If you have long term physical access you can do anything...
FTFY. by the sound of this flaw, the amount of physical access needed is negligible.
Think about all the times you step away from a live PC every day; if the amount of physical access needed is trivial (say, 2 seconds to plug in a flash drive and let a script run), a bad actor masquerading as the maintenance guy could easily compromise every machine in your office in the time it takes to get a fresh cup o' Joe.
the justices said they'll hear South Dakota's contention that the 1992 ruling is obsolete in the e-commerce era and should be overturned.
Ah, good! Too many old laws cutting into profit margins these days!
Next, after the precedent is set, they can go after that pesky First Amendment; after all, the Founding Fathers couldn't have possibly envisioned a world where we can communicate with anyone, anywhere instantaneously, so obviously the antiquated belief that people actually have a right to communicate freely needs to be eliminated.
Be careful what you wish for - you just might get it.
Yea that tends to happen when people use logical reasoning, since the closest thing to a "free market" that exists today would be the economy of Somalia.
I don't know anyone who thinks Somalian economics is a good idea.
Aaaaand this is why I vote third party; D & R are a lose-lose proposition, proven time and again.
So in order to avoid a "lose-lose" situation, you make absolutely SURE you'll lose by throwing away your vote and making sure that one of the people you don't like wins?
No, I vote my conscience, which is pretty much always aligned with a third party. You can't blame me for the situation caused by D and R, because I don't vote for D or R.
BTW, less than half of the electorate votes for D or R in a Presidential election - about 10% vote third party like me, and another 45% don't vote at all; so if you want to accuse someone of being part of the problem, blame the non-voters, or the 48% who continually vote to keep the same assholes in power.
Now, would a random person who doesn't have a Missouri ID get enough help to get one? Would the assistance be enough to get the potential voter to a DMV station while it's open?
It is explained on the link LynnwoodRooster posted, if you had bothered to look at it.
Also, you don't have to go to a DMV, any county courthouse can accommodate the new ID requirements.
Of course, if you're not willing to do the minimal amount of legwork required to obtain a free voter ID in Missouri, then you have no one to blame but yourself.
That's not going to work. Removing the D's and R's will exacerbate long lines at a polling places and discourage voting.
Yea, well, if you're voting without fully informing yourself first, then I hope you are discouraged, as low-information voters are one of the main reasons our system is so fucked up right now.
These methods aren't supposed to produce unbiased results. They're supposed to automate human judgements.
Well thank goodness for that! God help us if more people actually thought critically and formed their own opinions, rather than having a corporate algorithm decide our beliefs for us.
> And by supporting that racist, misogynistic piece of crap they are contributing to a culture in this country that is racist and misogynistic.
Or maybe they just researched the white gloves crimes of Clinton, or got most blatantly, rudely cheated out of the chance to vote Sanders and they voted *the other candidate*?
Aaaaand this is why I vote third party; D & R are a lose-lose proposition, proven time and again.
You can get any result you want out of a machine learning approach to classification. Training the model to give the answers you want isn't cheating, it's how the algorithms are supposed to work.
... and proof that such algorithms area terrible method for producing unbiased information.
The machines at the bank that count cash are based on 100-year-old technology, but the financial industry still relies on them heavily, because they just fucking work.
Why on earth would an ID be required? It's a needless extra complication for no good reason. You send out the voting cards to all registered voters, they show up at the polls, you score them off the list as they receive their ballot. Done. Everyone is identified, no one needs to get expensive, or complex to get ID cards.
Hi, I'm your next-door neighbor, and I vehemently disagree with you politically! So when I saw the mailman dropping off ballots today, I made sure to take yours out of your mailbox and give it to my 17-year-old son. Since there's no requirement to show ID when dropping off the ballot, it should be easy for him to impersonate you.
The PROBLEM is that minorities are apparently incapable of doing this. One can only assume why.... Is it they are too stupid to go get a free ID? It's not like they don't have time...
What state doesn't charge for a photo ID? It's something like $12 bucks for an ID in MO.
If we're seeking to have an informed electorate, then this poses a bit of a problem
Most adults are not ignorant due to a lack of ability - the amount of intelligence needed to read a birth certificate is minimal - even less than the amount needed to send a tweet.
The reason most adults are ignorant is because they want to be. They prefer it. Being uninformed makes life a lot easier. There are no weighty considerations to make - just vote for the candidate with the nicest hair, or the tallest, or the best..... body.
Actually, it's the dopamine rush - repeated studies have been conducted which strongly indicate that the human brain reacts the same way to defending a strongly held belief as it does when the body snorts a big fat line of cocaine.
So, really, the reason most adults prefer to stay in their personal belief bubbles isn't comfort, it's because they're getting high off it.
I think the idea is that if more people were aware that the majority of "news pieces" are actually paid advertisements, they wouldn't be so apt to jump on the mainstream media bandwagon.
Of course, eventually even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while, and there are a lot of journalists out there, so in aggregate, mistakes tend to be self-correcting eventually, but it's a very real problem, and IMO is getting worse with each passing year.
As of last week, CNN was continually bandying about this story, that the Trump administration had handed down a list of "banned terms" to the CDC.
Thing is, there is no such list, and no one ever said any terms were banned... but CNN has yet to announce any sort of retraction for the blatantly and demonstrably false claims they're perpetuating.... and they're far from the sole villian in this regard (looking at you, MSNBC and Fox).
Ergo, I don't expect much if any self-correction in the near future, any more than I expect banks to self-regulate without destroying the economy.
Slashdot Mirror
If you have long term physical access you can do anything...
FTFY. by the sound of this flaw, the amount of physical access needed is negligible.
Think about all the times you step away from a live PC every day; if the amount of physical access needed is trivial (say, 2 seconds to plug in a flash drive and let a script run), a bad actor masquerading as the maintenance guy could easily compromise every machine in your office in the time it takes to get a fresh cup o' Joe.
the justices said they'll hear South Dakota's contention that the 1992 ruling is obsolete in the e-commerce era and should be overturned.
Ah, good! Too many old laws cutting into profit margins these days!
Next, after the precedent is set, they can go after that pesky First Amendment; after all, the Founding Fathers couldn't have possibly envisioned a world where we can communicate with anyone, anywhere instantaneously, so obviously the antiquated belief that people actually have a right to communicate freely needs to be eliminated.
Be careful what you wish for - you just might get it.
You seem to have no faith in the free market.
Yea that tends to happen when people use logical reasoning, since the closest thing to a "free market" that exists today would be the economy of Somalia.
I don't know anyone who thinks Somalian economics is a good idea.
So, don't be responsible, because you can just take water from someone else?
Yea, I can imagine how well that would work out.
Trading arsenic for cyanide isn't really an improvement, you know.
Aaaaand this is why I vote third party; D & R are a lose-lose proposition, proven time and again.
So in order to avoid a "lose-lose" situation, you make absolutely SURE you'll lose by throwing away your vote and making sure that one of the people you don't like wins?
No, I vote my conscience, which is pretty much always aligned with a third party. You can't blame me for the situation caused by D and R, because I don't vote for D or R.
BTW, less than half of the electorate votes for D or R in a Presidential election - about 10% vote third party like me, and another 45% don't vote at all; so if you want to accuse someone of being part of the problem, blame the non-voters, or the 48% who continually vote to keep the same assholes in power.
Now, would a random person who doesn't have a Missouri ID get enough help to get one? Would the assistance be enough to get the potential voter to a DMV station while it's open?
It is explained on the link LynnwoodRooster posted, if you had bothered to look at it.
Also, you don't have to go to a DMV, any county courthouse can accommodate the new ID requirements.
Of course, if you're not willing to do the minimal amount of legwork required to obtain a free voter ID in Missouri, then you have no one to blame but yourself.
That's not going to work. Removing the D's and R's will exacerbate long lines at a polling places and discourage voting.
Yea, well, if you're voting without fully informing yourself first, then I hope you are discouraged, as low-information voters are one of the main reasons our system is so fucked up right now.
These methods aren't supposed to produce unbiased results. They're supposed to automate human judgements.
Well thank goodness for that! God help us if more people actually thought critically and formed their own opinions, rather than having a corporate algorithm decide our beliefs for us.
> And by supporting that racist, misogynistic piece of crap they are contributing to a culture in this country that is racist and misogynistic.
Or maybe they just researched the white gloves crimes of Clinton, or got most blatantly, rudely cheated out of the chance to vote Sanders and they voted *the other candidate*?
Aaaaand this is why I vote third party; D & R are a lose-lose proposition, proven time and again.
How many clusterfucks is it going to take for people to wake up and realize that this has been a FAILED strategy and move on?
Based on my experiences? All of them.
It will take all the clusterfucks.
You can get any result you want out of a machine learning approach to classification. Training the model to give the answers you want isn't cheating, it's how the algorithms are supposed to work.
... and proof that such algorithms area terrible method for producing unbiased information.
Of course, that's hardly the intent.
Republicans are for states rights, unless the states pass laws they don't like.
Democrats are for states rights, unless the states pass laws they don't like.
Actually, I think the title of this post explains it all - there's a few thousand miles of difference between "can cause" and "will cause."
The machines at the bank that count cash are based on 100-year-old technology, but the financial industry still relies on them heavily, because they just fucking work.
Why on earth would an ID be required? It's a needless extra complication for no good reason. You send out the voting cards to all registered voters, they show up at the polls, you score them off the list as they receive their ballot. Done. Everyone is identified, no one needs to get expensive, or complex to get ID cards.
Hi, I'm your next-door neighbor, and I vehemently disagree with you politically! So when I saw the mailman dropping off ballots today, I made sure to take yours out of your mailbox and give it to my 17-year-old son. Since there's no requirement to show ID when dropping off the ballot, it should be easy for him to impersonate you.
Also remove every "(R)" and "(D)" from the ballot
That is truly brilliant, as outside Presidential elections, most people probably don't actually know the candidates names.
The PROBLEM is that minorities are apparently incapable of doing this. One can only assume why.... Is it they are too stupid to go get a free ID? It's not like they don't have time...
What state doesn't charge for a photo ID? It's something like $12 bucks for an ID in MO.
You can go to any county courthouse and get one for about 10 bucks. Even leftists admit that narrative is bullshit - https://www.snopes.com/2015/10...
You're trying to be funny,right? Surely someone with a 3 digit UID isn't that ignorant...
... and making smart ass comments that in no way contribute to the conversation... how would you characterize that behavior?
If we're seeking to have an informed electorate, then this poses a bit of a problem
Most adults are not ignorant due to a lack of ability - the amount of intelligence needed to read a birth certificate is minimal - even less than the amount needed to send a tweet.
The reason most adults are ignorant is because they want to be. They prefer it. Being uninformed makes life a lot easier. There are no weighty considerations to make - just vote for the candidate with the nicest hair, or the tallest, or the best ..... body.
Actually, it's the dopamine rush - repeated studies have been conducted which strongly indicate that the human brain reacts the same way to defending a strongly held belief as it does when the body snorts a big fat line of cocaine.
So, really, the reason most adults prefer to stay in their personal belief bubbles isn't comfort, it's because they're getting high off it.
You mean other than the 2 sources he already cited, one of which being CNN.com?
I think the idea is that if more people were aware that the majority of "news pieces" are actually paid advertisements, they wouldn't be so apt to jump on the mainstream media bandwagon.
Of course, eventually even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while, and there are a lot of journalists out there, so in aggregate, mistakes tend to be self-correcting eventually, but it's a very real problem, and IMO is getting worse with each passing year.
As of last week, CNN was continually bandying about this story, that the Trump administration had handed down a list of "banned terms" to the CDC.
Thing is, there is no such list, and no one ever said any terms were banned... but CNN has yet to announce any sort of retraction for the blatantly and demonstrably false claims they're perpetuating.... and they're far from the sole villian in this regard (looking at you, MSNBC and Fox).
Ergo, I don't expect much if any self-correction in the near future, any more than I expect banks to self-regulate without destroying the economy.