This would also elminate missing a short light becaus the person in front of you isn't paying attention. As well as traffic jams caused by the wave phenomenon and gawkera of accidents.
That would be the weakest link in the chain - having a bar code. I suppose that, given the current level of OCR and a nice, clean, font that's known ahead of the time by the machine doing the scanning, there really is no reason to have a bar code unless the OCR slows down recounts or processing significantly. Still, unlike the current system, there would be a clear and easy way to do verification and mandated spot checks would be more than enough to root out statistical anomalies in the machine.
I think there are certain time-tested givens that are needed for fair elections. There is no reason to bring any receipt out of the voting area. Any generated chit should go into a locked box. This doesn't insure your vote is counted correctly, but my idea of a punched ballot that is both human and machine readable does ensure that your vote is as you intended when you place it in the box. The rest is common sense verification systems. At least with a paper trail, verification is possible. Otherwise it is a black box.
Norden said so far the machine in the Bronx was the only machine found to have this problem, but itâ(TM)s also the only machine thatâ(TM)s been tested.
First, I have to say that it is stunning that we can have ATM's that are largely error-free, but can't design a simple tabulation and reporting system.
But, here is the solution. You don't rely on computer-collected data. You cross-check. Here's how:
My proposal uses the computer terminal only as a means to record the vote on paper. There are definitely benefits to having an electronic front end on the voting process - maybe we can all agree on that - assuming that the front end is extremely simple and obvious to all users.
In my world, you get your official ballot from the check-in people and insert it into the machine. You cast your vote and the machine prints both a machine readable code and the human-readable results of your voting on the one ballot. You remove your ballot and the machine dumps its memory. You place your ballot in the locked ballot box - just as we always have. The ballots are ran through some very basic ( and open source ) optical scanner and the results posted.
What this solves:
Has the benefit of an electronic screen with big, bright, reprogrammable choices in the required languages etc.
The voter verifies that their ballot is correct before they put it in the box.
A certain percentage of the ballots chosen randomly can and should be regularly hand-counted to insure accurate optical scanning. This and larger hand counts are easy because the ballots are easily read by humans and machine alike.
Very difficult to hack the system as optical scanners are open source and easily cross-checked for accuracy by people on the scene and by random or court-ordered recounts.
No danger of any centralized computer failure
A verifiable record of results
No hanging chads
Why can we not do this? Is it because people in power want a way to cheat? This isn't rocket science.
Fight what the police and corporations can do with it. That's the problem.
This assumes transparency and honesty on the part of these entities. I think many in law enforcement are honest and decent and many are not. I also note that law enforcement is hostile to transparency - witness the uproar about citizens videotaping police.
There are definitely people who see the sinister in everything, but the government has a terrible track record lately with things that require warrants. It also speaks toa larger point about electronics, privacy and law enforcement. There will be a million things that can be done to monitor and control the populace as technology gets more and more advanced. Should we do them? Law enforcement and law makers sees it as a case of better tools to do the job they are tasked to do. Joe six pack approves it because it fights the bad guys. Who sill set the limits?
A good start would be a substantial escalation in R&D funding of a wide range of technologies such as safe nuclear generation and storage, battery technology - both at the transportation and grid level, solar, biofuel - using non-food sources that can be grown like algae, flywheels, smart grids, hydrogen, fuel cells, fusion you name it. This would create economic growth in much the same way that the government-funded creation of highways, space travel and the Internet did. However, while we seem OK with throwing a couple of trillions of dollars down the toilet conquering the middle east and giving tax breaks to millionaires, this kind of government spending is anathema in today's "conservative" climate.
Of course, large scale droughts, flooding, etc. in food-producing areas of the world does threaten our survival. But, hey, I trust BP and Exxon-funded scientists to tell me the truth because they seem so calm and reasonable next to those whacko environmentalists who are screaming about some crisis.
"If I were a government official making plans I would plan for 3 scenarios. It gets warmer, it gets colder, it stays the same."
In all three of these scenarios, weaning ourselves off of our addiction to fossil fuels makes sense. They pollute ( in many more ways than Co2), they put tons of money into the hands of middle eastern thugs, and they are running out anyway.
But isn't entanglement itself a known reality? Haven't they shown that two entangled particles are in sync - that one particle reflects the state of another instantly? So, doesn't that imply that the information IS traveling faster than the speed of light? Doesn't the information about the state of the particle that changes have to travel to the other particle?
I am aware that probably behind the scenes distance is an illusion in this case and the two particles are just one. But, what is to stop us from changing the state of the particle at one end and observing the change in the particle at the other? I probably don't really have a grasp on the subject...
I think there is a place for both. Human communication isn't just about effieciency. I enjoyed larning a little about this guy, picking up some context, hearing his humor and inflections etc. It's not just about rapid information transfer.
Except for the fact that Apple was a 20lb monkey 10 years ago and only became an 800lb gorilla because of great products, great execution and the free market.
I agree with this sentiment and the response saying that any meaningful investment in the region would also have generated more returns.
I think the number is waay above 500 billion. I don't have time to google the citations, but various credible parties have pegged the number well above a trillion and that doesn't even take into account the long term costs associated with disabilities, missed opportunities, ill will towards the US, interest on the trillion we borrowed to conduct the war, bad karma, etc.
And, no, I am not a delusional hippy or a communist, I am just smart - something we have not been as a country lately.
2) They have a cult of fanboys who would literally buy anything with the Apple logo on it and those people then pressure other people to get Apple products to "be cool".
I keep hearing this, but it is not borne out by reality. There would have to be an awfully large number of cult fanboys to sustain the kind of numbers Apple is posting. At what number do cult fanboys turn into satisfied customers?
I'm all for hemp, but what's the big deal about allowing THC-producing plants as well? Hell, that would solve even more problems while we are at it - like shifting people away from the twin killers of alcohol and tobacco and making people a little less violent and a lot less consumeristic - not to mention more contemplative. Furthermore, we could pump all that wasted DEA money into agricultural, space and energy research - not to mention that we would take away a key wedge that the government uses to invade our privacy and control us.
No, his logic was that it would suck the battery and resources out of the iPads and provide a bad touch experience - both of which would have reflected poorly on the product and on Apple had the customers installed it.
The public is not really tech savvy and would have installed it on their IOS devices and blamed Apple for the resulting security, usability, and performance degradations. Developers wouldn't have had a reason to use HTML5 and Adobe wouldn't have caved and thrown in with HTML5. Seems pretty logical to me. Choices like not using Flash are what made the iPad so useable and so different from all the other tablets that didn't sell worth a shit.
Also, let us not forget that, for all that time people bitched about Apple not having Flash, it was not available even for Android anyway. There was no product.
As many people will point out here, this is not Apple's original technology, they weren't the first to do it, there will be use cases where it won't work, you can do it much more cheaply and non-walled-garden-y with a rooted Nexus GTi Turbo running cyanogen, Apple steals everything, they're an evil empire tracking your every move and other such tiresome memes etc etc,
Thank You. Nicely put. I come to Slashdot because I dig technology and user interface issues - I dig them when they are done by MS, Linux, or Apple. This hatred of Apple is tiresome. How you can look at something like Siri and not be excited is beyond me.
Why does it have to be either or? People get so worried that everything is changing. It has been one way for ages and now there are other ways. I agree that it is cool, useful and necessary to have your apps all on screen and available, but there are definitely times when it is nice to have the option to work full screen - video editing, for example - something where you are engrossed in one thing and you don't want or need to see the clutter of the desktop and the other windows.
Slashdot Mirror
This would also elminate missing a short light becaus the person in front of you isn't paying attention. As well as traffic jams caused by the wave phenomenon and gawkera of accidents.
Your vehicle's resilience seems atypical. You have no repair bills? Brake jobs? Battery change? Shocks? Tire changes? Wiper changes? Tune ups? Accidents? Lecensing fees? Insurance?
A disturbing scenario. One would hope there would always be manual mode like in AI.
That would be the weakest link in the chain - having a bar code. I suppose that, given the current level of OCR and a nice, clean, font that's known ahead of the time by the machine doing the scanning, there really is no reason to have a bar code unless the OCR slows down recounts or processing significantly. Still, unlike the current system, there would be a clear and easy way to do verification and mandated spot checks would be more than enough to root out statistical anomalies in the machine.
I think there are certain time-tested givens that are needed for fair elections. There is no reason to bring any receipt out of the voting area. Any generated chit should go into a locked box. This doesn't insure your vote is counted correctly, but my idea of a punched ballot that is both human and machine readable does ensure that your vote is as you intended when you place it in the box. The rest is common sense verification systems. At least with a paper trail, verification is possible. Otherwise it is a black box.
Norden said so far the machine in the Bronx was the only machine found to have this problem, but itâ(TM)s also the only machine thatâ(TM)s been tested.
God help us.
What this solves:
Why can we not do this? Is it because people in power want a way to cheat? This isn't rocket science.
That's the spirit!
This assumes transparency and honesty on the part of these entities. I think many in law enforcement are honest and decent and many are not. I also note that law enforcement is hostile to transparency - witness the uproar about citizens videotaping police.
There are definitely people who see the sinister in everything, but the government has a terrible track record lately with things that require warrants. It also speaks toa larger point about electronics, privacy and law enforcement. There will be a million things that can be done to monitor and control the populace as technology gets more and more advanced. Should we do them? Law enforcement and law makers sees it as a case of better tools to do the job they are tasked to do. Joe six pack approves it because it fights the bad guys. Who sill set the limits?
A good start would be a substantial escalation in R&D funding of a wide range of technologies such as safe nuclear generation and storage, battery technology - both at the transportation and grid level, solar, biofuel - using non-food sources that can be grown like algae, flywheels, smart grids, hydrogen, fuel cells, fusion you name it. This would create economic growth in much the same way that the government-funded creation of highways, space travel and the Internet did. However, while we seem OK with throwing a couple of trillions of dollars down the toilet conquering the middle east and giving tax breaks to millionaires, this kind of government spending is anathema in today's "conservative" climate.
Of course, large scale droughts, flooding, etc. in food-producing areas of the world does threaten our survival. But, hey, I trust BP and Exxon-funded scientists to tell me the truth because they seem so calm and reasonable next to those whacko environmentalists who are screaming about some crisis.
"If I were a government official making plans I would plan for 3 scenarios. It gets warmer, it gets colder, it stays the same."
In all three of these scenarios, weaning ourselves off of our addiction to fossil fuels makes sense. They pollute ( in many more ways than Co2), they put tons of money into the hands of middle eastern thugs, and they are running out anyway.
This is a question - not an argument...
But isn't entanglement itself a known reality? Haven't they shown that two entangled particles are in sync - that one particle reflects the state of another instantly? So, doesn't that imply that the information IS traveling faster than the speed of light? Doesn't the information about the state of the particle that changes have to travel to the other particle?
I am aware that probably behind the scenes distance is an illusion in this case and the two particles are just one. But, what is to stop us from changing the state of the particle at one end and observing the change in the particle at the other? I probably don't really have a grasp on the subject...
I think there is a place for both. Human communication isn't just about effieciency. I enjoyed larning a little about this guy, picking up some context, hearing his humor and inflections etc. It's not just about rapid information transfer.
Except for the fact that Apple was a 20lb monkey 10 years ago and only became an 800lb gorilla because of great products, great execution and the free market.
I agree with this sentiment and the response saying that any meaningful investment in the region would also have generated more returns.
I think the number is waay above 500 billion. I don't have time to google the citations, but various credible parties have pegged the number well above a trillion and that doesn't even take into account the long term costs associated with disabilities, missed opportunities, ill will towards the US, interest on the trillion we borrowed to conduct the war, bad karma, etc.
And, no, I am not a delusional hippy or a communist, I am just smart - something we have not been as a country lately.
This model is inaccurate as it does not provide for the Reptilian space.
I keep hearing this, but it is not borne out by reality. There would have to be an awfully large number of cult fanboys to sustain the kind of numbers Apple is posting. At what number do cult fanboys turn into satisfied customers?
I'm all for hemp, but what's the big deal about allowing THC-producing plants as well? Hell, that would solve even more problems while we are at it - like shifting people away from the twin killers of alcohol and tobacco and making people a little less violent and a lot less consumeristic - not to mention more contemplative. Furthermore, we could pump all that wasted DEA money into agricultural, space and energy research - not to mention that we would take away a key wedge that the government uses to invade our privacy and control us.
In this image,
40.458638,93.390827
the crazy squiggly lines to to somewhat superimpose the same natural lines underneath.
And if you zoom in on that terrain, it is fucking crazy looking. Looks like a scene from an Aliens movie.
No, his logic was that it would suck the battery and resources out of the iPads and provide a bad touch experience - both of which would have reflected poorly on the product and on Apple had the customers installed it.
The public is not really tech savvy and would have installed it on their IOS devices and blamed Apple for the resulting security, usability, and performance degradations. Developers wouldn't have had a reason to use HTML5 and Adobe wouldn't have caved and thrown in with HTML5. Seems pretty logical to me. Choices like not using Flash are what made the iPad so useable and so different from all the other tablets that didn't sell worth a shit.
Also, let us not forget that, for all that time people bitched about Apple not having Flash, it was not available even for Android anyway. There was no product.
Thank You. Nicely put. I come to Slashdot because I dig technology and user interface issues - I dig them when they are done by MS, Linux, or Apple. This hatred of Apple is tiresome. How you can look at something like Siri and not be excited is beyond me.
Yeah, that and the fact that they sucked balls.
Why does it have to be either or? People get so worried that everything is changing. It has been one way for ages and now there are other ways. I agree that it is cool, useful and necessary to have your apps all on screen and available, but there are definitely times when it is nice to have the option to work full screen - video editing, for example - something where you are engrossed in one thing and you don't want or need to see the clutter of the desktop and the other windows.