Although there are limited data available, all indications are that Internet voting is not hazardous. So far it doesn't seem to be carcinogenic, nor has anyone become pregnant or contracted an STD by Internet voting.
We have to assume that if the Internet is secure enough for us to buy stuff, then it is secure enough for voting. Certainly far more effort will be spent to make transactions involving money secure than to make voting secure. From a practical standpoint, only close elections can be stolen anyway. If a close election is stolen, then approximately the same number of persons disagree with the result as if the election were not stolen, so what difference does it really make from the standpoint of quality of outcome?
The Washington Post has merely realized that it needs to allow ignorant posters their forum in order to compete with talk radio. I have seen little evidence that ensuing discussions necessarily iterate to rational, informed conclusions.
Providing a forum for extreme ideas is a bit like teaching creationism in science classes.
Next time get an unrelated party to purchase the work from you and then donate the work. You can further donate the money you were paid to the purchaser's favorite charity. Two donations?
Biden currently has one vote in the Senate. Should he become Vice President, he would one vote only if there were a tie breaker. The likelyhood of there being a tie breaker is extremely remote, so his influence in the legislative branch will be vastly diminished. Given that, his alledgedly poor voting record on technology issues make it a win for techonology if he becomes Vice President, assuming that his replacement would have a better record. (I don't know what the median voting record, so I'm skeptical about the likelyhood of that).
Referring our congress as "democrat-controlled" is either an example of parroting republic party talking points or showing a profound ignorance of both the make-up and the way congress works. The Senate is 49-49 with two independants, one of whom votes with Democrats, the other (Lieberman) with Republicans on defense, civil liberties and trade issues. If there is a tie, the Vice President breaks it, however ties are unlikely as partisan issues are never voted on as it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster. The merciful lack of laws being passed is the result of neither party controlling congress.
In fairness, the previous congress, who brought us the DCMA was not controlled by Republicans either.
The RIAA's position seems like "frivolous litigation" to me. I find it odd that cases like this are never cited by either side in our ongoing tort "reform" debates.
This is where Google's greatest value really lies: data mining. The possible advertising revenue pales in comparison to the value of the corporate (and even consumer) intelligence that Google collects. Simply being able to detect that persons in company x are suddenly interested in company y and that investment bank z is also interested in company y would allow one to predict things like mergers. Increased specific searches around the holidays might help predict which retail chain might do well. The power of Google should not be underestimated.
If the final law were intended to prevent blocking port 25, providers would only need to charge for data originating from or destined to port 25. The law will certainly not regulate cost
A couple of years ago newspapers and network news showed the cabin layout of a 747 shown inside the Mona Lisa, supposively used by terrorists. What supprised me was how little attention was payed to the fact that nobody was giving credit to Leonardo da Vinci for inventing the 747.
The often suggested idea that we return to paper ballots misses an aspect of US elections that would make such thing difficult, namely the complexity of our elections. Although the national offices get most of the attention, ballots may include 20-100 other things to vote on. Everything from state representatives down to obscure changes in county and city charters that most don't even take the time to read.
These ballots have always been tedious to count by hand. Perhaps we could outsource the hand-counting to some third world country.
I was so saddened by this story that I have started taking up a collection in the office. So far I've collected more than 500 IP addresses to send not counting an entire block of 10.100.x.x
At least one of the hijacked addresses might have been used in a critical infrastructure homeland security role, therefore we could lock up the hijackers without charging them with anything! Send them to Guantonimo. Hold them indefinately. That would be an eye-opener for the spammers.
Slashdot Mirror
Although there are limited data available, all indications are that Internet voting is not hazardous. So far it doesn't seem to be carcinogenic, nor has anyone become pregnant or contracted an STD by Internet voting.
We have to assume that if the Internet is secure enough for us to buy stuff, then it is secure enough for voting. Certainly far more effort will be spent to make transactions involving money secure than to make voting secure. From a practical standpoint, only close elections can be stolen anyway. If a close election is stolen, then approximately the same number of persons disagree with the result as if the election were not stolen, so what difference does it really make from the standpoint of quality of outcome?
The Washington Post has merely realized that it needs to allow ignorant posters their forum in order to compete with talk radio. I have seen little evidence that ensuing discussions necessarily iterate to rational, informed conclusions.
Providing a forum for extreme ideas is a bit like teaching creationism in science classes.
Since we are logically zero based, a meaningful series would be 0123456789, not 1234567890 which just seems wrong here in computer land.
To perl the number 0123456789 is merely bogus. "Illegal octal digit..."
Next time get an unrelated party to purchase the work from you and then donate the work. You can further donate the money you were paid to the purchaser's favorite charity. Two donations?
Biden currently has one vote in the Senate. Should he become Vice President, he would one vote only if there were a tie breaker. The likelyhood of there being a tie breaker is extremely remote, so his influence in the legislative branch will be vastly diminished. Given that, his alledgedly poor voting record on technology issues make it a win for techonology if he becomes Vice President, assuming that his replacement would have a better record. (I don't know what the median voting record, so I'm skeptical about the likelyhood of that).
Referring our congress as "democrat-controlled" is either an example of parroting republic party talking points or showing a profound ignorance of both the make-up and the way congress works. The Senate is 49-49 with two independants, one of whom votes with Democrats, the other (Lieberman) with Republicans on defense, civil liberties and trade issues. If there is a tie, the Vice President breaks it, however ties are unlikely as partisan issues are never voted on as it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster. The merciful lack of laws being passed is the result of neither party controlling congress.
In fairness, the previous congress, who brought us the DCMA was not controlled by Republicans either.
The RIAA's position seems like "frivolous litigation" to me. I find it odd that cases like this are never cited by either side in our ongoing tort "reform" debates.
This is where Google's greatest value really lies: data mining. The possible advertising revenue pales in comparison to the value of the corporate (and even consumer) intelligence that Google collects. Simply being able to detect that persons in company x are suddenly interested in company y and that investment bank z is also interested in company y would allow one to predict things like mergers. Increased specific searches around the holidays might help predict which retail chain might do well. The power of Google should not be underestimated.
If the final law were intended to prevent blocking port 25, providers would only need to charge for data originating from or destined to port 25. The law will certainly not regulate cost
A couple of years ago newspapers and network news showed the cabin layout of a 747 shown inside the Mona Lisa, supposively used by terrorists. What supprised me was how little attention was payed to the fact that nobody was giving credit to Leonardo da Vinci for inventing the 747.
Most of the Congress, the President and the Justice Department. The Fair Credit Reporting Act more or less makes them immune to any consequences.
1. How much of our national debt and looming deficit will Chinese and India programmers assume?
2. Will the foreign programmers be willing to defend the US against terrorist threats as Americans are expected to do?
3. Will the foreign programmers help prop up our social security system?
4. Given that our national security depends on high tech capabilities, how will we maintain our hedgemony when we give up our expertise to foreigners?
We're not so much the "torch-bearer of democracy" anymore as we are a mob with torches. And proud of it!
The often suggested idea that we return to paper ballots misses an aspect of US elections that would make such thing difficult, namely the complexity of our elections. Although the national offices get most of the attention, ballots may include 20-100 other things to vote on. Everything from state representatives down to obscure changes in county and city charters that most don't even take the time to read.
These ballots have always been tedious to count by hand. Perhaps we could outsource the hand-counting to some third world country.
Price. Built in FM radio. Ability to modify firmware. I was about to buy the slim device, but now I'll wait. Perhaps there will be a price war.
As a nation with an MBA President, we should be prepared to outsource everything but our "core competencies". What are America's "core competencies"?
1. litigation
2. consumption
3. entertainment
4. warefare
This change will not change until we start outsourcing the two political parties.
I was so saddened by this story that I have started taking up a collection in the office. So far I've collected more than 500 IP addresses to send not counting an entire block of 10.100.x.x
At least one of the hijacked addresses might have been used in a critical infrastructure homeland security role, therefore we could lock up the hijackers without charging them with anything! Send them to Guantonimo. Hold them indefinately. That would be an eye-opener for the spammers.