole chad debacle? I'm not just pointing fingers at the Democrats; they're just the first historical example to come to mind.
Paper ballots are not some magical shield against cheating and I wish proponents wouldn't chant "paper ballots" like it would solve everything. You either have a human point of failure counting the ballots, or an e-machine doing the vote tallies from a paper source which doesn't gain you much. Recounts can be tampered with too.
The problem with paperless voting machines is that fewer people can possibly commit fraud with a finer degree of control. So demand a better machine or a better system. But don't give me a cry for "paper ballots" like they will solve problems by themselves.
I don't. Google has shown time and again that their motto should truly be "Do no illegal activities" rather then "Do no evil."
Perhaps, but what is the evil in this case for either side? I think you're demeaning the definition of evil by placing mild censorship with, I dunno, say murder. Google hasn't yet directly or indirectly made use of a sweat shop as far as I know. They have not traded in slaves or assisted in arresting political activists like Yahoo.
Censorship can be a "slippery slop", but so is everything in life. Determining the balance is the charge of free societies. We permit Nazi sympathizers to speak their peace, but Germany does not. Many EU nations consider our decency policies absurd, but restrict their population in other ways.
Google may prove itself yet another standard corporation in time, as they all do eventually. But for now, I don't think working with the legal system in this case is caving in to evil.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, at least they have started their education in not trusting authority, and learning that those in authority will lie to you.
Yes, because it is intelligent to distrust authorities to the point that you disregard danger. There is nothing wrong with a healthy dose of skepticism if authorities are laying down fascist laws. But willfully disregarding an evacuation is not a smart move.
I'll admit I have a very sick, slimy feeling defending the RIAA in this regard. Perhaps I should commit honorable Seppuku after this post.
Where they are(were?) located what they were doing WAS NOT ILLEGAL.
First of all, it was illegal where they were located. If I recall correctly, it was the methods used to seize the servers that led to problems. They seized, and did not give back, servers that were unrelated to the site. Perhaps a Swede lawyer can correct me on the finer points of the law there.
Second, an "Information is free" battle cry does not make distributing protected digital content gratis legal in any country. It isn't. The only difference is that many countries have protections against the draconian tactics that the RIAA employs.
The site was not offering anything illegal, nor were they providing anything illegal.
Hypothetically, I have toured and employed the site many times. It is well designed and easy to use. There are some nice indy projects on there; but the majority of the content my indigent friend, is illegal. It is the THE PIRATE BAY, and not in an ironic or misleading sort of way.
They had ALL THE MORAL GROUND there is
A starving man stealing bread has moral ground; a digital pirate does not. No one is a hero for downloading the latest movie without paying. But no one is a major threat to society for doing so either.
Pirate Bay, anyone?
While I have sympathy for the distaste others might have for American legal exports, I gotta say that if you have the brass balls to call yourself "The Pirate Bay" and offer 95% illegal material...you probably don't have a lot of moral ground to stand on.
If our legal heft is threatening your iraqquagmire.co.uk website, then I think I'd feel the outrage a bit more.
Who wants a hard drive full of music/movies/books?
Many people do despite the illogic of it. Of my considerable book library at home, I may only re-read a fraction of the novels again. A smaller fraction of those books are read over and over again because they are favorites. Similar behavior surrounds any audio book, software package, or other thing I purchase.
Your suggestion attempts to rewrite our conception of ownership and property rights on consumer goods. Rentals have always served this niche of temporary ownership, but the larger balance of consumers prefer to posses unlimited rights to their property. Divx and related schemes failed for many reasons, but among them is that people didn't like property rights that are later revoked.
This is not to say that your method will not see adoption. Cell phone extras like ringtones often take this route. You get a background or ring for some trifle that gives you access for 90 days. I find nickel and dime practices like this annoying, but I also find leasing cars a bad practice while some people love it. I subscribe to Safari, which terminates my right to view their content if I drop the subscription.
There is space for your idea and similar propositions, but I hope there is always an outlet for persistent content.
The RIAA is a cure that is worse than the disease, piracy, that it fights. Frankly, I hope they do end up paying out the ass for their McLawsuit business model. That said, it always seems that arguing fairness on digital media is like arguing abortion: It is difficult to find middle ground, let alone win, an argument with a true believer.
.doc, .avi, .mp3, or other format and choose the correct interpreter in addition to the language barrier.
My own stance is often conflicted on digital media. I've never deluded myself into thinking I'm striking a blow for justice by downloading a game, software, song, show, etc. gratis. But the often clumsy DRM does sometimes make me regret a legitimate purchase. With BT games, I can take my machine to a LAN party without bringing a single disc. With a legitimate game, I'd either have to bring the discs or patch it as if I had obtained an illegal copy. Hell, I wanted a few songs right away to exercise with, so I downloaded the MSN service and bought a few bucks worth of songs: Easy as pie...until I restore my system, or until MSN folded into URGE without properly supporting legacy customers.
Even this far into the Internet age we still haven't developed proper analogues to physical media. You can loan a book to a friend; the only DRM is the security sticker removed at the store. How do you easily loan an audio book to a friend, without making it easy to endlessly provide perfect copies? The business model needs updating, but to what? As it stands, we are buying encrypted paper books that can only be read with a cipher key licensed to an individual.
But even that metaphor breaks down easily, since paper books employ near-universal formats that anyone literate in the language can read. Since the format is interpreted by the human mind, not a computer, any irregularities in the format (i.e. manga style graphic novels) can be adapted on the fly. We don't have to consider if a book comes in
Ease of use is key to adoption, but what is the balance between business and consumer? Is it fair that iTunes limits players or is it fair to demand that iTunes support an open format? Damned if I know the answer.
The Prius was never for real environmentalists anyway. It's for lazy yuppies who want to put out an environmentally conscious image. Real environmentalists live close to work, bike, or take the bus.
Please don't forget cheap bastards like me that want a tax break and fewer stops to the Gas station.
True and witness the recent post on Penny Arcade. You have everyone on the planet buying an iPod, but one of the dynamic duo buys a Zune. One influence was a horrible experience with a Nano. But a minority of failures doesn't mean consumers are going to flock to the Zune.
Sony's battery failure started a few fires; but most people just got a fresh free battery out of the mess. And the rootkit is off most consumer's radar. Sony may be proprietary, but in general they are well known and trusted. Hey, if Microsoft can stumble so often and recover in their core business...it's not so shocking that Sony can too.
That doesn't give them a win in the console war, but it means that launch problems are not the death knell.
Despite the bad press and some very questionable marketing and business choices (Rootkit, batteries, betamax, et. al.) they remain a very reliable brand for most products. I have a DVD+R drive I purchased back when they first came out from Sony and it's still going strong. Likewise, I have a DVD player, subwoofer, and PS2 from them. Only the PS2 started to glitch after 5 years, and I cleaned that up by adjusting the laser level and cleaning off the lens.
My 34" XBR TV got top notch reviews from Consumer Reports and unlike most companies, it has a 24 month warranty. Although I didn't go with the extended warranty, a 5 year coverage is $99 and covers shipping. That's far from the anal rape most stores charge.
Of course, that's my experience. You get a few sour ones like a replaced battery or a DOA PS2 and you might have a different opinion. What I can't deny is that they need to hire a marketing department worthy of the name. And declare that Sony BMI is dead to them.
Got it in one, though sadly I did not get the points when I said it myself. Maybe I'll have better luck in the next Sony thread when I tell everyone that The PS3 is the best system evar!
Good for you, I'm a republican myself too. But talk about mixed metaphors, Hippys generally don't like to be told what to do and good communist think what the central committee tells them what to think
Congrats and yes, I'm aware of the difference between many competing social philosophies. Personally, I favor fascism though. Republicans are too soft.
My previous post was a small nugget of personal belief wrapped in a thick layer of juicy humorous hyperbole. If that humor was stupid so be it, but I didn't really intend for it to be taken seriously. Ease up, it's an OS not the fate of the free world.
"Meanwhile Wal-mart now refuses to carry any games with too extreme of a rating, effectively brow-beating the game authors into self-censorship if they want to have any hope of enough sales to recoup their investment."
Isn't that how censorship is supposed to work in a free society? Rather than the angry fist of government, you have the soft hand of coercion. I mean Wal-Mart is not barring the extreme ratings to be a shining moral example; they do it because their customers want family friendly content. Want your Killer Rapist V game? Go to an adult bookstore. Yeah, it'll be a crappy game with little budget, but them's the breaks.
Jack Thompson is a douche, but that doesn't mean that society can't moderate it's view of acceptable behavior. I suppose you could sue Wal-mart to offer Anal Sluts IV, but somehow that doesn't seem as solid a right as the proper access to vital medicine. Like it or not, free speech earns you the right to be a dick, it doesn't earn you the right to sell products that the community at large deems inappropriate.
Frankly, I don't believe that Grand Theft Auto causes crazy gunmen, but I think it is proper to retrench and consider what is necessary for a good game. I'd rather not see O.J's "How I did it" end up as a Take Two interactive game.
Why? Well first of all I'm a masochist: TMI I know. But they suckered me in with the free year long trial of Vista RC1. It's shiny, pretty, and unfinished but it's more than usable.
Plus, I like to experiment with the new features and see what's under the hood. Switch to Gentoo you say? I could, but then I'd have to get my hands gooey at levels that I'd rather remain a mystery (the kernel should remain distant, angry, and invisible like a God).
I'm Microsoft's ideal early adopter: Easily impressed and willing to try new things along pre-arranged paths. Yeah, Apple did most of it before them and others before Apple...but I'm not a communist and don't believe in that hippy crap. Like Sony and consoles, the next generation doesn't arrive until the biggest behemoth in the industry says so. Finally clarity is brought to my world.®
Where the denizens are supporting Microsoft against an implementation of Linux.
They've voided our bedrock right to habeus corpus, which means they can arrest you for anything and hold you indefinitely just on their say-so.
You are remarkably free and not dead for someone so opinionated in a totalitarian regime. The good points you make are being buried beneath an avalanche of bravado and wanna-be warrior talk.
I believe the shopper's right to get to the Disney Store on 5th avenue is covered under the "pursuit of happiness" clause of the Constitution. If you're object is to voice your opinion and peaceably assemble then you can exercise your rights with a little forethought without bothering other people. Irritating the "sheep" by blocking their way is not necessarily a constitutional right. Expect resistance if that is your intent and need.
I don't really think this device is intended for normal crowd control. It seems more effective in situations where control has been lost and the alternative might be lethal force.
If a crowd tries to overwhelm a convoy, would it be better to use a device like this to convince them it's a bad idea? Or would it be better to add to the body count? The memory of pain can ease with time, but it's harder to bring the dead back to life.
Non-lethal weapons are not necessarily good alternatives, but except in rare cases they earn their name for being non-lethal. Yeah, they can be overused because the devices aren't fatal, but at least the victims are around to complain.
As for torture...
Hell, my details are sketchy on the utility of the device, but anything can be perverted into a torture device. Men were torturing without leaving outward marks long before this device was a gleam in the inventor's eye. There are groups watching US actions like hawks; if soldiers start joy buzzing random people or using it to gain information I'll wager you hear about it quickly.
Finally, if the device is used while you and your fellow "patriots" are assembling peaceably then I'll have a fight with the system as well. But if your automatic weapon toting militia is trying to drown the tree of liberty in blood...well I might be less inclined to believe you are exercising your "rights". Take that action without just cause and you may find "The Man" is the least of your opposition.
KB+M jihadists that are running around, either
Infidel, you have signed your death warrant with your disrespect of our proud interface traditions. You gamepad people are all alike in your arrogance and shameful teabagging Halo ways. You brag of superiority while auto-aim decadence erodes your skills. Your heathen controls corrupt our young and lead them away from the instruments of our forefathers.
Keyboard and Mouse are forever, peace be upon them.
I'm a Sony whore turning cheap tricks to make my Final Fantasy come true; however, I can't make myself descend to the Craigslist level and debase myself for launch day.
Wait few months and you'll be able to get it without humiliating yourself. Plus, if the console does break, there might be a chance in 7 hells you'll be able to get a replacement.
or five or even ten minutes to get a PS/2
Why in seven hells would anyone buy an IBM Personal System 2? I wouldn't wait even a minute for it, let alone pay someone for that antiquated piece of crap.
There is nothing you are not willing to do when you feel the force. Star Wars, PS3, or Tickle Me Elmo, obsession cares not.
Pfft! As a Sony fanboy I can declare that this particular slander is unjustified. The Xbox has, what, 180 something watts to cook with? Might as well use an easy bake oven nancy-boy!
The PS3 has 380 Watts of pure power to sear delicious hunks of meat. If you're civic minded, you can load up folding@home to generate the needed power. Thus, you have your steak and cure cancer too.
The difference is that we can go back and check the count against the physical votes cast with paper ballots. A computer only system doesn't let me check the count against anything.
True, I just dislike the cry of "paper ballots" as if that alone was enough to ensure 100% fair elections. In my own county, we use Scantron election systems; a combination of electronic tabulation with a paper trail. Maybe the Scantron corporation is missing a vast PR coup by introducing this revolutionary technology to the entire nation.
The problem with paperless voting machines is that fewer people can possibly commit fraud with a finer degree of control. So demand a better machine or a better system. But don't give me a cry for "paper ballots" like they will solve problems by themselves.
I totally agree with this poster and cannot imagine why he was modded as redundant. I feel the slight as if it were my own post.
Or better yet, have a hybrid system that has an electronic tally back up to verify against the paper system. But the unordered system isn't necessary I think. Someone on a different site said that they were more worried about the accuracy of the system rather than the privacy of it. If we're at a state where retaliation for voting is likely, then we have more serious problems then voting integrity.
Not that having a modicum of privacy isn't important, but the priority is lower than ensuring that vote counts are correct.
Paper ballots... you can count them... You can check them, you can verify them.
Have you ever read your history? The Democrat bosses in the Kansas City Organization, Chicago, and elsewhere voted multiple times, stuffed ballot boxes, etc. Do you even remember the whole chad debacle? I'm not just pointing fingers at the Democrats; they're just the first historical example to come to mind.
Paper ballots are not some magical shield against cheating and I wish proponents wouldn't chant "paper ballots" like it would solve everything. You either have a human point of failure counting the ballots, or an e-machine doing the vote tallies from a paper source which doesn't gain you much. Recounts can be tampered with too.
The problem with paperless voting machines is that fewer people can possibly commit fraud with a finer degree of control. So demand a better machine or a better system. But don't give me a cry for "paper ballots" like they will solve problems by themselves.
I don't. Google has shown time and again that their motto should truly be "Do no illegal activities" rather then "Do no evil."
Perhaps, but what is the evil in this case for either side? I think you're demeaning the definition of evil by placing mild censorship with, I dunno, say murder. Google hasn't yet directly or indirectly made use of a sweat shop as far as I know. They have not traded in slaves or assisted in arresting political activists like Yahoo.
Censorship can be a "slippery slop", but so is everything in life. Determining the balance is the charge of free societies. We permit Nazi sympathizers to speak their peace, but Germany does not. Many EU nations consider our decency policies absurd, but restrict their population in other ways.
Google may prove itself yet another standard corporation in time, as they all do eventually. But for now, I don't think working with the legal system in this case is caving in to evil.