To sum up the above link: An interesting phenomenon has occurred in every state of this year's Republican primaries. Votes appear to be flipped away from other candidates in favor of Romney, with a 99% correlation to precinct size. Although votes are "canvassed" (checked) after each primary, the methods used are primarily designed to detect vote stuffing, rather than vote flipping.
This phenomenon has recently been shown to be absent if you can get your hands on poll tapes from individual machines, rather than from voting tabulators (machines that count the totals from the various voting machines).
Voting machines are just scary stuff. More so since poll tapes are not always made readily available. Thankfully, a bill was recently introduced that would require poll tapes from individual machines (not just tabulators) to be made available by the next day following an election.
The first two issues here are clearly local government, while the third may be a state OR federal government issue. However, in my experience, when people talk about "the government" they are usually referring to the federal government. I would imagine that was the case here.
Furthermore, I suspect that he was being slightly hyperbolic when he said "always" making it worse. Few libertarians argue that all government is completely bad. The (federal!) government could get FAR smaller without cutting off basic services.
As opposed to the free computer you were using before?
It's true that you have to buy a Mac to code for iOS, but that doesn't mean other computers are free. And I don't think most devs are sitting around waiting for someone to retire an old PC, just to get a box to develop for android on.
So the same as our tactical nukes ~ 750 KT, enough to wipe out Manhattan. Perhaps statistically the chance of hitting a major city is low, but if it does hit a city, it would be tragic and the stats would no longer matter. Even if it was a 1 in a billion chance, I'd be all for spending a trillion dollars trying to nuke it out of existence.
The year we got our NES for Christmas, we ended up opening Zelda before the system. We were so upset that Santa didn't realize we had a 2600 and not an NES. Obviously it was a big deal when we did unwrap the actual system.
Then we played Zelda all night. My sister couldn't stay in the same room. The dungeon music made her so nervous she had to go to the bathroom!
When I got the GB version I was so excited I was shaking in the car outside the video game store. Definitely my favorite franchise ever.
This, like so many other school programs, is an egregious violation of the students' rights.
Not so. Most parents would happily sign a release if it meant not having to go through truancy charges.
You seem to be ignoring the fact that truancy charges themselves are a violation of an individual's right to raise his own children. Guess they already got to you!
Is it me or this guy gets all the attention that should instead be devoted to the leaks' content? I bet most people following assange' ascention to stardom don't even read wikileaks.
I don't think of that as being a bad thing. The leaks in general draw attention to the US's abuse of power, but so do the US's (open) actions and statements regarding Assange and Manning.
I've been wondering how this might affect learning since I read Savant for a Day several years ago. Since it looks like you can actually learn using this technique, it might be time to add some magnets to my tinfoil hat!
Yeah, that's the sort of thing they're thinking of doing. Exercise routines. I imagine that the whole thing would look rather horrific, we'll probably replace the whole "watching sausage get made" metaphor with something more general.
No need to replace it at all. We'll keep it, but we'll just be referring to an earlier step in the process!
Why should the public pay for party primaries? If the parties don't want 5 (or 10...) people running, they should control and pay for their own internal selection process. There's no good reason to ask the public to pay for their internal politics. That would also eliminate the issue brought up here, which can work both ways.
That's a great point. I believe parties are a huge disruption of the democratic process. I don't believe that parties should be illegal, as that would be a clear violation of freedom of speech and freedom of association. But I do believe that the parties should have zero recognition within the government. There should be no positions of Majority Leader, Minority Leader, etc. Do what you want outside the halls of congress, but inside you should be just another 'aye' or 'nay.' And similarly here. There should be no notification of political party on ballots (If you're going to include their party, why shouldn't you include their stump speech, too? How about their employer? College?), nor should the public be paying for party primaries. Of course, this will make it harder for the uninformed to vote, but that's kind of the point.
... The government doesn't give us rights. We have the rights inherently. Just because the government says driving on roads that I payed for isn't a right, doesn't mean their position is legally sound. Their unreasonable search and seizure of persons and property at airports is outright illegal under the Constitution. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it. The reason it continues is that nobody in power will prosecute them, and courts won't hear criminal cases brought by the general public.
Criminal actions were only a step away from civil actions — the only material difference being that criminal claims ostensibly involved an interest of the public at large as well as the victim.16 Private prosecutors acted under authority of the people and in the name of the state — but for their own vindication.17 The very term "prosecutor" meant criminal plaintiff and implied a private person.18 A government prosecutor was referred to as an attorney general and was a rare phenomenon in criminal cases at the time of the nation's founding.19 When a private individual prosecuted an action in the name of the state, the attorney general was required to allow the prosecutor to use his name — even if the attorney general himself did not approve of the action.20
Yes, because nobody takes the train, takes the bus, rides a bike, goes sailing, or any one of a thousand other things that can produce those speeds.
Riding the train or the bus, sure fine. But talking on the cell while riding your bike?! That's got to be at least as likely to cause an accident as talking while driving! Maybe you have a tandem bicycle?
According to one commentator, Congress had two principal concerns about sound recordings, leading it to decline to protect them. First, Congress wondered about the constitutional validity of such protection. The Constitution allows Congress to protect "writings," and Congress was uncertain as to whether a sound recording could constitute a writing. Second, Congress worried that allowing producers to exclusively control both the musical notation and the sound recording could lead to the creation of a music monopoly.
I found this to be the more interesting and exciting part of that quote:
Congress wondered about the constitutional validity of such protection.
That was probably the last time the constitutionality of a law actually came up in Congress...
That ruling also needs to be overturned. That and the related rulings going back to Wickard v. Filburn represent a disgusting overreach of government power. If all commerce is interstate commerce, why did the founders bother with the word INTERSTATE?!
It might be true that spending would be higher for some people. The difference is that an income tax is unavoidable, whereas you can't force people to spend their money (except for our new health care program...).
DNA guy: Ooh, nice eyelash. Yours?
Wiggum: No. We need to find out who it belonged to. We want a DNA
test.
DNA guy: Ooh, ooh, ee, ooh, ooh, that takes, uh, eight to ten weeks.
Wiggum: [sighs, hands him a carton of cigarettes]
DNA guy: Did I say weeks? 'Cause I meant seconds.
[runs over to another machine, grabs a card from it; puts it
in a computer]
Wiggum: What do you got, the whole town's DNA on file?
DNA guy: Y'uh huh. If you've ever handled a penny, the government's got
your DNA. Why do you think they keep 'em in circulation?
That's a good amendment. However, I've been reading a bit about the topic lately. I'm not sure the founding fathers thought you even needed such an amendment for the states to nullify federal laws.
Another good start would be to repeal the 17th Amendment (direct election of senators). This would give the governments of the states back their voice in the federal government.
Of course, repealing the 17th won't happen, since people don't understand the purpose of letting the states choose their senators.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. What you're missing is that the people making them/buying them didn't want secure machines. They wanted something they could tamper with.
I still have enough faith in humanity left to blame it on stupidity, ignorance, carelessness and greed.
Read this and then tell me whether you still feel like that.
Submitted this related article to Slashdot a few months ago. Bev Harris looked into this as well.
To sum up the above link: An interesting phenomenon has occurred in every state of this year's Republican primaries. Votes appear to be flipped away from other candidates in favor of Romney, with a 99% correlation to precinct size. Although votes are "canvassed" (checked) after each primary, the methods used are primarily designed to detect vote stuffing, rather than vote flipping.
This phenomenon has recently been shown to be absent if you can get your hands on poll tapes from individual machines, rather than from voting tabulators (machines that count the totals from the various voting machines).
Voting machines are just scary stuff. More so since poll tapes are not always made readily available. Thankfully, a bill was recently introduced that would require poll tapes from individual machines (not just tabulators) to be made available by the next day following an election.
It's a tool like any other. It can be used for good or for evil. Juries should always seek true justice first.
The first two issues here are clearly local government, while the third may be a state OR federal government issue. However, in my experience, when people talk about "the government" they are usually referring to the federal government. I would imagine that was the case here.
Furthermore, I suspect that he was being slightly hyperbolic when he said "always" making it worse. Few libertarians argue that all government is completely bad. The (federal!) government could get FAR smaller without cutting off basic services.
As opposed to the free computer you were using before?
It's true that you have to buy a Mac to code for iOS, but that doesn't mean other computers are free. And I don't think most devs are sitting around waiting for someone to retire an old PC, just to get a box to develop for android on.
So the same as our tactical nukes ~ 750 KT, enough to wipe out Manhattan. Perhaps statistically the chance of hitting a major city is low, but if it does hit a city, it would be tragic and the stats would no longer matter. Even if it was a 1 in a billion chance, I'd be all for spending a trillion dollars trying to nuke it out of existence.
You work for the TSA, don't you?
The year we got our NES for Christmas, we ended up opening Zelda before the system. We were so upset that Santa didn't realize we had a 2600 and not an NES. Obviously it was a big deal when we did unwrap the actual system.
Then we played Zelda all night. My sister couldn't stay in the same room. The dungeon music made her so nervous she had to go to the bathroom!
When I got the GB version I was so excited I was shaking in the car outside the video game store. Definitely my favorite franchise ever.
This, like so many other school programs, is an egregious violation of the students' rights.
Not so. Most parents would happily sign a release if it meant not having to go through truancy charges.
You seem to be ignoring the fact that truancy charges themselves are a violation of an individual's right to raise his own children. Guess they already got to you!
Is it me or this guy gets all the attention that should instead be devoted to the leaks' content? I bet most people following assange' ascention to stardom don't even read wikileaks.
I don't think of that as being a bad thing. The leaks in general draw attention to the US's abuse of power, but so do the US's (open) actions and statements regarding Assange and Manning.
I've been wondering how this might affect learning since I read Savant for a Day several years ago. Since it looks like you can actually learn using this technique, it might be time to add some magnets to my tinfoil hat!
Yeah, that's the sort of thing they're thinking of doing. Exercise routines. I imagine that the whole thing would look rather horrific, we'll probably replace the whole "watching sausage get made" metaphor with something more general.
No need to replace it at all. We'll keep it, but we'll just be referring to an earlier step in the process!
Why should the public pay for party primaries? If the parties don't want 5 (or 10...) people running, they should control and pay for their own internal selection process. There's no good reason to ask the public to pay for their internal politics. That would also eliminate the issue brought up here, which can work both ways.
That's a great point. I believe parties are a huge disruption of the democratic process. I don't believe that parties should be illegal, as that would be a clear violation of freedom of speech and freedom of association. But I do believe that the parties should have zero recognition within the government. There should be no positions of Majority Leader, Minority Leader, etc. Do what you want outside the halls of congress, but inside you should be just another 'aye' or 'nay.' And similarly here. There should be no notification of political party on ballots (If you're going to include their party, why shouldn't you include their stump speech, too? How about their employer? College?), nor should the public be paying for party primaries. Of course, this will make it harder for the uninformed to vote, but that's kind of the point.
That was not always true, however, according to this history of policing in America (from the section PRIVATE PROSECUTORS).
Criminal actions were only a step away from civil actions — the only material difference being that criminal claims ostensibly involved an interest of the public at large as well as the victim.16 Private prosecutors acted under authority of the people and in the name of the state — but for their own vindication.17 The very term "prosecutor" meant criminal plaintiff and implied a private person.18 A government prosecutor was referred to as an attorney general and was a rare phenomenon in criminal cases at the time of the nation's founding.19 When a private individual prosecuted an action in the name of the state, the attorney general was required to allow the prosecutor to use his name — even if the attorney general himself did not approve of the action.20
Yes, because nobody takes the train, takes the bus, rides a bike, goes sailing, or any one of a thousand other things that can produce those speeds.
Riding the train or the bus, sure fine. But talking on the cell while riding your bike?! That's got to be at least as likely to cause an accident as talking while driving! Maybe you have a tandem bicycle?
In an important breakthrough, scientists at McMaster University have discovered how to make human blood from adult human skin.
So not only will it clot, it can tan?
And blend!
proportional representation
The U.S. doesn't have a "two-party" system for any reason other than two parties have a lot more political skill than any third party does.
Well, that and first past the post voting...
It's not tied to your phone number, unless you signed a cell phone contract. Then they probably asked you for it.
Given, YOU may not have signed a cell phone contract, but a majority of people have these days.
Each of these an order of magnitude more impressive than the next.
I found this to be the more interesting and exciting part of that quote:
Congress wondered about the constitutional validity of such protection.
That was probably the last time the constitutionality of a law actually came up in Congress...
That ruling also needs to be overturned. That and the related rulings going back to Wickard v. Filburn represent a disgusting overreach of government power. If all commerce is interstate commerce, why did the founders bother with the word INTERSTATE?!
It might be true that spending would be higher for some people. The difference is that an income tax is unavoidable, whereas you can't force people to spend their money (except for our new health care program...).
Anonymous Coward==666 is a red herring. The user we really have to worry about is Have Blue!
Personally, I think it should be coproclepticratic... Government via the uncontrolled theft of people's shit.
We already have that.
DNA guy: Ooh, nice eyelash. Yours?
Wiggum: No. We need to find out who it belonged to. We want a DNA test.
DNA guy: Ooh, ooh, ee, ooh, ooh, that takes, uh, eight to ten weeks.
Wiggum: [sighs, hands him a carton of cigarettes]
DNA guy: Did I say weeks? 'Cause I meant seconds. [runs over to another machine, grabs a card from it; puts it in a computer]
Wiggum: What do you got, the whole town's DNA on file?
DNA guy: Y'uh huh. If you've ever handled a penny, the government's got your DNA. Why do you think they keep 'em in circulation?
That's a good amendment. However, I've been reading a bit about the topic lately. I'm not sure the founding fathers thought you even needed such an amendment for the states to nullify federal laws.
Another good start would be to repeal the 17th Amendment (direct election of senators). This would give the governments of the states back their voice in the federal government.
Of course, repealing the 17th won't happen, since people don't understand the purpose of letting the states choose their senators.