I'd like that and I agree, but good luck getting the states to ratify it. I'd like to think my plan, were it a snowball, would have a slightly larger chance in hell of surviving.
Interesting idea, but how much would the largest allotment to a state be? My biggest concern is that if two blue or two red states got the 55 and 34 votes, that might decide the election then and there. It's too much like gambling. One election the numbers just fall for one side. Four years later the random distribution favors the other side.
Your logic doesn't make sense to me. 38% voted for Kerry in Texas. That's 12 votes under this system. Yes 44% of California went to Bush, but 40-something went to Kerry in Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, N. Carolina, Missouri, and Ohio, to look at the most populous Republican states. I simply don't see the Democrats (they sure as hell aren't all liberals) losing nationwide. Campaign strategies would shift, and maybe Texas would be 40-something for the Democrat, so more votes.
I heard an idea I like that would shift the campaign more to the populated states, but would keep middle-sized states relevant. The small states are, and will continue to be overlooked, but there's even a benefit for them too.
Presently each state gets electoral votes equal to one for each member of the House it has and two for the Senators. Thus even the least populated states get three electoral votes. I'm not suggesting a change to this, but a change to the way they are awarded. The two senatorial electoral votes are separated out and the population based ones are distributed based on the percentage of the popular vote won in that state. The winner of the popular vote in each state gets two senatorial votes.
Example: Georgia - worth 15 votes (13 population, 2 senatorial) If Lisa gets 55% of the vote and Jack gets 45%, Lisa is awarded 7 of the 13 and the two for winning for a total of 9. All further examples assume the same percentages.
Example: Montana - worth 3 votes (1 population, 2 senatorial) The winner gets 2 plus the remaining 1. Thus winning this state is worth all 3 votes and denies the losing candidate even 1 vote.
Example: New Mexico - worth 5 (3 population, 2 senatorial) Winner gets 2 plus 2 of the remaining 3. That's 4 of the 5. Simply splitting all 5 might've been only 3 to the winner. This way the winner gets 1 more and loser gets 1 less.
What do I like about this extra layer of complexity vs. only awarding votes based on the percentage breakdown? Because it makes it slightly more worth it to not give up on the smaller states. In New Mexico, under a simple split, the loser gets 2 while the winner receives 3. That's an acceptable loss, only 1 point difference. A candidate behind in the polls might write off the state. But if the winner gets 4 of the 5, it becomes more costly to give up.
Example: Indiana - worth 11 Winner gets 2 plus 5 of the remaining 9. That's 7 out of 11. Writing off this state may be costly.
Now let me clarify here, if Lisa wins between 50 and 61.11% she'll get 7 votes. If it's 61.12 to 72.22% she'll get 8.
If you're still reading, it's time to address an important question: Why not write off all the smaller states and focus on the large ones? Because, compared to simply awarding everything based on the popular vote, every state won is an additional vote. Winning 30 states is worth 30 extra votes. Consider Texas. Lisa and her campaign spend a large amount of time and resources in the state, which has boosted her standing in the polls to 60% so she's getting lots of votes plus the extra one. She has a choice now, she could spend X time and resources there trying to get more votes, or she could go focus them on Wisconsin where she's statistically tied with Jack. The (hypothetical) polls also seem to show her support is plateauing. If she chooses Texas, she'll probably only get one more vote. It makes more sense to go to Wisconsin where she could win the state and get 6 votes there instead of 4.
I like this system better than what we have presently because it makes 8 large, currently uncompetitive, states competitive and important to the race. These 8 are 184 votes, which is 34% of 538. Since smaller states are better represented, these 8 actually have more than 38% of the population who are not being attended to by the electoral process. Counting Louisiana, Alabama, Kentucky, and Maryland, these 12 are 220 votes and over 44% of the population.
Overall warmer temps would be good for siberia, but bad for plenty of other places. Since humans are worried about where we live, the warming is bad for Los Angeles, Venice, probably Sydney, and India, for examples.
Or build windfarms and not have to bury the waste in a mountain that will probably leak radioactive water into the area before enough material has become lead.
I hope you're right, because otherwise we'll fark up the planet too much. Just like hopefully all mankind will learn to live in peace, if WWIII doesn't nuke us back to the stone age first.
The media has done an excellent job of giving the people what they want, instead of what they need. This administration has used the power of the media to increase nationalism. If the dems and reps jointly agreed to use the media to inform the public that social security has to be fixed now, that benefit cuts/ new taxes/ raise age to start collecting has to happen for the sake of the boomers and their children, I expect there would be little political fallout.
It's a huge "IF" whether Sony will have software/firmware to read video off memory sticks. What (copy protected) format will it be? I doubt we'll be so lucky that it runs divx, xvid, and div3. That means compressing a DVD to the special 480x272 resolution format. That's perhaps 2 hours on a 2GHz box. I'd call that a big deal.
I'm going to presume you despise CCTV cameras on the highways too. What if the number of highway patrols tripled? Just three times as many cars and officers ticketing speeders? Would you still object?
Re:They're not targetted at the same audience
on
PSP Pricing Announced
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Sorry, the PSP only plays UMD which are 60mm across. If it's going to play movies the user will have to buy a PSP-only copy that will not work in DVD drives. MP3 support will be through memory sticks which are currently more expensive than smart media. So anyone wanting two hours of music on a 128MB stick will have to pay another $40.
Are co-location sites required to keep aisles and cages wide enough for those in wheelchairs to maneouver? Don't most racks put some equipment higher than the wheel-bound can reach? If so there must be an exception, probably related to the requirements of the job which is also why high-rise welders are able-bodied.
I know jack about how the wi-fi works, but could someone transmit a homebrewed virus if given too much access to the hardware? If so, that reason alone is probably enough to keep Nintendo from letting people do it.
Not if people reading you don't know what the difference is. Until now I didn't. I guessed it was like hard drives being different on the package from what the OS says. Good thing you spent an extra post explaining it. Plenty of people reading this site aren't geeks, they just like computers and know about them at an intermediate level. As opposed to the masses of novices or beginners who ask more knowledgeable family and friends for help. I'm fine with 16.78MHz since I know the Sega Genesis had a chip at 7.61MHz.
Do you remember how many MB the Shenmue games were? If the 3 disc first game and 4 disc sequal weren't huge I'd be confused as to why they were multidisc. Now if the audio was stereo and the burned copy reduced it to mono that would explain it.
Yeah but he made it twice in one speaking. Comedy Central's The Daily Show has a clip of his gaffes from 1:30 to 2:30 of it. I give you the times so you can avoid the satire if you want.
Was the CG done about about 3000x2000 and the live action interpolated in? In the early 90s I understand film was scanned at 2000x2000 and big budget projects got 4000x4000. Now by the time I see a print on the screen the resolution has dropped appreciably, but digital's low resolution is a huge drawback to me. Even what Lucas uses is 1920x1024. I'll be waiting for when the cameras and projectors can match film resolution, that will win me over as it doesn't have jitter. Then they can work on upping the fps to 30.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd like that and I agree, but good luck getting the states to ratify it. I'd like to think my plan, were it a snowball, would have a slightly larger chance in hell of surviving.
Interesting idea, but how much would the largest allotment to a state be? My biggest concern is that if two blue or two red states got the 55 and 34 votes, that might decide the election then and there. It's too much like gambling. One election the numbers just fall for one side. Four years later the random distribution favors the other side.
Your logic doesn't make sense to me. 38% voted for Kerry in Texas. That's 12 votes under this system. Yes 44% of California went to Bush, but 40-something went to Kerry in Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, N. Carolina, Missouri, and Ohio, to look at the most populous Republican states. I simply don't see the Democrats (they sure as hell aren't all liberals) losing nationwide. Campaign strategies would shift, and maybe Texas would be 40-something for the Democrat, so more votes.
I heard an idea I like that would shift the campaign more to the populated states, but would keep middle-sized states relevant. The small states are, and will continue to be overlooked, but there's even a benefit for them too.
Presently each state gets electoral votes equal to one for each member of the House it has and two for the Senators. Thus even the least populated states get three electoral votes. I'm not suggesting a change to this, but a change to the way they are awarded. The two senatorial electoral votes are separated out and the population based ones are distributed based on the percentage of the popular vote won in that state. The winner of the popular vote in each state gets two senatorial votes.
Example: Georgia - worth 15 votes (13 population, 2 senatorial)
If Lisa gets 55% of the vote and Jack gets 45%, Lisa is awarded 7 of the 13 and the two for winning for a total of 9. All further examples assume the same percentages.
Example: Montana - worth 3 votes (1 population, 2 senatorial)
The winner gets 2 plus the remaining 1. Thus winning this state is worth all 3 votes and denies the losing candidate even 1 vote.
Example: New Mexico - worth 5 (3 population, 2 senatorial)
Winner gets 2 plus 2 of the remaining 3. That's 4 of the 5. Simply splitting all 5 might've been only 3 to the winner. This way the winner gets 1 more and loser gets 1 less.
What do I like about this extra layer of complexity vs. only awarding votes based on the percentage breakdown? Because it makes it slightly more worth it to not give up on the smaller states. In New Mexico, under a simple split, the loser gets 2 while the winner receives 3. That's an acceptable loss, only 1 point difference. A candidate behind in the polls might write off the state. But if the winner gets 4 of the 5, it becomes more costly to give up.
Example: Indiana - worth 11
Winner gets 2 plus 5 of the remaining 9. That's 7 out of 11. Writing off this state may be costly.
Now let me clarify here, if Lisa wins between 50 and 61.11% she'll get 7 votes. If it's 61.12 to 72.22% she'll get 8.
If you're still reading, it's time to address an important question: Why not write off all the smaller states and focus on the large ones?
Because, compared to simply awarding everything based on the popular vote, every state won is an additional vote. Winning 30 states is worth 30 extra votes. Consider Texas. Lisa and her campaign spend a large amount of time and resources in the state, which has boosted her standing in the polls to 60% so she's getting lots of votes plus the extra one. She has a choice now, she could spend X time and resources there trying to get more votes, or she could go focus them on Wisconsin where she's statistically tied with Jack. The (hypothetical) polls also seem to show her support is plateauing. If she chooses Texas, she'll probably only get one more vote. It makes more sense to go to Wisconsin where she could win the state and get 6 votes there instead of 4.
I like this system better than what we have presently because it makes 8 large, currently uncompetitive, states competitive and important to the race. These 8 are 184 votes, which is 34% of 538. Since smaller states are better represented, these 8 actually have more than 38% of the population who are not being attended to by the electoral process. Counting Louisiana, Alabama, Kentucky, and Maryland, these 12 are 220 votes and over 44% of the population.
Overall warmer temps would be good for siberia, but bad for plenty of other places. Since humans are worried about where we live, the warming is bad for Los Angeles, Venice, probably Sydney, and India, for examples.
Or build windfarms and not have to bury the waste in a mountain that will probably leak radioactive water into the area before enough material has become lead.
I hope you're right, because otherwise we'll fark up the planet too much. Just like hopefully all mankind will learn to live in peace, if WWIII doesn't nuke us back to the stone age first.
The media has done an excellent job of giving the people what they want, instead of what they need. This administration has used the power of the media to increase nationalism. If the dems and reps jointly agreed to use the media to inform the public that social security has to be fixed now, that benefit cuts/ new taxes/ raise age to start collecting has to happen for the sake of the boomers and their children, I expect there would be little political fallout.
It's a huge "IF" whether Sony will have software/firmware to read video off memory sticks. What (copy protected) format will it be? I doubt we'll be so lucky that it runs divx, xvid, and div3. That means compressing a DVD to the special 480x272 resolution format. That's perhaps 2 hours on a 2GHz box. I'd call that a big deal.
All the liquid nitrogen or flourinert OC tests never got the CPU below -20C so superconducting isn't likely.
Last I read, AMD was 6 to 12 months behind Intel in switching fabs over.
Or they just found how hard it is to get the speed up that high and work properly.
I'm going to presume you despise CCTV cameras on the highways too. What if the number of highway patrols tripled? Just three times as many cars and officers ticketing speeders? Would you still object?
Sorry, the PSP only plays UMD which are 60mm across. If it's going to play movies the user will have to buy a PSP-only copy that will not work in DVD drives. MP3 support will be through memory sticks which are currently more expensive than smart media. So anyone wanting two hours of music on a 128MB stick will have to pay another $40.
Yep Sega learned that lesson with the $399 Saturn. It only lasted from May until September when the Playstation came out and both retailed for $299.
Are co-location sites required to keep aisles and cages wide enough for those in wheelchairs to maneouver? Don't most racks put some equipment higher than the wheel-bound can reach? If so there must be an exception, probably related to the requirements of the job which is also why high-rise welders are able-bodied.
I know jack about how the wi-fi works, but could someone transmit a homebrewed virus if given too much access to the hardware? If so, that reason alone is probably enough to keep Nintendo from letting people do it.
Not if people reading you don't know what the difference is. Until now I didn't. I guessed it was like hard drives being different on the package from what the OS says. Good thing you spent an extra post explaining it. Plenty of people reading this site aren't geeks, they just like computers and know about them at an intermediate level. As opposed to the masses of novices or beginners who ask more knowledgeable family and friends for help. I'm fine with 16.78MHz since I know the Sega Genesis had a chip at 7.61MHz.
Do you remember how many MB the Shenmue games were? If the 3 disc first game and 4 disc sequal weren't huge I'd be confused as to why they were multidisc. Now if the audio was stereo and the burned copy reduced it to mono that would explain it.
Shenmue was 3 discs. Shenmue 2 came on 4. I'd be shocked if none of the discs were over 700MB.
What if Nintendo made a PDA cartridge that connected by USB to a PC for syncing? Easily upgradable firmware this way also.
The Last Starfighter today is nothing without his rich voice and animated acting. The CG is only amusing to see what they had back then.
Yeah but he made it twice in one speaking. Comedy Central's The Daily Show has a clip of his gaffes from 1:30 to 2:30 of it. I give you the times so you can avoid the satire if you want.
Was the CG done about about 3000x2000 and the live action interpolated in? In the early 90s I understand film was scanned at 2000x2000 and big budget projects got 4000x4000. Now by the time I see a print on the screen the resolution has dropped appreciably, but digital's low resolution is a huge drawback to me. Even what Lucas uses is 1920x1024. I'll be waiting for when the cameras and projectors can match film resolution, that will win me over as it doesn't have jitter. Then they can work on upping the fps to 30.
What, are you playing some gimped PS2 version? On the xbox turning off the DJ is in the options menu.