Well this is always the problem with social research. Everybody thinks he knows better by common sense.
You research something: Result is in concensus with your common sense, feelings: you get tagged "[+] captainobvious, duh, obvious" You research something: Result is contrary with your common sense, feeling: you get tagged "wrong, stupid, this cannot be true".
Can somebody explain me, how much CDs decade? I thought they were pretty much sealed... except that exotic muchroom, that eats the silicium layer... (an even then, altough *we* can't read it now, with a laser, the information should still be there in the plastic...)
I wrote my guestbook for a project page - php code myself... simply because I wanted to learn how to code PHP+MySQL.
Its now some years ago, in the beginning no problem... then got hit my massive spamming. Cleaned it up.
I never wanted to do captchas or question, since it should be most easy and convenient for the human user to post, anonymously without much worries, the "entry barrier" has to be low.
First I blocked some IPs did not help much.
A great benefit was I gave the user a cookie when viewing the main side, and looked if the cookie is still there when viewing the guestbook, that got rid of the spam bots... but in the last time some seem to have learned that as well.
Now I block on server side just as you everything that containts "a href=" "[url]" or "[link]" and that stuff, just as you, this really blocks A LOT, since they all are out to post links to raise their side in google.
Now the few that get through 1-2 a week, I block special content strings, usually their URL like mycoolrippoffs.com or that stuff.
There is no real shortage thats a planned trick to get more money into the toy sector.
Robert B. Cialdini writes this in his book "The Psychology of Persuasion". One Toy-Product is heavily marketed, so you eventually promise your kids who will be longing for it, they will get it as present for christmas. Then *tata* production shortage bla-bla, and you can't get it, so you have to buy another equally valued toy for your kids. But(!): Promised is still promised! In February the production shortage suddendly vanishes, and you will have to buy your kids the promised toy also. -> Result: You spent twice as much in the toy sector.
It seems, I will have to come up with a new story about high-tech solutions, inspered by everything modern is cool-thining, sometimes are inferiour to simple solutions... Grrrr...
I've seen posts by you before, you take your narrow world view and provide a high level commentry based on this flawed or limited understanding. Are you trying to come over like an arrogant asshole?
In this case we all humans are arrogant assholes.
Being human you don't have any other choice than taking your world view (things you perceived and experienced) and based on this inevitable limited understanding you project ideas about the higher levels of theories how the world functions, to aid you in future decisions. There is no guarantee this isn't flawed, and luckely we are able of communication to exchange each other about our ideas.. so we can widen our inevitable limted understanding by tapping other understandings.
"Whether we like it or not, this highlights a serious problem with the development model. Likewise, it indirectly highlights one of its strengths. Free software programmers are very much pack animals, like the rest of us. We tend to folllow the herd (I don't mean that in the modern "bad" sense of the phrase. We stick with those we know and enjoy hanging with. We do things we perceive subjectively as fun or cool. We join projects that interest us, we leave projects that offend or dissappoint or bore us. With the GPL, a company that relies on a no-longer-cool project can always pick up the banner and try to reinvigorate interest, but in the end the projects that have momentum have it because they have that special unnamable something that brings people to the fold."
Wheter we like it or not, this highlights a serious problem with the commercial development model. Likeweise, it indirectly highlights one of its strengths. Commercial software programmer are very much pack animals, like the rest of us. We tend to follow the money (I don't mean that in the modern "bad" sense of the phrase. We stick with those we know to pay our loan cheque and enjoy cashing it. We do things we perceive subjectively as uncool, as long the market supports this. We join employers that pay us, we leave employers that offend or dissappoint or dont pay us. With commercial software, a company that relieas on a no-longer-profit-making project can always pick up the huge investions and try to finance it all by themselves, but in the end the projects that have momentum have it because they have that special unnamable something that brings a lot of people to pay for it.
Does nobody just take a pencil and make a cross on the paper?
Then 3 people (from different parties) count them, 2 watching the counter, and recount to cross-check?
Its so simple...
This all reminds me of the old story of the NASA which invested millions to develop a ballpen that can write in zero-gravity... well the russians solved the issue by using a pencil.
"and there no known incidents with these voting machines (that are already being used for over 15 years)."
Maybe, because there frauding them is much easier? And evidence is much harder to grasp? On paper tracked votes you always have some evidence that something did not work well. On voting machines there isn't.
Also here in Austria pen&paper works well, and there were no real "big-deal" incidents I can remember.
I personally think evoting is just a child of the modern thinking. Everything has to be modernized, we don't care if it is better or not. Electronic, yay, cool! Lets make it! Or we will fall behind... yeah... yeah...
Before the food market was regulated, like the historical farmer market, it was not an anonymous market in the sense it was very small. I knew the seller personally. Something that often cannot hold true for today dimensions. Before the food market was regulated there was no genetical engineer available, the was no pesticides that can be used, etc. The farmers just sold personally to you what they have grown.
Today with the need to write the ingrediences on a product, without the worries about trials if you sell bad food, the market would brake down, in the sense there is little incitation for procuders to sell good food.
People need to it, but without regulations they would eat crap.
You cannot seriously support 3 parties with the electoral-delegate-the-winner-gets-it-all system.
Well with parlamentary systems it sometimes happens that a big player allies with a fringe group to set the government (and to move out the other big player they usually allied with)... However while by paper in the goverment, and makes spectaculous headlines, like you example the italian communists their power is in fact in reality very limited since they have to follow pretty much the big guys.
Ethically driven systems? Medicine. Just as I told you. 100%-Market-logic does not work here. Not well. And yes you do see where it won't work. Many markets need a state (political) regulation without them they wont work. Take the food market as an another example, without the legislative system ensuring food quality (and penality if it doesn't work) the food market would collapse.
Get back to the original post. I think you misunderstood it. The innovative power of the open market. The belief that by allowing a competition of ideas in how best to run elections (as long as they meet minimal standards) the best choice will be eventually reached.
We are not talking about the market of voting machines. We are talking about a hypothetically "market of ides how to best run elections". Such a thing is not a market in an economic sense but the decission is a political issue. How much shall we spent for vote security? This answer is not solved on a market. The ideas are not set on a market here, and you cannot mix that with market of the used hardware.
Look the market is not the all-to-everything solution some people want it to have. And yes I do study economics at the university. Take for example the neoclassic economie that has the "everything is a market" assumption. Well in the 20th century they e.g. discovered when the market indeed does give the optimal allocation, why are there so many people working in companies instead of working alone offering they work power on a market? Inside a company the ressource allocation is not done by a market, but by command. Of course with cost center accounting there are incentives to recreate a market inside a company, however the decision is still done top-down by command, even if it relies on cost center "prices".
I personally believe the problem is the 2-party system. Its just to few incitation to pull some things straight. Yes I totally believe that you are correct with your "I am bad, but I know you are bad too" politics betweet the two.
On the otherhand. We (most EU countries) have a proportional-election-system an thus usually e.g. 4 parties in the parlament, 2 together forming the government, which 2 varies due to the election results. Its just that 4 parties set the election rules, and 4 parties govern each other. The we are bad, you 3 are bad too thing just doesn't work that much, and thats good.
* I cannot choose the voting system, uncheck * voting security does not have a setable price, uncheck (the cheapest voting system isn't the best...) * you are mixing up: the market of voting systems against the market of voting machines. There is no Economic equilibrium on voting sytems, uncheck
Winning votes for your party... has a price! What a horror having a market here. Ethical driven system cannot and should not work with market logic. Not with a supreme overlooker driven by another logic than economy.
(Take medicine as another point, if there isn't an ethical issue like the hippocratic oath, and a system to check what the doctors do to you, they have an infinite income in never healing you completely. But we do expect more from doctors than working purely economical....)
It ain't the last election in history. So make it better next time!
After all, better make next month an election with pen&paper (which has worked well for 200-300 years) then a bad election with corrupted/risky e-voting. The value of democraticy is much higher then an abortive project/experiment.
Voting a market? Whoo how. Slow down. Voting isn't a market! There are several market conditions that are not met.
Where is the price? Where is the costumers free choice? (In fact it's all a set of "monopolies".) Where is the comparisen mechanism? Who determines what is better and whats worse? Where is the economic equilibrium?
Until they invent the bullet proof way to get votes directly to the voting precinct reliably and securely, problems will be in every election with or without electronic voting.
This is absolutely wrong. And thats the thinking the US is doing wrong. Who tells you the voting precinct is doing stuff correctly.
Count the votes on the local poll office. Have all parties be present at the local poll office so they can check each other and watch their fingers respectively. Sent the counted summ over to the voting precinct. Seal the ballot box, so they can be rechecked later in case of doubt.
The more you centralize, the more vulnerable you are to froud. Why? Because there are much fewer points you have to corrupt to make a change in the result. The extreme transition you have in e-voting when there is only one point you have to corrupt (the votingmachine producer) or if you take it secure you have to corroup only 2 points (the producer, and the observer)
Huh? Isn't ID checking mandatory? Im not sure how the US handels this, but how do you ensure everyone casts one and only one vote if you don't check his ID?
Over here (Austria) you go to your local poll office, give your ID, they check you from the list and you get your ballot. We never had any issues with fraud.
ALTERNATIVELY you can go until a week before the election to your local office, and request a "Vote-Card", they check you off the list, so you cannot go to the local poll office without that Vote-Card, but you can cast that Card at any poll office all over the country (for travellers), or you can even sent it by postal service. (However requiring you 2 witnesses that you sent it *before* the election is over. however much real harm cannot be done here, since you still can cast only one vote.). Yes this postal votes delay the official result, as the normal result is available 4 hours after the office close (yes you can count that fast, if you count that on the local offices... no need to ship that stuff around) but the cards take 1 week, only on very close results they matter, but in some past votes they did flip around the result.
Slashdot Mirror
Well this is always the problem with social research. Everybody thinks he knows better by common sense.
You research something: Result is in concensus with your common sense, feelings: you get tagged "[+] captainobvious, duh, obvious"
You research something: Result is contrary with your common sense, feeling: you get tagged "wrong, stupid, this cannot be true".
They will kill each other. Point.
Can somebody explain me, how much CDs decade? I thought they were pretty much sealed... except that exotic muchroom, that eats the silicium layer... (an even then, altough *we* can't read it now, with a laser, the information should still be there in the plastic...)
I wrote my guestbook for a project page - php code myself... simply because I wanted to learn how to code PHP+MySQL.
Its now some years ago, in the beginning no problem... then got hit my massive spamming.
Cleaned it up.
I never wanted to do captchas or question, since it should be most easy and convenient for the human user to post, anonymously without much worries, the "entry barrier" has to be low.
First I blocked some IPs did not help much.
A great benefit was I gave the user a cookie when viewing the main side, and looked if the cookie is still there when viewing the guestbook, that got rid of the spam bots... but in the last time some seem to have learned that as well.
Now I block on server side just as you everything that containts "a href=" "[url]" or "[link]" and that stuff, just as you, this really blocks A LOT, since they all are out to post links to raise their side in google.
Now the few that get through 1-2 a week, I block special content strings, usually their URL like mycoolrippoffs.com or that stuff.
There is no real shortage thats a planned trick to get more money into the toy sector.
Robert B. Cialdini writes this in his book "The Psychology of Persuasion". One Toy-Product is heavily marketed, so you eventually promise your kids who will be longing for it, they will get it as present for christmas. Then *tata* production shortage bla-bla, and you can't get it, so you have to buy another equally valued toy for your kids. But(!): Promised is still promised! In February the production shortage suddendly vanishes, and you will have to buy your kids the promised toy also. -> Result: You spent twice as much in the toy sector.
Too bad, well you never seem to learn out.
It seems, I will have to come up with a new story about high-tech solutions, inspered by everything modern is cool-thining, sometimes are inferiour to simple solutions... Grrrr...
I've seen posts by you before, you take your narrow world view and provide a high level commentry based on this flawed or limited understanding. Are you trying to come over like an arrogant asshole?
In this case we all humans are arrogant assholes.
Being human you don't have any other choice than taking your world view (things you perceived and experienced) and based on this inevitable limited understanding you project ideas about the higher levels of theories how the world functions, to aid you in future decisions. There is no guarantee this isn't flawed, and luckely we are able of communication to exchange each other about our ideas.. so we can widen our inevitable limted understanding by tapping other understandings.
"Whether we like it or not, this highlights a serious problem with the development model. Likewise, it indirectly highlights one of its strengths. Free software programmers are very much pack animals, like the rest of us. We tend to folllow the herd (I don't mean that in the modern "bad" sense of the phrase. We stick with those we know and enjoy hanging with. We do things we perceive subjectively as fun or cool. We join projects that interest us, we leave projects that offend or dissappoint or bore us. With the GPL, a company that relies on a no-longer-cool project can always pick up the banner and try to reinvigorate interest, but in the end the projects that have momentum have it because they have that special unnamable something that brings people to the fold."
Wheter we like it or not, this highlights a serious problem with the commercial development model. Likeweise, it indirectly highlights one of its strengths. Commercial software programmer are very much pack animals, like the rest of us. We tend to follow the money (I don't mean that in the modern "bad" sense of the phrase. We stick with those we know to pay our loan cheque and enjoy cashing it. We do things we perceive subjectively as uncool, as long the market supports this. We join employers that pay us, we leave employers that offend or dissappoint or dont pay us. With commercial software, a company that relieas on a no-longer-profit-making project can always pick up the huge investions and try to finance it all by themselves, but in the end the projects that have momentum have it because they have that special unnamable something that brings a lot of people to pay for it.
"Wouldn't the lead crumbling and breaking off be a hazard in zero gravity?"
How about: no?
Does nobody just take a pencil and make a cross on the paper?
Then 3 people (from different parties) count them, 2 watching the counter, and recount to cross-check?
Its so simple...
This all reminds me of the old story of the NASA which invested millions to develop a ballpen that can write in zero-gravity... well the russians solved the issue by using a pencil.
"and there no known incidents with these voting machines (that are already being used for over 15 years)."
Maybe, because there frauding them is much easier? And evidence is much harder to grasp?
On paper tracked votes you always have some evidence that something did not work well. On voting machines there isn't.
Also here in Austria pen&paper works well, and there were no real "big-deal" incidents I can remember.
I personally think evoting is just a child of the modern thinking. Everything has to be modernized, we don't care if it is better or not. Electronic, yay, cool! Lets make it! Or we will fall behind... yeah... yeah...
"Within each, the parliamentary process happens a few months before the general election. "
Im not familiar the us election system. But I don't think you can call this process to be democratic...
Before the food market was regulated, like the historical farmer market, it was not an anonymous market in the sense it was very small. I knew the seller personally. Something that often cannot hold true for today dimensions. Before the food market was regulated there was no genetical engineer available, the was no pesticides that can be used, etc. The farmers just sold personally to you what they have grown.
Today with the need to write the ingrediences on a product, without the worries about trials if you sell bad food, the market would brake down, in the sense there is little incitation for procuders to sell good food.
People need to it, but without regulations they would eat crap.
But nowhere it is mandatory to vote VALID.
You cannot seriously support 3 parties with the electoral-delegate-the-winner-gets-it-all system.
... However while by paper in the goverment, and makes spectaculous headlines, like you example the italian communists their power is in fact in reality very limited since they have to follow pretty much the big guys.
Well with parlamentary systems it sometimes happens that a big player allies with a fringe group to set the government (and to move out the other big player they usually allied with)
Ethically driven systems? Medicine. Just as I told you. 100%-Market-logic does not work here. Not well. And yes you do see where it won't work. Many markets need a state (political) regulation without them they wont work. Take the food market as an another example, without the legislative system ensuring food quality (and penality if it doesn't work) the food market would collapse.
Get back to the original post. I think you misunderstood it.
The innovative power of the open market. The belief that by allowing a competition of ideas in how best to run elections (as long as they meet minimal standards) the best choice will be eventually reached.
We are not talking about the market of voting machines.
We are talking about a hypothetically "market of ides how to best run elections".
Such a thing is not a market in an economic sense but the decission is a political issue.
How much shall we spent for vote security? This answer is not solved on a market.
The ideas are not set on a market here, and you cannot mix that with market of the used hardware.
Look the market is not the all-to-everything solution some people want it to have. And yes I do study economics at the university. Take for example the neoclassic economie that has the "everything is a market" assumption. Well in the 20th century they e.g. discovered when the market indeed does give the optimal allocation, why are there so many people working in companies instead of working alone offering they work power on a market? Inside a company the ressource allocation is not done by a market, but by command. Of course with cost center accounting there are incentives to recreate a market inside a company, however the decision is still done top-down by command, even if it relies on cost center "prices".
I personally believe the problem is the 2-party system. Its just to few incitation to pull some things straight. Yes I totally believe that you are correct with your "I am bad, but I know you are bad too" politics betweet the two.
On the otherhand. We (most EU countries) have a proportional-election-system an thus usually e.g. 4 parties in the parlament, 2 together forming the government, which 2 varies due to the election results. Its just that 4 parties set the election rules, and 4 parties govern each other. The we are bad, you 3 are bad too thing just doesn't work that much, and thats good.
c) if thats the result of a "voting market", its really an excelent example why it is a very bad idea.
* I cannot choose the voting system, uncheck
* voting security does not have a setable price, uncheck (the cheapest voting system isn't the best...)
* you are mixing up: the market of voting systems against the market of voting machines. There is no Economic equilibrium on voting sytems, uncheck
Winning votes for your party... has a price! What a horror having a market here.
Ethical driven system cannot and should not work with market logic. Not with a supreme overlooker driven by another logic than economy.
(Take medicine as another point, if there isn't an ethical issue like the hippocratic oath, and a system to check what the doctors do to you, they have an infinite income in never healing you completely. But we do expect more from doctors than working purely economical....)
"' to pay to bus voters from polling station to polling station"
Really? Sorry
a) I can't believe this is true.
b) even if it would, I can't believe you could call this a democracy.
It ain't the last election in history. So make it better next time!
After all, better make next month an election with pen&paper (which has worked well for 200-300 years) then a bad election with corrupted/risky e-voting. The value of democraticy is much higher then an abortive project/experiment.
How much would such a printer cost? 300$? Oh no democracy is not worth that!?!?
Even my cheap laser printer can do that! If I don't mount the exit tray correctly, it all falls behind (in a box) with no checkable order!
The innovative power of the open market.
Voting a market? Whoo how. Slow down.
Voting isn't a market! There are several market conditions that are not met.
Where is the price?
Where is the costumers free choice? (In fact it's all a set of "monopolies".)
Where is the comparisen mechanism? Who determines what is better and whats worse?
Where is the economic equilibrium?
Nooo. Voting is no market. Nooo...
Until they invent the bullet proof way to get votes directly to the voting precinct reliably and securely, problems will be in every election with or without electronic voting.
This is absolutely wrong. And thats the thinking the US is doing wrong. Who tells you the voting precinct is doing stuff correctly.
Count the votes on the local poll office. Have all parties be present at the local poll office so they can check each other and watch their fingers respectively. Sent the counted summ over to the voting precinct. Seal the ballot box, so they can be rechecked later in case of doubt.
The more you centralize, the more vulnerable you are to froud. Why? Because there are much fewer points you have to corrupt to make a change in the result.
The extreme transition you have in e-voting when there is only one point you have to corrupt (the votingmachine producer) or if you take it secure you have to corroup only 2 points (the producer, and the observer)
Huh? Isn't ID checking mandatory? Im not sure how the US handels this, but how do you ensure everyone casts one and only one vote if you don't check his ID?
Over here (Austria) you go to your local poll office, give your ID, they check you from the list and you get your ballot.
We never had any issues with fraud.
ALTERNATIVELY you can go until a week before the election to your local office, and request a "Vote-Card", they check you off the list, so you cannot go to the local poll office without that Vote-Card, but you can cast that Card at any poll office all over the country (for travellers), or you can even sent it by postal service. (However requiring you 2 witnesses that you sent it *before* the election is over. however much real harm cannot be done here, since you still can cast only one vote.). Yes this postal votes delay the official result, as the normal result is available 4 hours after the office close (yes you can count that fast, if you count that on the local offices... no need to ship that stuff around) but the cards take 1 week, only on very close results they matter, but in some past votes they did flip around the result.