The EFF delegate would keep explaining to the troops that they just had to compromise on those DRM issues in order to get the RIAA delegates support on those privacy issues, and so on.
You have a point, if the design isn't careful, we just end up trading one Congress for another. I think we can cut down on vote trading by requiring the candidates for delegation to register for some subset of related issues, so the EFF would not vote on issues that the RIAA would deal with except in those cases where their interests overlap. Then for any given item, people can choose to have a delegate they feel represents them on that issue (out of a field of delegates that can only vote on such issues), cast their own ballot, or decide not to vote.
The final goal could be an automated system of government... everyone enters their preferences into the machine, and the computers sort out each bill, tallying up everyone's vote based on their preferences. Scary;)
or could I sub-divide the issues among multiple delegates?
I think subdivision would work best, though at that point, you're basically voting on individual issues in the first place, except instead of personally voting on each issue, you're voting on representatives for each issue. It'd also introduce interesting difficulties, for instance, how do you ensure that when you assign your vote on abortion issues to a given representative, that that representative only spends your vote on abortion issues? There's also issues of making sure that you don't end up voting through two representatives on an issue.
If the problems could be worked out, it would pretty much fix most of the major problems with representative democracy, the worst of which being voting for people that don't represent you on many issues just to get your voice heard on one or two.
And the kids' daycare. Thats what the poster said, "HD Cable with on-demand and HBO, 6MB DSL, 4 cell phones with unlimited texting with 2 year contracts,... the Wii, xbox 360, playstation III".
If one side can't just choose a different license without informing the other, would this apply in reverse? The "or later" part does not modify any existing contracts. If I received a piece of software under GPL2 "or later" and someone else wants to distribute the program under GPL3, my copy of the software is not magically GPL3.
This (pdf) looks like the rebate form they've been using along with the list of discs you can choose from. That form expires in a few days, so there may be a new one somewhere else with different discs.
Are you seriously stating that every person in the world is a member of the "land or naval forces" or "in the Militia" and currently "in actual service"?
No, really, tell us all again about how "liberals" don't wish for whatever brain damage you have.
Good thing that the Constitution specifically defines treason and the process and punishment for such a crime, and none of the treason section of the Constitution says anything about the President having the power to declare anyone treasonous, much less the power to delegate that power.
Oh, and by the way: it's impossible by definition to commit treason against a foreign country.
Remember those ballots have to go to a machine that counts them. That machine is not perfect That's because you're doing it wrong. Machines should augment, not replace, humans. "Trust but Verify" -- at every step:
1) "Voting" Machine that prints out a combination human/optically readable ballot. Human verifies the human part says what they want it to say. We don't want observers confirming this, that's why privacy sleeves have been used for years. 2) "Sorting" Machine that sorts the ballots based on the optically readable ballot. Human flips through the stacks and verifies all of the human parts say the same thing for that race. Observers can confirm. 3) A dumb "Counting" Machine that counts a stack of ballots (without needing to know whose ballots are in it). Human puts the resulting number in the tally under the human readable name on the stack. Observers can confirm. Totals of the entire stack before sorting and after counting each race to confirm that nobody misplaced a stack of ballots.
At each step of the process, a very simple machine (low cost, minimum requirements for certification, etc) performs a single task (and hopefully it will perform it well). And following every machine step comes a step where humans can verify that the step was performed correctly. Since the individual machines don't contain any state about the election at all, voting machine malfunction cannot lose votes, and any malfunctioning piece of equipment can be replaced by any other piece that works. If standards are defined for each step of the process, then multiple companies can compete, driving down prices, and in the event a company is unable to provide sufficient numbers of voting machines, the remainder can be bought from other companies.
Furthermore, many of the tampering problems with paper ballots (whether cast electronically or not) can be taken care of with forethought and work. Ballot stuffing with leftover ballots (or duplicates, or casting the ballots people turn in as incorrect) can be stopped by issuing numbered ballots and invalidating the remaining or wrong ballots. Likewise, lost ballots would be known based on the gaps in numbers. Preventing this from identifying the voter (based on, say, their position in line relative to a planted observer) can be done by packaging the ballots in blocks of 100 or so, pre-randomized within that block. This way at the end of the day, only the unused ballots of open packages have to be invalidated, the remainder can be invalidated block-by-block (bigger blocks: more random and more to invalidate from an open package at the end of the day. smaller blocks: less random but less cleanup at the end).
I did. Switched it to satellite view, what's all that green stuff on the other side of the city?
Ketchikan is completely out of space.
I guess the green stuff must be radioactive wasteland. Should have thought about that before building a city there.
Oh, and the AIRPORT is on the other side
And they should have thought about that before building the airport there.
makes sense to anyone
I guess it makes sense to everyone who thinks that the federal government should bail out stupid banks, stupid airlines and stupid fisheries. Why not stupid cities too?
Re:Speaking of 'ignorance is no excuse'...
on
False Copyright Claims
·
· Score: 2, Funny
s/sediment/sentiment/ Damn, and here I was thinking that the poster was attempting to evoke an image of people wading through the sludge of the legal system.
I did read your post. Those services exist now and have been at the heart of the entire network neutrality debate that has been going on for some time.
Sure, 40Gbps is a publicity stunt, and sure, if it became everyday then people would use it, but the set-top video players, voip telephones, and everything else required for a non-stunt internet connection all exist now.
Oh, she will, will she? And this content comes from where, exactly?
Nice try, but this time the point you're trying to make is flat out wrong thanks to the internet providers pushing their own VoIP and TV services over their pipes. The content would come directly from the service provider and enjoy every last bit of bandwidth the user has between the service provider and the user.
and a corporate giant like Cisco is buying it, it would have been purchased without Windows why, again?
Who knows? Maybe because Cisco's windows site license/"software assurance" plan doesn't cover grandmothers using it in their homes?
Okay, who wants to try to come up with words which provide network neutrality, without preventing me from blocking spammers. You're welcome to block all the spam you want. Blocking email based on whether or not the sender shelled out cash *cough*goodmail*cough* isn't "blocking spam", just like blocking Youtube based on whether or not they shelled out cash for the bandwidth your customer was already paying for isn't a "tiered internet".
Around here, the words we use for "network neutrality" that don't prevent you from blocking spammers are "status" and "quo". We're not the ones trying to change the way the internet is run.
(Whether the necessary remaining data (what are hardwares x and y? how was PostgreSQL tunde) is published now, later, or never, is a separate issue. B-) ) From the SPEC site, click on the "Disclosures" links to find out the hardware and software used for each part of the test. For instance, the postgres server ran on a SunFire T2000 with one 8 core (4 virtual threads per core) UltraSPARC T1 processor at 1.2GHz, 16GB of ram running 64-bit solaris 10, etc. The HTML Disclosure links to the "Disclosure Archive" which is a.jar with all of the configuration files used.
Slashdot Mirror
The EFF delegate would keep explaining to the troops that they just had to compromise on those DRM issues in order to get the RIAA delegates support on those privacy issues, and so on.
;)
You have a point, if the design isn't careful, we just end up trading one Congress for another. I think we can cut down on vote trading by requiring the candidates for delegation to register for some subset of related issues, so the EFF would not vote on issues that the RIAA would deal with except in those cases where their interests overlap. Then for any given item, people can choose to have a delegate they feel represents them on that issue (out of a field of delegates that can only vote on such issues), cast their own ballot, or decide not to vote.
The final goal could be an automated system of government... everyone enters their preferences into the machine, and the computers sort out each bill, tallying up everyone's vote based on their preferences. Scary
or could I sub-divide the issues among multiple delegates?
I think subdivision would work best, though at that point, you're basically voting on individual issues in the first place, except instead of personally voting on each issue, you're voting on representatives for each issue. It'd also introduce interesting difficulties, for instance, how do you ensure that when you assign your vote on abortion issues to a given representative, that that representative only spends your vote on abortion issues? There's also issues of making sure that you don't end up voting through two representatives on an issue.
If the problems could be worked out, it would pretty much fix most of the major problems with representative democracy, the worst of which being voting for people that don't represent you on many issues just to get your voice heard on one or two.
Plus, if you have decent tools, there's a chance people won't destroy them first chance they get and not replace them.
:P
Rather, if you get decent tools they won't destroy them the first chance they get... they just won't return them
If you think that's bad, just wait til you see what happens when they're not there to issue token fines and slap people on the wrist.
This (pdf) looks like the rebate form they've been using along with the list of discs you can choose from. That form expires in a few days, so there may be a new one somewhere else with different discs.
isp will be forced to stop doing this.
That, or ISPs will work harder to defeat the detection.
Where the heck did personal responsibility run away to?
It bailed out back during the S&L bailout, the airline bailout, the...
It might come back someday, but most likely all these subprime mortgage brokers and homebuilders will be crying for a bailout again.
the wartime exemption
Are you seriously stating that every person in the world is a member of the "land or naval forces" or "in the Militia" and currently "in actual service"?
No, really, tell us all again about how "liberals" don't wish for whatever brain damage you have.
Then they came for IRC, and dammit, I use IRC, and if my ISP blocks it, it's a dealbreaker, even if I have to sue to cancel the contract.
No injury, no redressability, nada.
Breaking the law isn't an injury? If the government refuses to enforce the law, is there no redress available?
but an act of treason.
Good thing that the Constitution specifically defines treason and the process and punishment for such a crime, and none of the treason section of the Constitution says anything about the President having the power to declare anyone treasonous, much less the power to delegate that power.
Oh, and by the way: it's impossible by definition to commit treason against a foreign country.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is a bunch of detectives, not spies.
Except for the whole wire-tap thing. Which have been abused for decades.
Oh Yeah? Well, dbb3def560c4e620d61db69ea4c154d2 proves he's wrong! After all, it's a hash of a text file too!
1) "Voting" Machine that prints out a combination human/optically readable ballot. Human verifies the human part says what they want it to say. We don't want observers confirming this, that's why privacy sleeves have been used for years.
2) "Sorting" Machine that sorts the ballots based on the optically readable ballot. Human flips through the stacks and verifies all of the human parts say the same thing for that race. Observers can confirm.
3) A dumb "Counting" Machine that counts a stack of ballots (without needing to know whose ballots are in it). Human puts the resulting number in the tally under the human readable name on the stack. Observers can confirm. Totals of the entire stack before sorting and after counting each race to confirm that nobody misplaced a stack of ballots.
At each step of the process, a very simple machine (low cost, minimum requirements for certification, etc) performs a single task (and hopefully it will perform it well). And following every machine step comes a step where humans can verify that the step was performed correctly. Since the individual machines don't contain any state about the election at all, voting machine malfunction cannot lose votes, and any malfunctioning piece of equipment can be replaced by any other piece that works. If standards are defined for each step of the process, then multiple companies can compete, driving down prices, and in the event a company is unable to provide sufficient numbers of voting machines, the remainder can be bought from other companies.
Furthermore, many of the tampering problems with paper ballots (whether cast electronically or not) can be taken care of with forethought and work. Ballot stuffing with leftover ballots (or duplicates, or casting the ballots people turn in as incorrect) can be stopped by issuing numbered ballots and invalidating the remaining or wrong ballots. Likewise, lost ballots would be known based on the gaps in numbers. Preventing this from identifying the voter (based on, say, their position in line relative to a planted observer) can be done by packaging the ballots in blocks of 100 or so, pre-randomized within that block. This way at the end of the day, only the unused ballots of open packages have to be invalidated, the remainder can be invalidated block-by-block (bigger blocks: more random and more to invalidate from an open package at the end of the day. smaller blocks: less random but less cleanup at the end).
like for example which places are covered (and therefore which places have a blind eye)
If your aim is a completely open society, then even that should be released so that the blind spots get fixed.
Remind me how tracking everyone everywhere is going to do anything whatsoever to prevent that happening again?
If they try again, at least the cops will be able to say that the cars were not previously unknown?
Cheney also is accruing deferred salary
So, does a deferred salary include deferred raises for doing deferred jobs well done?
Look at it on a map...
I did. Switched it to satellite view, what's all that green stuff on the other side of the city?
Ketchikan is completely out of space.
I guess the green stuff must be radioactive wasteland. Should have thought about that before building a city there.
Oh, and the AIRPORT is on the other side
And they should have thought about that before building the airport there.
makes sense to anyone
I guess it makes sense to everyone who thinks that the federal government should bail out stupid banks, stupid airlines and stupid fisheries. Why not stupid cities too?
I did read your post. Those services exist now and have been at the heart of the entire network neutrality debate that has been going on for some time.
Sure, 40Gbps is a publicity stunt, and sure, if it became everyday then people would use it, but the set-top video players, voip telephones, and everything else required for a non-stunt internet connection all exist now.
Oh, she will, will she? And this content comes from where, exactly?
Nice try, but this time the point you're trying to make is flat out wrong thanks to the internet providers pushing their own VoIP and TV services over their pipes. The content would come directly from the service provider and enjoy every last bit of bandwidth the user has between the service provider and the user.
and a corporate giant like Cisco is buying it, it would have been purchased without Windows why, again?
Who knows? Maybe because Cisco's windows site license/"software assurance" plan doesn't cover grandmothers using it in their homes?
Around here, the words we use for "network neutrality" that don't prevent you from blocking spammers are "status" and "quo". We're not the ones trying to change the way the internet is run.