Their personal information is their property, and they are free to share with with the rest of the world. As long as they don't post sensitive military information on Facebook, there is no damage done.
As I have said, it's possible to make a cryptographic system where the votes are unverifiable to a third party. Give the voters a series of codes for every option, the guy standing over their shoulder will have no idea which code means what. Or have them submit one key of a pair, and encrypt their vote using the other one. The guy standing there again will have no idea whether the key they use to encrypt their vote fits the one they have submitted. It's not an unsolvable problem.
Paper-based voting is not perfect either, and frauds do happen. And it's not a waste of money, as software development is relatively cheap, and the main purpose of online voting is to cut the costs of elections to a fraction. Money will be saved in the long run.
These are technical problems, which require cryptographic solutions. It's not that hard to make a vote unverifiable by the voter. What's missing is mostly the will: the point of current e-voting systems is not to be secure. With enough determination and a few years of development these problems can be overcome.
So you want your personal data to be at the mercy of a bunch of self-righteous hackers? While it's not a substitute for a more consumer-friendly policy, securing their systems is something they should have done long ago.
I didn't say they are comparable to braindeath, I said that the patients seem braindead and are sometimes wrongly diagnosed as one.
Re:I have an organ donor card...
on
When Are You Dead?
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Not necessarily. There are people who seem braindead but they are awake, and some others can wake up from a comatose state. The diagnosis of brain death tends to be inaccurate.
That is, of course, the big question. As there was no loss of life, the equation is fairly easy: if the total cost of the accident are higher than the cost of proofing/shutting down the reactors times 30, then it was a bad decision to take the risk. But the total cost of the accident are not easy to measure.
If the tsunami was a 1 in 1000 years event, then the chance of one of the Fukushima reactors to get hit by it during their lifetime was about 3.5%, which is high enough to cause concern.
If you have read the article you would have noticed that the statistics were updated with the one death that might have been connected to that accident.
The ICANN has been collaborating with the Amerian government for a while now, this move just makes it official that the government assumes total control.
He used footage from all three prequels, a couple cuts from the original trilogy, some music from The Clone Wars television series, and even a dialogue bit from Anthony Daniels' (C-3PO) audio book recordings.
He used parts of the first one, that most of us desperately tried to forget? If he was in need of material he should have used the deleted scenes from episode 3, they tell a much deeper story than the final one.
In my country breathalyzer is only the first test after which you have to go to the police station and they take a blood sample. A breathalyzer test alone shouldn't be enough.
Slashdot Mirror
Because that's not the standard.
The device has been tested now on over 11,000 people, with only two serious injuries to show for it.
Doesn't sound like an effective weapon to me.
Most likely he was fired because he sued the company after being demoted. Not a nice thing from NASA, but he should have seen it coming.
Look at /., most of us just read the articles and doesn't care about the comments at all.
Their personal information is their property, and they are free to share with with the rest of the world. As long as they don't post sensitive military information on Facebook, there is no damage done.
Giving jobs to those people in need instead of just some spare change is exactly the thing that can help them.
You can't have a secure voting system without at least one physical check, that's pretty obvious. You have to be able to verify the voter's identity.
As I have said, it's possible to make a cryptographic system where the votes are unverifiable to a third party. Give the voters a series of codes for every option, the guy standing over their shoulder will have no idea which code means what. Or have them submit one key of a pair, and encrypt their vote using the other one. The guy standing there again will have no idea whether the key they use to encrypt their vote fits the one they have submitted. It's not an unsolvable problem.
Paper-based voting is not perfect either, and frauds do happen. And it's not a waste of money, as software development is relatively cheap, and the main purpose of online voting is to cut the costs of elections to a fraction. Money will be saved in the long run.
These are technical problems, which require cryptographic solutions. It's not that hard to make a vote unverifiable by the voter. What's missing is mostly the will: the point of current e-voting systems is not to be secure. With enough determination and a few years of development these problems can be overcome.
And then we would have third-world warlords export organs en masse from "volunteer donors" .
Selling organs is banned by international treaties for good reasons.
So you want your personal data to be at the mercy of a bunch of self-righteous hackers? While it's not a substitute for a more consumer-friendly policy, securing their systems is something they should have done long ago.
I didn't say they are comparable to braindeath, I said that the patients seem braindead and are sometimes wrongly diagnosed as one.
Not necessarily. There are people who seem braindead but they are awake, and some others can wake up from a comatose state. The diagnosis of brain death tends to be inaccurate.
That is, of course, the big question. As there was no loss of life, the equation is fairly easy: if the total cost of the accident are higher than the cost of proofing/shutting down the reactors times 30, then it was a bad decision to take the risk. But the total cost of the accident are not easy to measure.
So how many tidal waves do you have there?
If the tsunami was a 1 in 1000 years event, then the chance of one of the Fukushima reactors to get hit by it during their lifetime was about 3.5%, which is high enough to cause concern.
If you have read the article you would have noticed that the statistics were updated with the one death that might have been connected to that accident.
It's already noisy enough without everyone banging on the walls.
The ICANN has been collaborating with the Amerian government for a while now, this move just makes it official that the government assumes total control.
The engine itself can be as good as Google's, but they will never have a massive database that's comparable to what Google has.
He used footage from all three prequels, a couple cuts from the original trilogy, some music from The Clone Wars television series, and even a dialogue bit from Anthony Daniels' (C-3PO) audio book recordings.
He used parts of the first one, that most of us desperately tried to forget? If he was in need of material he should have used the deleted scenes from episode 3, they tell a much deeper story than the final one.
In my country breathalyzer is only the first test after which you have to go to the police station and they take a blood sample. A breathalyzer test alone shouldn't be enough.
It also has a practical side, it's not easy to get those plants to work again.