Yep - and in today's day and age, I guess there's nothing preventing you using your phone camera to snap a screen shot of your digital vote casting (or video, I guess) either.
There's no such thing as a "perfect" system, I guess...:(
ANYTHING that gives the voter the opportunity to walk out with confirmation of HOW they voted is a huge problem. In the system you describe, the voter could decide to not put their paper slip into the box, or to drop in a fake substitute (and no, you couldn't verify it was a real slip without making their vote non-anonymous in the process).
So, they walk out the door, show their slip to "Guido", and poof - their vote has been bought.
The only time their vote gets screwed up is if a manual recount is done at that station, which in terms of % is low (by design - with an electronic system).
You need a solution where the original vote is cast on paper, and is scanned in (and retained) by the system... and the voter verifies their vote electronically on screen before walking off empty-handed.
The DVD conversion certainly is a lossy process... if they could get the original film to look at frame-by-frame, you could certainly see a ton more detail, which might let you clarify if she's holding anything at all.
I just RTFA, and the partner with Casio is Toppan Printing... one of the world leaders in lenticular lens technology. Maybe they're going down the lenticular display route already? FYI, lenticular is a "no-glasses-required" 3D technology. I know many people hate lenticular, but that's usually because it's badly done - poor registration between the image and the lens. But, for a display you'd invest much more in ensuring proper registration in the first place and could achieve high quality every time.
The other cool use would be integration into a stereo 3D headset... two screens at HD resolution would make an awesome immersive experience, where you could incorporate a decent field of view without losing too much detail to be useful.
The other cool use would be integration into a stereo 3D headset... two screens at HD resolution would make an awesome immersive experience, where you could incorporate a decent field of view without losing too much detail to be useful.
it may be overkill for normal use (assuming the Retina display is already beyond the eye's capability to see detail), but there are other applications of such high density.
If you paired a 458dpi display with a 40lpi lenticular lens, you could display a whopping 11+ images for true 3-D. 11 images means that when you rotate the display back and forth the objects rotate too... so you can look "behind" things just like if they were really there in 3D - you get 11 different perspectives to view from. 40lpi lenses are good enough for hand-held lenticular (basically the minimum for handheld viewing distances so it doesn't look chunky). You could even do 80lpi decently, with about 6 images - which is still decent for rotation.
I'd LOVE to get my hands on one of those - the real trick would be matching the lens to the display, and getting it close enough to the switching plane to be effective (instead of on to of an already-thick cover glass).
Banning the use of such devices I can see... until we more fully understand them, and the potential un-intended impacts.
But to ban RESEARCH on such subjects??? The whole idea of research would be to understand these issues in the first place. Since when is better knowledge of something undesirable (in a "free" state, at least)?
Maybe it's an issue with the summary, and I should have RTFA... but I'm stunned that a global body would be so naieve and ignorant.
I was probably remembering the number backwards - 22 minutes of content for a 1/2hour show, not 22 minutes of advertising per hour.
I guess those commercials just drag on so much it SEEMS like they're longer than they actually are.:) Actually, I haven't watched commercials in years, thanks to my DVR. So much so, that I'm rarely up to date on what movies are coming out - that's about the only thing I miss from commercials.
Commercials aren't 60 seconds long. Try doubling that cost to at least $0.66/hour, assuming your other numbers are correct.
Actually, I think there's more like 22 minutes of advertising time per hour = 44 x 30sec commercials = 44 * $0.033 = $1.45/hour. That's not so far off their $2.
However, I am taking the other approach: I'm going to patent boycotting Google TV, and/or any other medium where ads are blocked. I already avoid DVD's with unskippable content, by ripping them for my AppleTV first... I paid for the DVD, why do I have to suffer through advertising EVERY time I want to watch it?
>>I use my DVR to record programs, then watch them "later" (at least 30 minutes later)
Actually, if there's 22 minutes of commercials per hour, you only have to wait 11 minutes before starting your 30-minute program to ensure you can skip all the commercials. Actually, seeing as some of those 11 minutes of commercials will come right at the end of the 30-minute segment, you could start a bit earlier.
If I can start watching Caprica 38 minutes sooner (1-hour show), then I'll do it!:)
My son, at 2 1/2 years old, got frustrated with a puzzle at his Montesory School (they start early in Belgium). He got up, said "Aw, fuck it." and walked away.
My wife was mortified when the teacher told her. I was proud he used it in context.:)
Well, although the local service I have here seems "ok" most of the time, after visiting overseas where they're still using full-analog for local calls (backwoods, India, for example), the quality is surprisingly better... and home seems crappy upon return.
My experience only... maybe I'm just getting old and can't handle duplex myself anymore.:)
I don't have an issue with the frequency range, but certainly do with latency, and the lack of true duplex any more!
I find (found) that talking on a true analog line is MUCH easier than any digital line today - be that Skype, cell phones, or even land lines in most countries. I'm always amazed when traveling abroad when I make a local call on a truly-analog system how much nicer the experience is!
With today's systems in "Westernized" countries, you can't even have an effective 2-way conversation. The duplex performance sucks - you can't hear anything while you're talking. Add to that a small but noticable delay, and you have to resort to long pauses between sentences to ensure you don't talk over one another.
Am I the only one that notices this? It's AWFUL compared to what it was like 20 years ago.
"Customer Satisfaction" for Facebook is measured in click-throughs and sales dollars... not in user complaints.
You and I are not customers to Facebook. We're the product. We're what they're selling - our eyeballs are being sold to the advertisers. Their only reason to make you happy is to ensure you come back (begrudgingly or not).
Once you realize that, their lack of "customer service" isn't surprising in the least. So long as you're not paying for the service, you're not a customer. They care very little about your privacy, your experience, the impact that their constant site layout changes and privacy policies have on you, the annoyance if/when they sell your personal data to mailing lists and spammers - so long as it all suits the needs of their true customers and doesn't piss you off enough that you don't keep coming back. This is the way of business... get used to it unless you want to pay for these things.
Yep - I bet he's hit on a Trade Secret of theirs in his blog post and/or development work, and they're just trying to scare him away from posting the details. Trade Secrets are only secrets as long as nobody else knows about them - there's no protection on them other than that.
The patent holds NO ability to stop him from disclosing ANYTHING - anything covered by the patent is by definition publicly disclosed in the patent itself. If it's not there, it's not covered. Period. The "international viewing" holds no water either - there's nothing preventing someone from viewing the patent from another country.
He can go tell them to fuck off. He can probably sue for SLAPP or something like that too. I would!
In addition, my understanding is that this goes even further - there's nothing preventing him from developing his own implementation of their patent. The only issue arises when he distributes it beyond himself. IANAL, so this part I'm only 99.9% sure on.:)
One of the biggest reasons is white-listing. My operator can't do that unless I provide my whitelist to them. My address book (updated on the go) is the whitelist.
Everything else goes to a "maybe spam" folder that I can peruse when I'm bored.
>> The iPhone, with its quality touch screen and beautiful, lickable looks, continues to announce 'amazing new features' that have been available in Blackberrys (Blackberries?) for nearly a decade.
There's a difference in philosophy here... Apple may be slow with some things like that, but when they do release it, they do it DAMN well (in most cases... at least). Quality and user experience rank much higher for them than simple feature list comparisons - and that's the single reason they have a highly profitable, niche business.
The lack of filtering on mail is my biggest complaint (iPhone and iPad too)... it makes using mail frustrating to say the least. I really don't understand how difficult that would be!!!
Slashdot Mirror
Yep - and in today's day and age, I guess there's nothing preventing you using your phone camera to snap a screen shot of your digital vote casting (or video, I guess) either.
There's no such thing as a "perfect" system, I guess... :(
Vote buying. That's what's wrong with it.
ANYTHING that gives the voter the opportunity to walk out with confirmation of HOW they voted is a huge problem. In the system you describe, the voter could decide to not put their paper slip into the box, or to drop in a fake substitute (and no, you couldn't verify it was a real slip without making their vote non-anonymous in the process).
So, they walk out the door, show their slip to "Guido", and poof - their vote has been bought.
The only time their vote gets screwed up is if a manual recount is done at that station, which in terms of % is low (by design - with an electronic system).
You need a solution where the original vote is cast on paper, and is scanned in (and retained) by the system... and the voter verifies their vote electronically on screen before walking off empty-handed.
MadCow.
The DVD conversion certainly is a lossy process... if they could get the original film to look at frame-by-frame, you could certainly see a ton more detail, which might let you clarify if she's holding anything at all.
Contact the studio. It'd be great promo for them!
MadCow.
I just RTFA, and the partner with Casio is Toppan Printing... one of the world leaders in lenticular lens technology. Maybe they're going down the lenticular display route already? FYI, lenticular is a "no-glasses-required" 3D technology. I know many people hate lenticular, but that's usually because it's badly done - poor registration between the image and the lens. But, for a display you'd invest much more in ensuring proper registration in the first place and could achieve high quality every time.
The other cool use would be integration into a stereo 3D headset... two screens at HD resolution would make an awesome immersive experience, where you could incorporate a decent field of view without losing too much detail to be useful.
The other cool use would be integration into a stereo 3D headset... two screens at HD resolution would make an awesome immersive experience, where you could incorporate a decent field of view without losing too much detail to be useful.
it may be overkill for normal use (assuming the Retina display is already beyond the eye's capability to see detail), but there are other applications of such high density.
If you paired a 458dpi display with a 40lpi lenticular lens, you could display a whopping 11+ images for true 3-D. 11 images means that when you rotate the display back and forth the objects rotate too... so you can look "behind" things just like if they were really there in 3D - you get 11 different perspectives to view from. 40lpi lenses are good enough for hand-held lenticular (basically the minimum for handheld viewing distances so it doesn't look chunky). You could even do 80lpi decently, with about 6 images - which is still decent for rotation.
I'd LOVE to get my hands on one of those - the real trick would be matching the lens to the display, and getting it close enough to the switching plane to be effective (instead of on to of an already-thick cover glass).
MadCow
If this goes through, then I vow to initiate research into the subject myself.
Banning the use of such devices I can see... until we more fully understand them, and the potential un-intended impacts.
But to ban RESEARCH on such subjects??? The whole idea of research would be to understand these issues in the first place. Since when is better knowledge of something undesirable (in a "free" state, at least)?
Maybe it's an issue with the summary, and I should have RTFA... but I'm stunned that a global body would be so naieve and ignorant.
MadCow.
I was probably remembering the number backwards - 22 minutes of content for a 1/2hour show, not 22 minutes of advertising per hour.
I guess those commercials just drag on so much it SEEMS like they're longer than they actually are. :) Actually, I haven't watched commercials in years, thanks to my DVR. So much so, that I'm rarely up to date on what movies are coming out - that's about the only thing I miss from commercials.
MadCow.
Commercials aren't 60 seconds long. Try doubling that cost to at least $0.66/hour, assuming your other numbers are correct.
Actually, I think there's more like 22 minutes of advertising time per hour = 44 x 30sec commercials = 44 * $0.033 = $1.45/hour. That's not so far off their $2.
However, I am taking the other approach: I'm going to patent boycotting Google TV, and/or any other medium where ads are blocked. I already avoid DVD's with unskippable content, by ripping them for my AppleTV first... I paid for the DVD, why do I have to suffer through advertising EVERY time I want to watch it?
MadCow.
>>I use my DVR to record programs, then watch them "later" (at least 30 minutes later)
Actually, if there's 22 minutes of commercials per hour, you only have to wait 11 minutes before starting your 30-minute program to ensure you can skip all the commercials. Actually, seeing as some of those 11 minutes of commercials will come right at the end of the 30-minute segment, you could start a bit earlier.
If I can start watching Caprica 38 minutes sooner (1-hour show), then I'll do it! :)
My son, at 2 1/2 years old, got frustrated with a puzzle at his Montesory School (they start early in Belgium). He got up, said "Aw, fuck it." and walked away.
My wife was mortified when the teacher told her. I was proud he used it in context. :)
MadCow.
Maybe you're right - I'll have to go buy an old-style corded phone (a big heavy one at a garage sale) and see if that helps.
I just don't enjoy talking on the phone any more because of what a chore it has become - due to the quality experience these days.
Well, although the local service I have here seems "ok" most of the time, after visiting overseas where they're still using full-analog for local calls (backwoods, India, for example), the quality is surprisingly better... and home seems crappy upon return.
My experience only... maybe I'm just getting old and can't handle duplex myself anymore. :)
I don't have an issue with the frequency range, but certainly do with latency, and the lack of true duplex any more!
I find (found) that talking on a true analog line is MUCH easier than any digital line today - be that Skype, cell phones, or even land lines in most countries. I'm always amazed when traveling abroad when I make a local call on a truly-analog system how much nicer the experience is!
With today's systems in "Westernized" countries, you can't even have an effective 2-way conversation. The duplex performance sucks - you can't hear anything while you're talking. Add to that a small but noticable delay, and you have to resort to long pauses between sentences to ensure you don't talk over one another.
Am I the only one that notices this? It's AWFUL compared to what it was like 20 years ago.
MadCow.
Actually, if you use your soldering torch on them for a few seconds, they usually burn up pretty easily. A quick cleaning after that is pretty simple.
That advice works well for copper fittings... probably not so well for laptops. :)
"Customer Satisfaction" for Facebook is measured in click-throughs and sales dollars... not in user complaints.
You and I are not customers to Facebook. We're the product. We're what they're selling - our eyeballs are being sold to the advertisers. Their only reason to make you happy is to ensure you come back (begrudgingly or not).
Once you realize that, their lack of "customer service" isn't surprising in the least. So long as you're not paying for the service, you're not a customer. They care very little about your privacy, your experience, the impact that their constant site layout changes and privacy policies have on you, the annoyance if/when they sell your personal data to mailing lists and spammers - so long as it all suits the needs of their true customers and doesn't piss you off enough that you don't keep coming back. This is the way of business... get used to it unless you want to pay for these things.
MadCow.
thanks - I'll look that over too!
You're right - but I believe they can't patent it if you can prove yours was developed first and they had knowledge of it.
Yep - I bet he's hit on a Trade Secret of theirs in his blog post and/or development work, and they're just trying to scare him away from posting the details. Trade Secrets are only secrets as long as nobody else knows about them - there's no protection on them other than that.
The patent holds NO ability to stop him from disclosing ANYTHING - anything covered by the patent is by definition publicly disclosed in the patent itself. If it's not there, it's not covered. Period. The "international viewing" holds no water either - there's nothing preventing someone from viewing the patent from another country.
He can go tell them to fuck off. He can probably sue for SLAPP or something like that too. I would!
In addition, my understanding is that this goes even further - there's nothing preventing him from developing his own implementation of their patent. The only issue arises when he distributes it beyond himself. IANAL, so this part I'm only 99.9% sure on. :)
MadCow.
One of the biggest reasons is white-listing. My operator can't do that unless I provide my whitelist to them. My address book (updated on the go) is the whitelist.
Everything else goes to a "maybe spam" folder that I can peruse when I'm bored.
>> The iPhone, with its quality touch screen and beautiful, lickable looks, continues to announce 'amazing new features' that have been available in Blackberrys (Blackberries?) for nearly a decade.
There's a difference in philosophy here... Apple may be slow with some things like that, but when they do release it, they do it DAMN well (in most cases... at least). Quality and user experience rank much higher for them than simple feature list comparisons - and that's the single reason they have a highly profitable, niche business.
MadCow.
The lack of filtering on mail is my biggest complaint (iPhone and iPad too)... it makes using mail frustrating to say the least. I really don't understand how difficult that would be!!!
Advertise on my car, pay me money. End of story.
Ah.... ASCII porn... The good ol days!