BlackBoxVoting.org published an announcement that voting machine vendors are now hiring more support techs, asking people with skills who want to protect democracy from broken voting systems to get paid to do it:
On Sun, 8/24/08, Black Box Voting wrote: From: Black Box Voting Subject: From BBV: Patriotic Techs - Please apply for voting machine tech temp jobs
Widest possible distribution needed. Please do spread this in blogs, etc:
This post will no doubt produce howls of objection for the vendors that read it. Black Box Voting is encouraging all individuals with a technical background to search and apply for temporary tech ELECTION SUPPORT jobs for the November 2008 election. Hiring is underway for temporary technicians to help with voting machines this fall.
We want to see You, the People, enter into the vendor mix directly HOW TO FIND TEMPORARY ELECTION TECH POSITIONS: In a presidential election year, voting machine vendors will hire and trainthousands of technicians staffed around the country. For example, anywhere that Election Systems & Software has a machine, they are under contract to provide an on-site support tech. Hart Intercivic, Premier (Diebold), and Sequoia also use Election Day support technicians.
Temporary election tech support jobs have been spotted on hotjobs.com, rollouts.com, and local tech temp firms like (in 2006) DecisionOne. The tech services firm may be a subcontractor for the big four voting machine companies.
Sometimes you'll find the positions advertised by your local county. Sites like Rollouts.com have you register in their E-tech database. They search for techs based on skill set and area. There isn't much in the way of a skill set needed for the election projects.
QUIETLY APPLY FOR THE JOBS Anyone with tech skills interested in safeguarding the November election is encouraged to regisster at technical recruiting sites and apply for any election-related projects.
CONSIDER ASKING FOR TIME OFF ON YOUR FULL TIME JOB TO DO THIS. This November, there may be no better way to watch the behind-the-scenes process than to be a stagehand, so to speak. It is not the vendor, and not the government, that has the right to elections information, it is the PUBLIC.
Citizens have inalienable rights to sovereignty over the government they created and pay for. These rights cannot be honored without mechanisms to see all information related to elections, and ultimately, to have control processes that honor citizen sovereignty. That said, it ain't gonna happen this November. Therefore it is entirely appropriate, patriotic, and important, for citizens to apply for temporary positions as voting machine technicians to provide inside public oversight for the process. There will be nondisclosure agreements, which are not appropriate at all for public elections, but it's a reality now that vendors are trespassing on citizen right to know. There may be issues that arise which the public clearly has a right to know. When that happens, a decision must be made.
YOU WON'T BE THE FIRST We have already been in communications with other patriotic volunteers who have successfully obtained these positions in the past, and are doing this for November. THERE ARE ALWAYS WAYS TO DEAL WITH IMPORTANT ISSUES IF THEY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC GOOD. You, the People, are needed on the inside of the elections industry this November. This is a public service bulletin from Black Box Voting. Black Box Voting Tool Kit 2008 - free download here: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/toolkit2008.pdf Empower more election watchdog actions:
The NSA is supposed to care about me, and about you, and about each American whose rights the Constitution directs the government - which includes the NSA - to protect. Not to invade our rights because the NSA doesn't care about them, us or the Constitution.
Now that Congress has demonstrated its enthusiasm for rewriting laws when telcos and the NSA violate them (along with the Constitution, like in the 4th Amendment), as it just did this Summer in the FISA, why should the NSA care about the law at all? Laws are for little people.
When China starts exploring space and developing new technology for it (not just retracing the USA's pioneering steps), will China publish as much of its results for free consumption by the rest of the world as the USA has? Did Russia ever publish as much as the USA has?
Or will the capitalists just freely subsidize the (ex/) Communists' space industries without getting as much back?
By keeping the spectrum in the hands of the existing billionaire's club, their cozy cartel, and keeping out new competition which might actually innovate and actually compete with them.
No, we're not ready. The public has already spent hundreds of $millions ($billions, if you include spectrum giveaways to incumbents, or just locking out new competition with high prices and anticompetitive rules) in government subsidies to this extremely rich and powerful TV industry.
So we should of course spend even more of the public's money on this industry that works furiously, tirelessly, constantly, to lie to us and corrupt us.
Humans are our DNA's elaborately evolved package to defend it from a hostile universe. Sending our DNA out into space undefended with its human package is simply surrendering without a fight.
Hey, let's try just changing administrations and giving the FAA new bosses who aren't Republicans. It's worth trying at FEMA and the Department of Justice. Since the last 8 years have seen so much Republican involvement in America's aviation industry, we've probably got nothing left to lose at FAA, either.
The mayor of a town of 6000 is responsible for whether it's the meth capital of her state. Especially when she becomes governor of that state, with so much more power, but the problem gets only worse.
The senator from a big state like Illinois has zero control over whether a giant city in it like Chicago has a lot of drugs (that it's had for centuries). A state senator has a little more control, but even that's not much.
You zombie Republicans are so incompetent at knowing anything about government that you'll grunt how Obama has less "executive experience" than Palin has, when hers is all bad, and of course therefore also more than McCain has, either. But then you'll grunt how Obama is more to blame for executive incompetence that has nothing to do with him, as some demented argument that Palin's executive experience means nothing.
Thanks, that's another excellent suggestion. $600 WUXGA notebooks are really cool. I wonder whether the GPU/ethernet is fast enough to play 1080p HD streamed from the network, running Linux?
Also, I wonder whether I can get a "Windows refund" and knock some $more off the price...
I was searching the Web for just "WUXGA notebooks", not for "notebooks factory upgradeable to WUXGA". Thanks for that very clear explanation. Do you happen to have a URL for the best place to start picking among the features you mentioned?
I bought a Dell Inspiron 8000 in 2001. For $2200, it came with a 15" 1600x1200 screen, the first one in an under $5000 notebook. I knew I was buying a PC that would stay "current" for quite a while (despite its P3/1GHz and slowish CD-R). But if I want to jump to the next higher resolution now, 1920x1200 (1080p), I've still got to spend well over $2500.
After the past 7 years, in which notebooks, TVs, projectors, phones, iPods and everywhere else I look have made substantial LCDs a huge mass market, why aren't these things cheap yet?
I don't really need a palmtop PC to take everywhere. I'd rather keep my phone with me all the time, and use it as a remote and mic/earphone when I'm near a PC (maybe booting the PC off my own secured Desktop stored on the phone). If P4/2GHz/1GB/GPU notebooks with 1080p (1920x1200) screens 15" or bigger were $500 each, I'd buy a bunch of them to leave in my usual haunts, instead of schlepping them around.
There's a lot of evidence (despite a lot of disagreement) that the Great Pyramids and the Sphinx in Egypt, Angkor Wat in Cambodia, and Chichen Itza in the Yucatan are all monuments to the sky as it appeared 13.5 thousand years ago. Even though none of those monuments seem to actually be at all that old (though perhaps half that old, in their original constructions), which seems to indicate that the memory was preserved for six or seven millennia without such a monumental "permanent marker".
These unearthed skeletons date from approximately that time. I wonder if they'll shed any light on what was so important from their epoch that it earned the most permanent and recognizable "bookmarks" that humanity has ever kept?
They're the ones who want it. They're the ones with some value attached to it. Let them make an offer to you.
Turn it down. See what they offer next.
Why should you "negotiate against yourself" by setting the values, when you don't know how much they can afford for the value they will receive that they can't get anywhere else?
For that matter, why am I explaining this to you for free? Dammit.
You're invoking a rightwing Canadian paper's column that's anchored on a statistician whose official report to the government, disagreeing with some climate science, wasn't peer reviewed by anyone except some people he picked himself to review it. A disagreement that he backed up by saying the statisticians he disagreed with are "isolated from the statistics community". But yet you're claiming that the ones who disagree with those stats are buried and ignored.
That's quite a mess. Tell me more about Capricorn One: why isn't that front page news, since those Moon landings are a hoax.
Plenty of evidence. They are not ignored by the deniers who pretend they're correct. They are ignored by actual scientists, because they're clearly incorrect, because their methodologies are invalid. Which is why they're paid for by deniers, rather than the ample funding for regular science. Of which there is quite a lot, that overwhelmingly confirms that reducing human generation of Greenhouse pollution would slow, stop or even reverse the Greenhouse threat.
Oh yeah - the Apollo Program did indeed land men on the Moon.
[Google] wants Firefox to perform well with its applications, that's for sure. Indeed, it even wants IE to perform well with Gmail and the rest. It's just that it has very limited control over this.
Why doesn't Google just contribute code to Mozilla for Firefox that works well with Google's apps? It's not "control", but it's how open source projects work instead of control: leadership by coding. Since Google has 200M users who Mozilla's org is supporting rather than at Google's expense, why doesn't Google give back to the Mozilla project?
Is it all really because Google is at war with the Mozilla license?
Where is your evidence of valid "scientific papers questioning global warming ending careers without ever seeing the light of day"?
We have lots of real evidence of oil corporations funding fake science to deny climate change. Do you have real evidence of your conspiracy theory claims?
Zarya was funded and is owned by the US, though we paid Russia quite a lot to build it. Even thought Zvezda was really built mainly by the Soviets in the 1980s for their old programme, it was delayed quite a lot (delaying the entire ISS deployment), launched without backup or insurance (causing extra NASA expenses and still more delays), and has broken down a lot (more delays). Russia basically cut back funding its ISS commitments (though the $1M Pizza Hut logo on Zvezda helped out). Meanwhile Russia has funded its other projects quite handsomely, what with $150 oil barrels and a quite "remarkable" natural gas and oil export industry.
Slashdot Mirror
BlackBoxVoting.org published an announcement that voting machine vendors are now hiring more support techs, asking people with skills who want to protect democracy from broken voting systems to get paid to do it:
You're right.
The NSA is supposed to care about me, and about you, and about each American whose rights the Constitution directs the government - which includes the NSA - to protect. Not to invade our rights because the NSA doesn't care about them, us or the Constitution.
Now that Congress has demonstrated its enthusiasm for rewriting laws when telcos and the NSA violate them (along with the Constitution, like in the 4th Amendment), as it just did this Summer in the FISA, why should the NSA care about the law at all? Laws are for little people.
When China starts exploring space and developing new technology for it (not just retracing the USA's pioneering steps), will China publish as much of its results for free consumption by the rest of the world as the USA has? Did Russia ever publish as much as the USA has?
Or will the capitalists just freely subsidize the (ex/) Communists' space industries without getting as much back?
Er, that doesn't even have anything to do with the overall spectrum auction. They don't get everything they want, just lots of it.
But since you're going to be a cunt when I'm just offering you some friendly insight, you go fuck yourself. With a WiMAX tower, bitch.
By keeping the spectrum in the hands of the existing billionaire's club, their cozy cartel, and keeping out new competition which might actually innovate and actually compete with them.
No, we're not ready. The public has already spent hundreds of $millions ($billions, if you include spectrum giveaways to incumbents, or just locking out new competition with high prices and anticompetitive rules) in government subsidies to this extremely rich and powerful TV industry.
So we should of course spend even more of the public's money on this industry that works furiously, tirelessly, constantly, to lie to us and corrupt us.
Humans are our DNA's elaborately evolved package to defend it from a hostile universe. Sending our DNA out into space undefended with its human package is simply surrendering without a fight.
Hey, let's try just changing administrations and giving the FAA new bosses who aren't Republicans. It's worth trying at FEMA and the Department of Justice. Since the last 8 years have seen so much Republican involvement in America's aviation industry, we've probably got nothing left to lose at FAA, either.
The mayor of a town of 6000 is responsible for whether it's the meth capital of her state. Especially when she becomes governor of that state, with so much more power, but the problem gets only worse.
The senator from a big state like Illinois has zero control over whether a giant city in it like Chicago has a lot of drugs (that it's had for centuries). A state senator has a little more control, but even that's not much.
You zombie Republicans are so incompetent at knowing anything about government that you'll grunt how Obama has less "executive experience" than Palin has, when hers is all bad, and of course therefore also more than McCain has, either. But then you'll grunt how Obama is more to blame for executive incompetence that has nothing to do with him, as some demented argument that Palin's executive experience means nothing.
Congratulations! You're a zombie army.
When science says that oil corps and other big "resource extractors" should't just get whatever they want, Palin's hates science.
Though if being mayor of the meth capital of Alaska counts as "chemistry policy", Palin is ahead of the curve.
Thanks, that's another excellent suggestion. $600 WUXGA notebooks are really cool. I wonder whether the GPU/ethernet is fast enough to play 1080p HD streamed from the network, running Linux?
Also, I wonder whether I can get a "Windows refund" and knock some $more off the price...
Thanks. Your help has just made up for so many pointless, pointlessly wrong and even pointlessly abusive Slashdot threads posted by so many others. :).
So the FCC is going to "end debate" with a wireless death ray ?
Tell me for sure: do these tinfoil hats block the government's TV waves from controlling my brain, or amplify them?
Anonymous zombie army cowards mean nothing to me. Thanks for the proof that the trollMods mean even less than that.
I was searching the Web for just "WUXGA notebooks", not for "notebooks factory upgradeable to WUXGA". Thanks for that very clear explanation. Do you happen to have a URL for the best place to start picking among the features you mentioned?
I bought a Dell Inspiron 8000 in 2001. For $2200, it came with a 15" 1600x1200 screen, the first one in an under $5000 notebook. I knew I was buying a PC that would stay "current" for quite a while (despite its P3/1GHz and slowish CD-R). But if I want to jump to the next higher resolution now, 1920x1200 (1080p), I've still got to spend well over $2500.
After the past 7 years, in which notebooks, TVs, projectors, phones, iPods and everywhere else I look have made substantial LCDs a huge mass market, why aren't these things cheap yet?
I don't really need a palmtop PC to take everywhere. I'd rather keep my phone with me all the time, and use it as a remote and mic/earphone when I'm near a PC (maybe booting the PC off my own secured Desktop stored on the phone). If P4/2GHz/1GB/GPU notebooks with 1080p (1920x1200) screens 15" or bigger were $500 each, I'd buy a bunch of them to leave in my usual haunts, instead of schlepping them around.
How long must I wait?
There's a lot of evidence (despite a lot of disagreement) that the Great Pyramids and the Sphinx in Egypt, Angkor Wat in Cambodia, and Chichen Itza in the Yucatan are all monuments to the sky as it appeared 13.5 thousand years ago. Even though none of those monuments seem to actually be at all that old (though perhaps half that old, in their original constructions), which seems to indicate that the memory was preserved for six or seven millennia without such a monumental "permanent marker".
These unearthed skeletons date from approximately that time. I wonder if they'll shed any light on what was so important from their epoch that it earned the most permanent and recognizable "bookmarks" that humanity has ever kept?
It's a space worker's paradise over there.
They're the ones who want it. They're the ones with some value attached to it. Let them make an offer to you.
Turn it down. See what they offer next.
Why should you "negotiate against yourself" by setting the values, when you don't know how much they can afford for the value they will receive that they can't get anywhere else?
For that matter, why am I explaining this to you for free? Dammit.
You're invoking a rightwing Canadian paper's column that's anchored on a statistician whose official report to the government, disagreeing with some climate science, wasn't peer reviewed by anyone except some people he picked himself to review it. A disagreement that he backed up by saying the statisticians he disagreed with are "isolated from the statistics community". But yet you're claiming that the ones who disagree with those stats are buried and ignored.
That's quite a mess. Tell me more about Capricorn One: why isn't that front page news, since those Moon landings are a hoax.
Typo.
http://www.google.com/search?q=(%22climate+change+denial%22+OR+%22global+warming+denial%22)+oil.
Plenty of evidence. They are not ignored by the deniers who pretend they're correct. They are ignored by actual scientists, because they're clearly incorrect, because their methodologies are invalid. Which is why they're paid for by deniers, rather than the ample funding for regular science. Of which there is quite a lot, that overwhelmingly confirms that reducing human generation of Greenhouse pollution would slow, stop or even reverse the Greenhouse threat.
Oh yeah - the Apollo Program did indeed land men on the Moon.
Why doesn't Google just contribute code to Mozilla for Firefox that works well with Google's apps? It's not "control", but it's how open source projects work instead of control: leadership by coding. Since Google has 200M users who Mozilla's org is supporting rather than at Google's expense, why doesn't Google give back to the Mozilla project?
Is it all really because Google is at war with the Mozilla license?
Where is your evidence of valid "scientific papers questioning global warming ending careers without ever seeing the light of day"?
We have lots of real evidence of oil corporations funding fake science to deny climate change. Do you have real evidence of your conspiracy theory claims?
Zarya was funded and is owned by the US, though we paid Russia quite a lot to build it. Even thought Zvezda was really built mainly by the Soviets in the 1980s for their old programme, it was delayed quite a lot (delaying the entire ISS deployment), launched without backup or insurance (causing extra NASA expenses and still more delays), and has broken down a lot (more delays). Russia basically cut back funding its ISS commitments (though the $1M Pizza Hut logo on Zvezda helped out). Meanwhile Russia has funded its other projects quite handsomely, what with $150 oil barrels and a quite "remarkable" natural gas and oil export industry.
"Remarkable" doesn't always mean "good".