Slashdot Mirror


User: meerling

meerling's activity in the archive.

Stories
0
Comments
2,572
First seen
Last seen
Profile
(view on slashdot.org)

Comments · 2,572

  1. Re: Well, there goes the 4th Amendment again... on It's Entirely Reasonable For Police To Swipe a Suspicious Gift Card, Says Court (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    It's the same thing, a means to store digital data, of course you can.
    Heck, you could store malicious code on punch cards if you wanted to, but there's not a lot machines around that can read those in this century.
    Now if that malicious code could crash, compromise, or otherwise screw up the system the cops are using, it's a real possibility. Of course to create such a thing, you're probably going to have to find out just what the cops use so you can try to find an exploitable weakness.
    Now that's a project that isn't going to be easy or fast, not to mention it won't be universal. After all, it's not like all police departments use the same hardware or software, even if there are some more popular ones out there.
    But don't worry, I'm sure it'll show up on a TV show or movie soon enough, and it'll probably have a single card load an entire A.I. infiltration and control backdoor suite as well. (Hollywood isn't exactly realistic, and that's on a good day.)

  2. Re:If it's like Politifake, expect far left bias. on Google News Introduces Fact Check Feature -- Just In Time For the US Election (thenextweb.com) · · Score: 1

    Facts are verifiable data.
    Some people call things facts that are not facts.
    How people present facts may be false or incomplete, but facts aren't, they are still verifiable data.

    It's possible to be deceptive and still use facts, after all, you can mix them with lies, but it still doesn't change that facts are facts. If you do fact checking, you are verifying the data of the statement. If it passes, it's actually a fact and not a fake. If it fails to be verified, odds are you are looking at a lie.

    What's so bloody hard to understand about that?
    Oh yeah, people have been suckered in by 'truthy'. That old set of lies that is present as facts that you don't want to try and verify because you want to believe them. Sorry, but fact checking shoots those lies down too.

    Perhaps you're worried that the fact checkers won't actually check the facts and lie about it. That is a possibility, but there are always more fact checkers out there to check over the other fact checkers. Anyone who does the research to verify data is a fact checker, even if you're an amateur. Fact check the fact checkers, and if you find they've screwed up or lied, let everyone know, and you can bet the scandal that would cause will get their butts back in line and checking properly again. Either that or wipe them out entirely.

  3. Re:OK but misses a larger problem on Google News Introduces Fact Check Feature -- Just In Time For the US Election (thenextweb.com) · · Score: 1

    You'd be amazed at how many people freeze up, often due to fear, when these kinds of things happen. They were never trained to beat the shit out of the asshole molesting them, and often were taught to not physically fight someone since these were women. ("Ladies don't hit people...", etc.)
    If someone doing that kind of garbage has some way of asserting the impression of authority, it makes it even harder for people to act against them. One of those little foibles of a cooperative society.
    Also don't forget that fear instinct isn't just fight or flight, it also includes freeze.

    If you don't get it, you probably have never been exposed to it, nor are you close to someone who has.
    You should hope you never get into a crisis situation, since the odds are you won't respond well, as most people don't.

  4. Oh come on, it's no where near every word! Most of those sentences were pretty meaningless bluster and double speak, which isn't a lie, just a way to waste time and trick people into thinking they got a possible answer.

  5. Re:All Mail Voting is horrible on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    Tracable? Not really. You have obviously never done it before.
    Coerced by those around you? Why would they strongarm you over a mail in ballot when they aren't already doing that for your current voting method?
    If they are coercing you, you should contact the police. If they aren't I somehow doubt a mind control ray will suddenly cause them to start if mail in ballots happen.

    The unrealistic paranoid fantasy that people have been posting on this entire article are mindboggling!

  6. Re:All mail voting? on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    So you mean stick with the same thing that has been problematic in various places for the last several national elections, though none quite as messy as the florida hanging chad fiasco?
    Of course that solves nothing, so why go backwards?

  7. Re:All mail voting? on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    Not to mention it runs the real risk of getting caught. You ever try to open one of those metal cans? Noisy as hell and people are happy to report your ass for that. You can F with a lot of things, but the mailbox and ballot dropoff boxs are two that people feel happy to report even if they do the no snitches thing.

  8. Re:Now that's more like it on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    And then for four years, no voters would get laid.
    Look at the bright side, invest in a dildo factory.

  9. And just why is that? Do you think there are video cameras reading your mail? Watching you in your own home? Recording everything you do?

    If so, please turn a little to the left and smile, I want to save this one for the scrapbook.

  10. Re:Understand how the system works first on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    That happens without mail in votes, what's your point?
    No, absentee ballots are NOT a "...historically a huge source of vote fraud...".
    So what coolaid have you been drinking?

  11. Re:far bigger danger on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    Imagine a place where you can get your official ID, but it's only open a couple of days a month, for a few hours on those days, they aren't on the weekend, and it's the only one for 50 miles or so.
    So now tell me again how you think getting an appropriate ID isn't an issue?

  12. Re:The only voting system on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    No more than going to a polling booth. And do you really think anyone has the manpower and money to afford to go to enough houses and extort enough people to swing any election, much less something on a national level?
    Here's a hint, if they did, they don't want to be president, they already have more power than he'll ever have.

  13. You do know that the republicans in a particular state did a study to find out what possible rules to voting would affect which demographics, and they specifically chose to implement the ones that would most affect those groups most likely to vote democrat?
    Look it up, it happened.
    So what was the purpose of those laws again? That's right, to fuck over the US public by preventing a LOT of non-republicans from voting.
    It's like gerrymandering. WTF is wrong with people?

  14. Re:Mail-only voting on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    How do you know Bush didn't win by those exact means?

  15. Re:See who voted on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Really? You think people are going to be extorting whole neighborhoods for an extended period for their ballots, and have them sign the security envelope it's sealed in just to try and rig an election? Due to the obvious exploitation and manpower requirements, it would be far more efficient, safer, and faster to just extort the ballot officials that tally the damn things. Of course, that doesn't even need a vote by mail system.

    Your paranoia is unfounded and silly.

  16. Same in Oregon, you can mail it, but a lot of people drop them off at the official ballot drop boxes.

  17. Re:Mail-only voting on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    If you're going to be that paranoid, how do you know that ballot booth isn't rigged to take your picture, record your biometrics, and the button or level also takes a small dna sample?

  18. Re:Mail-only voting on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Dumbass. People do this in their homes, you know, where they receive their mail. If people are coming into your home and strongarming you, you have some other serious issues to contend with. As to getting a meeting where everyone brings their blank ballots, there is no way to keep that shit secret! It will be found out, and the law will be on their ass! It's not going to happen, so you can put your tinfoil hat down, this isn't a hollywood movie.

  19. Re:It's actually a lot easier... on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    It's easy to not have a permanent location, but still have a permanent mailing address. Just ask any snowbird. If you don't know what a snowbird is, google it.

  20. Re:Lose all the Mail for the Win on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    That can happen, but Oregon is rather dedicated to the vote by mail thing. They send the ballots to overseas voters early, so yes, those people may get to cast their votes before some other people, but they get to cast their votes in time!

  21. Re:Lose all the Mail for the Win on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    If they could do that, then they already control the voting officials that count the ballots, and it wouldn't matter what anyone voted by any means.

  22. Re:Orangutan Wants Nationwide, All-Male Voting on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 2

    Stop insulting our primate relatives!

  23. Re:Drivers License? on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You do know that has never been a real issue don't you? It's just fear driven demagoguery.
    Besides, you don't just walk in and pick up a ballot, they send it to you. Funny thing, they don't send them to illegals.

  24. Re:Drivers License? on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    Getting a valid photo ID there is the same as the drivers license, other than you don't have to take the driving tests, and it doesn't give you permission to drive.

  25. Re:US Post Office always secure. on Senator Wants Nationwide, All-Mail Voting To Counter Election Hacks (arstechnica.com) · · Score: 1

    You also have the sign the security envelope it's sealing in, over the seal, so if it's opened, it's pretty damn obvious.
    So yeah, unless you think 10,000 ballots with the same handwriting won't get noticed.