I've noticed lot of people suggest the lookup reciept but it wouldn't work, nor be allowed. One of the important aspects of the voting procedure it that the vote itself is entirely anonomous. You might not understand that, but in the same way that your religious beliefs (or lack thereof) could affect your standing in society, so can your political affiliation. If you get a receipt that ties you to your vote, then an outsider could see your ticket and your vote would be known, thus those who are worried, would simply not vote, bad for democracy!
You're quite right about an electronic vote not being inherently bad--The problem I see with the current crop of electronic voting machines is that they are far to complex, why on earth do they need to be? Surely it can be a custom chip running, the complexity of it should match a toddlers toy. All it needs are buttons with pictures on them (analog or digital) for each of the candidates, a big okay button.
To record it you just need a simple tally and a receipt being printed on a paper spool behind a glass cover, so the voter can be sure that it's been recorded. The spool can be run through a OCR machine, or looked at manually to verify the vote.
Throw a development team together and give them a couple of million, and you'll have a cheap, working solution that will work anywhere around the country or world.
Wouldn't one of the greatest problems be that of signal to noise. If P2P is employed as a way to supress censorship, then we by that very mark, we are unaware of who published it (since we don't want the author being censored at a later date)
Now spread this out to a wide implementation, what news is 'worthy' and 'trusted' to read if this very untraceable route holds true? I might as well read mind-numbing, ultra-biased blogs, because that is all the system would amount to. I go to the news outlets I currently do because I can to a high degree trust the articles, news without that trust is.. gossip.
P2P for articles, especially news doesn't hold true, how is the article propogated? Will I have to wait 2 days for a fresh article to make its way around the Internet to me? If I want news, I'm used to getting information when I want it, P2P fails on this point.
People think P2P is the cure to [insert internet downfall] because it works for MP3's. But MP3-P2P essentially runs off peoples greed, so there are mass copies of MP3's around, no-one cares if an Mp3 is four days, old, 3 years old, it makes not a difference, but hell, even MP3's are tainted, blanks, bad rips, misnamed, to assume this wouldn't follow on to any other P2P implementation is wishful thinking.
Not to mention that only when an article gains a certain critical popularity mass would most people be able to find it on the system due to the inability to search every user without having a centralised database/hub (which could of course be.. you got it, censored!)
Are we doomed to a future consisting entirely of middleware, middle of the road first person shooters? Whats that I hear? another [insert old war] based game coming out, Zz.
Sam and Max, the original, was a joy to play, the characters were perfectly crazy, just thinking of that amazing game makes me smile. The story was excellent and everyone worshipped Lucasarts, the world was good. Their entire line of games at that time was a showcase to how games should be made. So how can they go wrong so magnificiently wrong with their marketing descisions lately? How can they lose their way?
All 'we' want is the same characters, with the same 2D graphics (be it at 1024 res), the same *excellent* animation and a similarly excellent script. People aren't bored of 2D! 3D looks dated by the time the game goes gold whereas 2D endures.
3D doesn't suit point 'n' clicks (although "Runaway a Road Adventure" is pretty slick, it's 2D sets with 3D(toonish) people, works well but it's no S&M or DOTT) so why not stick to the tried, tested and proved approach of 2D excellence?
Lucasarts had it on a plate, they've got the characters, they've got the talent to produce both exciting and unexpected scripts and the artistic skills to bring them to life.
I saw a Sam and Max cartoon on 'childrens' TV last year, if the characters are judged good enough to appeal to a mass audience such as that plus the legions of Lucasarts fans waiting with baited breath, how can they do anything but not make a profit, along with raising their crumbling image?
Hmm... Think carefully what your saying. Say in Q3 you got 120fps on a 1gig machine, you wouldnt expect much more then that on a 1000gig machine. The Graphics card would be the bottleneck.
Quake 3 tends to be best at testing one machines config, and it is quite good at testing a network connection.
As it is at the moment, I cannot walk for more then three minutes in any direction without stumbling across an advert, a Nike sign on someones shoe, a fly poster on the wall, painted Taxi Cabs, radio ads, sides of buses,TV ads,massive poster ads does it not seem a little extreme to you?
If this does become a reality then it will invade what little time we do have away from these major company slogans. Imagine sitting at home tapping away on your computer *beep* "you havn't moved in 2 hours, you can nip down the road to get a cheeseburger for £.80"
Its getting too extreme, surely having such a flood of marketing lowers peoples attentions of it, we dont need the constant stream of adverts where-ever we go, allow us to use out own free will to choose items for God sake. Whats next? Sending adverts into your head while you sleep? (Taken from a Futurama episode...)
Slashdot Mirror
I've noticed lot of people suggest the lookup reciept but it wouldn't work, nor be allowed. One of the important aspects of the voting procedure it that the vote itself is entirely anonomous. You might not understand that, but in the same way that your religious beliefs (or lack thereof) could affect your standing in society, so can your political affiliation. If you get a receipt that ties you to your vote, then an outsider could see your ticket and your vote would be known, thus those who are worried, would simply not vote, bad for democracy!
You're quite right about an electronic vote not being inherently bad--The problem I see with the current crop of electronic voting machines is that they are far to complex, why on earth do they need to be? Surely it can be a custom chip running, the complexity of it should match a toddlers toy. All it needs are buttons with pictures on them (analog or digital) for each of the candidates, a big okay button.
To record it you just need a simple tally and a receipt being printed on a paper spool behind a glass cover, so the voter can be sure that it's been recorded. The spool can be run through a OCR machine, or looked at manually to verify the vote.
Throw a development team together and give them a couple of million, and you'll have a cheap, working solution that will work anywhere around the country or world.
Now spread this out to a wide implementation, what news is 'worthy' and 'trusted' to read if this very untraceable route holds true? I might as well read mind-numbing, ultra-biased blogs, because that is all the system would amount to.
I go to the news outlets I currently do because I can to a high degree trust the articles, news without that trust is.. gossip.
P2P for articles, especially news doesn't hold true, how is the article propogated? Will I have to wait 2 days for a fresh article to make its way around the Internet to me? If I want news, I'm used to getting information when I want it, P2P fails on this point.
People think P2P is the cure to [insert internet downfall] because it works for MP3's. But MP3-P2P essentially runs off peoples greed, so there are mass copies of MP3's around, no-one cares if an Mp3 is four days, old, 3 years old, it makes not a difference, but hell, even MP3's are tainted, blanks, bad rips, misnamed, to assume this wouldn't follow on to any other P2P implementation is wishful thinking.
Not to mention that only when an article gains a certain critical popularity mass would most people be able to find it on the system due to the inability to search every user without having a centralised database/hub (which could of course be.. you got it, censored!)
Sam and Max, the original, was a joy to play, the characters were perfectly crazy, just thinking of that amazing game makes me smile. The story was excellent and everyone worshipped Lucasarts, the world was good.
Their entire line of games at that time was a showcase to how games should be made. So how can they go wrong so magnificiently wrong with their marketing descisions lately? How can they lose their way?
All 'we' want is the same characters, with the same 2D graphics (be it at 1024 res), the same *excellent* animation and a similarly excellent script. People aren't bored of 2D! 3D looks dated by the time the game goes gold whereas 2D endures. 3D doesn't suit point 'n' clicks (although "Runaway a Road Adventure" is pretty slick, it's 2D sets with 3D(toonish) people, works well but it's no S&M or DOTT) so why not stick to the tried, tested and proved approach of 2D excellence?
Lucasarts had it on a plate, they've got the characters, they've got the talent to produce both exciting and unexpected scripts and the artistic skills to bring them to life.
I saw a Sam and Max cartoon on 'childrens' TV last year, if the characters are judged good enough to appeal to a mass audience such as that plus the legions of Lucasarts fans waiting with baited breath, how can they do anything but not make a profit, along with raising their crumbling image?
Sigh...
--Doobeh
Hmm... Think carefully what your saying.
Say in Q3 you got 120fps on a 1gig machine, you wouldnt expect much more then that on a 1000gig machine. The Graphics card would be the bottleneck.
Quake 3 tends to be best at testing one machines config, and it is quite good at testing a network connection.
Regards.
As it is at the moment, I cannot walk for more then three minutes in any direction without stumbling across an advert, a Nike sign on someones shoe, a fly poster on the wall, painted Taxi Cabs, radio ads, sides of buses,TV ads,massive poster ads does it not seem a little extreme to you?
If this does become a reality then it will invade what little time we do have away from these major company slogans. Imagine sitting at home tapping away on your computer *beep* "you havn't moved in 2 hours, you can nip down the road to get a cheeseburger for £.80"
Its getting too extreme, surely having such a flood of marketing lowers peoples attentions of it, we dont need the constant stream of adverts where-ever we go, allow us to use out own free will to choose items for God sake.
Whats next? Sending adverts into your head while you sleep? (Taken from a Futurama episode...)
Regards.