Well, it also happens from time to time, that we here in Denmark get/have to vote for more than one thing at a time, for instance, the last election we had, we voted for city council, county council (sorta) and parliment.
Seeing how we have 11 parties represented in parliment alone, and each of those parties usually have 10+ candidates on average, that's 110+ choices to choose from - just from the parliment vote.
County and city elections are a bit less crowded, but I think the ballots I was handed were probably ~1 meter in length - think about that for a minute...
At this particular election, we were given three balots, each roughly the same length. That's probably 3 meters of paper, for one election.
Why would it be soooooooooooooooooooooooooo difficult to give people more than one ballot? Affraid they might drop one, and forget to vote in that election? Well, if that's your problem, then you might just have a voting population, who are dumber than a bag of hammers.
Yes, I've seen one of your ballots (punch-type). They don't really impress me. You cram EVERYTHING onto a single piece of paper that is way too small, they seem really errorprone (pregnant chads anyone?), not to mention, that it's quite easy to punch a hole for the wrong part, like putting two holes in the president part, but none in the constitutional part.
Of course, this benifits the beaurocrats, who probably gets paid to count votes, the people who maintain the machines needed, the manufacturers, etc, etc, etc...
One paper ballot for every election. If you have twenty things up for election, then hand out 20 fucking pieces of paper!
Yes, electronic voting systems, like the one hosted at http://openvotingconsortium.org/ would make things a lot easier. It has everything needed; paper trail (which is both human readable AND has a barcode line), it can read out the ballot etc... my only complaint about this one is the same as the one above. WAY too much info in WAY to little room.
I think it can be traced back to a couple of things:
1) Changing the meaning of "patriot" to someone who is behind his government no matter what. 2) Changing the definition of "democracy" to "the lesser of two evils" 3) Changing the meaning of any political group to be derogatory. 4) Labeling anyone who speaks out against the government to be either a traitor or freedom hating commie bastard (this relates to #1)
Of course, I'm just a godless freedom hating commie bastard from Denmark of all places - hell, I'm even a member of the [warning for the faint of heart] Social Democrats AND I'm an atheis, so that absolutely PROVES that I'm a freedom hating godless commie bastard. Oh, and since I don't agree with your governments politics, and can really only stand Colin Powel, I hate America too.
I have a program, that I made myself. Works just fine. Nary a problem.
I brought out the source code, just for fun, and noticed, that for some idiotic reason, I did a loop backwards (from n-1 to 0). No need for that, and as far as I can/could tell from the rest of the code, this would infact result in the wrong result (wrong as in listing things backwards).
I fixed the bug, but then it did what it wasn't supposed to do - listing things backwards. Of course I undid my changes.
So I have two bugs, that quite obviously cancel eachother out. On their own, they're defects, but as a pair, they're non-existant.
Yeah, and the Enron-scandal was because accounting grew a little out of control...
Re:If they came up with *novel* uses, sure...
on
Open Source Life?
·
· Score: 1
Now if instead they were patenting "method for gene for making dragonfly wings added to tomatoes so they fly straight to the harvest box" that would be a new and original idea.
It's proof of concept, not "here, use this in your ultra secretive secure thing-a-ma-jig".
I knew a guy who had ten locks on his door. You had to turn the key the same way to lock and unlock. He usually only locked two or three locks, when he left, simply because he figured, that by the time he gets home, a possible burglar still haven't unlocked the door (probaby by locking some of the unlocked locks).
This is (to me anyway) somewhat the same thing.
It may not be entirely difficult to figure out, what ports are being used to knock, but as I understand port knocking, there's more to it than just the ports; the timing has to be right as well. And using a one time pad, makes sniffing useless. And just how do you brute force a secret knock?
Just for kicks, let's say we restrict ourselves to knocking on 4 ports, and we have a range of 128 ports.
Well, if you can knock on a port more than once, you'll end up with 128^4 (268.435.456) (it could be 4^128 which is MUCH worse). Not too shabby, right?
This is even ignoring any timing restrictions. If you have to say knock on port 1004 first, wait 3 seconds, knock on port 1100, wait 1 second, knock on 1001, wait 5 seconds, knock on port 1027, HOW would you brute that? Remember, knocking on a wrong port in the sequence will reset your attempt.
I don't even want to speculate on the numbers in that case.
At this point Skype for Linux is being offered without the SkypeOut service that allows calls to go to any telephone, not just other Skype users.
At this point Skype for ANY platform is being offered without the SkypeOut service that allows calls to go to any telephone, not just other Skype users.
Come July 1st, they'll open their comp to phone service. Wether or not that'll be in the Linux version then, is anybody's guess though.
Well, if it has either FireWire 800, FireWire or USB 2.0, it could have a 1 TB disk.
That's almost 247 hours of recording at 9 Mb/second (DVD).
Re:Okay, so when's the GMail middleman getting her
on
Gmail in the News
·
· Score: 1
So, in order to prevent company A from storing and potentially reading your e-mail, you're opting to let company B store it instead? What's to keep company B from reading the messages it has stored? And what's to keep company B from being ordered to hand over all the messages it has stored to some government agency?
Riddle me this, and riddle me that, who's being a big dumb asshat?
Re:My experiences with Gmail invitations
on
Gmail in the News
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I highly doubt that. (IANAL, though).
First, I'm fairly certain that YOUR privacy ranks WAY higher than any company's supposed "right" to a profit.
Secondly, the only way the advetiser would find out is by setting up a mail account of their own, and then sending mail to themself, trying to find out wether or not it's working. They could then easily save copies of the web-views, and use those.
Thirdly, such a lawsuit would be a civil matter, and I doubt that you can just get a judge to sign over a subpoena to go searching though million of people's mail. This relates to point number one.
This is of course dependent on the legal system, and we've all seen that they're very keen on protecting our rights, right?
That's not (just) communism - that's what happens in all authoritarian governments.
Kinda funny what the USA is supposed to be "the land of the free" and "built on the ideals of freedom".
And it's not very difficult to confirm - all you have to do is compare your rights to what they are in other "civilised" countries. Sure, if you compare yourself with dictatorships etc, then you're fairly well off.
The scary part is when you start to notice, that many of the lost freedoms are not because of the government as such, but due to extremely ignorant people... like being labled all kinds of things, just because you're critical of the government, while the country is at war.
I've definitely never had to turn a page twice while holding a random button to get the desired response from a novel.
I have. I had to turn the page twice, because the first time I turned the page, and held a random button, my girlfriend slapped me. Then I tried another button, and hey presto.
Well, you don't think that'd be a problem under normal circumstances anyway?
Last I checked, moving troops were usually done through territory not occupied by enemy forces, and if you thought the forrest was empty, what's the make you think otherwise, just because you don't have a "super map"?
Actually, that's the whole POINT of having a paper receitpt/ballot/whatever. You hand it in and it is used as a backup measure.
Since the paper can't be changed after it has been handed in, if there's any discrepancy between the electronic and paper results, the paper result is used. The electronic vote is merely for speedy results.
And some of the schemes I've seen make it mandatory to have a manual recount of randomly chosen districts, again to make sure. If you have a huge discrepancy in those, you can easily demand a manual recount in all the other districts, because something is obviously wrong. Like the machines having been changed AFTER being certified.
I see. And how do you propose to cool the peltier cooler? It's not some magic mumbo jumbo, that'll make the heat go away. In fact it generates more heat, than it removes, needing more cooling than you would otherwise. If you want it to be quiet and robust, you could go for an external water cooling system, but then you wouldn't be able to move your computer.
I've been calling it "multiplying by crossing" or "multiplying across" (very rough translation from Danish) since forever (not litterally). Not very difficult, but most people don't really get it. The point is to end up with the same denominator on both (all) the fractions being added; once this is done, you add the numerators like a regular addition and keep the denominator:
17 87 -- + -- 28 98
17*98 87*28 ----- + ----- 98*28 98*28
1666 2436 ---- + ---- 2744 2744
4102 ---- 2744
And adding in the Greatest Common Denominator algorithm, you end up with 14 =>
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it's not the pr0n you're watching, it's that you don't look away from ... you know ... at the climax.
Don't get that goo in your eye - it's not good for you.
Well, it also happens from time to time, that we here in Denmark get/have to vote for more than one thing at a time, for instance, the last election we had, we voted for city council, county council (sorta) and parliment.
...
...
... my only complaint about this one is the same as the one above. WAY too much info in WAY to little room.
Seeing how we have 11 parties represented in parliment alone, and each of those parties usually have 10+ candidates on average, that's 110+ choices to choose from - just from the parliment vote.
County and city elections are a bit less crowded, but I think the ballots I was handed were probably ~1 meter in length - think about that for a minute
At this particular election, we were given three balots, each roughly the same length. That's probably 3 meters of paper, for one election.
Why would it be soooooooooooooooooooooooooo difficult to give people more than one ballot? Affraid they might drop one, and forget to vote in that election? Well, if that's your problem, then you might just have a voting population, who are dumber than a bag of hammers.
Yes, I've seen one of your ballots (punch-type). They don't really impress me. You cram EVERYTHING onto a single piece of paper that is way too small, they seem really errorprone (pregnant chads anyone?), not to mention, that it's quite easy to punch a hole for the wrong part, like putting two holes in the president part, but none in the constitutional part.
Of course, this benifits the beaurocrats, who probably gets paid to count votes, the people who maintain the machines needed, the manufacturers, etc, etc, etc
One paper ballot for every election. If you have twenty things up for election, then hand out 20 fucking pieces of paper!
Yes, electronic voting systems, like the one hosted at http://openvotingconsortium.org/ would make things a lot easier. It has everything needed; paper trail (which is both human readable AND has a barcode line), it can read out the ballot etc
I can think of a democratic republic, that would pay anything, including civil liberties, to get their hands on this device.
Yeah, tell me about it ... my account number is so old, the number causes an underrun.
I think it can be traced back to a couple of things:
1) Changing the meaning of "patriot" to someone who is behind his government no matter what.
2) Changing the definition of "democracy" to "the lesser of two evils"
3) Changing the meaning of any political group to be derogatory.
4) Labeling anyone who speaks out against the government to be either a traitor or freedom hating commie bastard (this relates to #1)
Of course, I'm just a godless freedom hating commie bastard from Denmark of all places - hell, I'm even a member of the [warning for the faint of heart] Social Democrats AND I'm an atheis, so that absolutely PROVES that I'm a freedom hating godless commie bastard. Oh, and since I don't agree with your governments politics, and can really only stand Colin Powel, I hate America too.
Well, it's not ALWAYS a defect.
I have a program, that I made myself. Works just fine. Nary a problem.
I brought out the source code, just for fun, and noticed, that for some idiotic reason, I did a loop backwards (from n-1 to 0). No need for that, and as far as I can/could tell from the rest of the code, this would infact result in the wrong result (wrong as in listing things backwards).
I fixed the bug, but then it did what it wasn't supposed to do - listing things backwards. Of course I undid my changes.
So I have two bugs, that quite obviously cancel eachother out. On their own, they're defects, but as a pair, they're non-existant.
Actually, I hear that $1B will get you 3 apache helicopters, 6 M1 Abrahms and 500 soldiers for a full year.
...
I'm fairly certain that you could break even with that kind of collection crew
Just don't eat Wheat planted in yellow snow. Or brown.
It's proof of concept, not "here, use this in your ultra secretive secure thing-a-ma-jig".
I knew a guy who had ten locks on his door. You had to turn the key the same way to lock and unlock. He usually only locked two or three locks, when he left, simply because he figured, that by the time he gets home, a possible burglar still haven't unlocked the door (probaby by locking some of the unlocked locks).
This is (to me anyway) somewhat the same thing.
It may not be entirely difficult to figure out, what ports are being used to knock, but as I understand port knocking, there's more to it than just the ports; the timing has to be right as well. And using a one time pad, makes sniffing useless. And just how do you brute force a secret knock?
Just for kicks, let's say we restrict ourselves to knocking on 4 ports, and we have a range of 128 ports.
Well, if you can knock on a port more than once, you'll end up with 128^4 (268.435.456) (it could be 4^128 which is MUCH worse). Not too shabby, right?
This is even ignoring any timing restrictions. If you have to say knock on port 1004 first, wait 3 seconds, knock on port 1100, wait 1 second, knock on 1001, wait 5 seconds, knock on port 1027, HOW would you brute that? Remember, knocking on a wrong port in the sequence will reset your attempt.
I don't even want to speculate on the numbers in that case.
Don't know about fuel cells, but the burner I have out in the back works just fine on ugly bags of mostly water.
Come July 1st, they'll open their comp to phone service. Wether or not that'll be in the Linux version then, is anybody's guess though.
Well, if it has either FireWire 800, FireWire or USB 2.0, it could have a 1 TB disk.
That's almost 247 hours of recording at 9 Mb/second (DVD).
So, in order to prevent company A from storing and potentially reading your e-mail, you're opting to let company B store it instead? What's to keep company B from reading the messages it has stored? And what's to keep company B from being ordered to hand over all the messages it has stored to some government agency?
Riddle me this, and riddle me that, who's being a big dumb asshat?
I highly doubt that. (IANAL, though).
First, I'm fairly certain that YOUR privacy ranks WAY higher than any company's supposed "right" to a profit.
Secondly, the only way the advetiser would find out is by setting up a mail account of their own, and then sending mail to themself, trying to find out wether or not it's working. They could then easily save copies of the web-views, and use those.
Thirdly, such a lawsuit would be a civil matter, and I doubt that you can just get a judge to sign over a subpoena to go searching though million of people's mail. This relates to point number one.
This is of course dependent on the legal system, and we've all seen that they're very keen on protecting our rights, right?
Actually Fascism is also authoritarian.
That's not (just) communism - that's what happens in all authoritarian governments.
... like being labled all kinds of things, just because you're critical of the government, while the country is at war.
Kinda funny what the USA is supposed to be "the land of the free" and "built on the ideals of freedom".
And it's not very difficult to confirm - all you have to do is compare your rights to what they are in other "civilised" countries. Sure, if you compare yourself with dictatorships etc, then you're fairly well off.
The scary part is when you start to notice, that many of the lost freedoms are not because of the government as such, but due to extremely ignorant people
It's a MOON!
Well, you don't think that'd be a problem under normal circumstances anyway?
...
Last I checked, moving troops were usually done through territory not occupied by enemy forces, and if you thought the forrest was empty, what's the make you think otherwise, just because you don't have a "super map"?
Barring a leutenant with a map of course
Actually, that's the whole POINT of having a paper receitpt/ballot/whatever. You hand it in and it is used as a backup measure.
Since the paper can't be changed after it has been handed in, if there's any discrepancy between the electronic and paper results, the paper result is used. The electronic vote is merely for speedy results.
And some of the schemes I've seen make it mandatory to have a manual recount of randomly chosen districts, again to make sure. If you have a huge discrepancy in those, you can easily demand a manual recount in all the other districts, because something is obviously wrong. Like the machines having been changed AFTER being certified.
I've been calling it "multiplying by crossing" or "multiplying across" (very rough translation from Danish) since forever (not litterally). Not very difficult, but most people don't really get it. The point is to end up with the same denominator on both (all) the fractions being added; once this is done, you add the numerators like a regular addition and keep the denominator:
17 87
-- + --
28 98
17*98 87*28
----- + -----
98*28 98*28
1666 2436
---- + ----
2744 2744
4102
----
2744
And adding in the Greatest Common Denominator algorithm, you end up with 14 =>
'4102
' --
' 14
------
'2744
' --
' 14
293
---
196