Ah, it depends on the meaning of the word booth, doesn't it?
If we're talking about the classic style, where you have a curtain and all that, then yes, I'd agree with you.
But isn't likely that we'll migrate to booths similiar to those used by banks for their ATM's? Just enough privacy to ensure that nobody can peek and see what your passcode is, nevertheless you are still in full view the entire time.
So tell me, Mr. Oh-so-intelligent-person, how do you know that the votes in the machine don't match the votes on the receipts if you don't count the receipts in the first place?
Read the article again, and this time, try to understand what is being said. The receipts are only used in the event of an "irregularity", ergo, no irregularity, no recount, and the tally maintained by the machine stands.
What you're describing is where the receipts are always counted. This isn't what California is proposing. And as I've commented elsewhere here, that is too bad. I'd prefer that they did this.
Now I see that they are able to send you animations/videos that get past Mozilla's image-blocking feature. Saw the first one yesterday, trying to sell me a Sony VAIO. How long is it going to be before I get one featuring erotic acts with barnyard animals?
The only thing that surprises me about this is that it wasn't a father who went nuts when seeing his little boy or girl subjected to some of this crap. Yeah, the penis ads are truly obnoxious... but to see your kids exposed to this some of this stuff? I could really sympathethize with someone going postal because of this.
It is funny. I mean, we all know that nobody would ever go to such lengths to obtain power.
Nobody would ever do that.
Not once in the history of this nation, or of the world for that matter, has anyone ever conspired to steal power.
All those stories you hear about fraud and elections in the past, they're all made up. Nobody ever stuffed ballot boxes. Nobody ever denied the right to vote to minorities. Nobody ever bought votes, or intimidated voters on their way to the booth, or bribed election officials, or tampered with ballots.
I mean, that's just crazy, right? It's all a great big conspiracy theory.
LOL
Better a tinfoil hat than a blindfold made of iron.
I think maybe you're the one who is retarded. Read the fucking post. The question is whether the voter will actually bother confirming whether the receipt accurately reflects his or her choice(s), and was clearly stated as such.
It would be wise to incorporate into the system some means of requiring the voter to examine their receipt.
Perhaps they could use printers like the ones used at a grocery store I used to go to. They take *forever* to print out, and the customer and the check-out lady are forced to sit there and watch the thing print out the receipt line-by-line.
I know it would probably create long lines at the polls, but I for one would be more than happy to wait an hour or more if I could know that my vote wasn't being rewritten by some unseen entity.
It's easy to envision an instance where an individual dedicated to corrupting the vote stations himself within the voting station, observing the voters as they leave the booth and deposit their receipt.
Those voters that don't bother examining their receipts can be easily discerned, and the voting machine could conceivably be instructed remotely to change that voter's vote.
This is a very good step being taken by California, but I think they need to go one step further and mandate a recount for every election, regardless of whether it is seen to have irregularities or not.
Grow up and participate in the ADULT world. Your exactly the type of person who gets laughed at. I bet your easily tweaked about other subjects as well.
If the other subjects involve runaway aggregation of power or the wholesale killing or brutalization of people, then yes, you are correct.
It would be absolutely hilarious watching you attempt to argue your point with intelligent people - in other words you would be "toast".
So if we look at the banter you and I are having, we can only come to one of two conclusions: either I am "toast", which certainly isn't the case as you've largely evaded the substantive points I've made, or, you're not an intelligent person.
I love the line about he didn't win the popular vote, guess what, neither did Kennedy - hell Kennedy lost by a bigger margin.
Speaking of not being very intelligent, this is incorrect.
Finally, don't look for salvation in either the Democrats or Republicans. They both suck...
You're missing the point. The question isn't so much whether their email should be considered spam, as it is the fact that such a provision is front-loaded into legislation that on its face has absolutely nothing to do with copyright issues.
This is particularly relevant given the past instances of industry involvement in the legislative process, and most especially the DMCA itself, which it has been alleged saw language included at the last moment on behest of the RIAA that was never approved by any member of the House or Senate.
In other words, it is just another example of corruption of our government by the "entertainment" industry.
Maybe if these people spent less time choking our freedoms with self-serving laws and spent more time on creating art we wouldn't have to deal with fare such as Matrix: Sucks and Matrix: Really Sucks.
Go to http://thomas.loc.gov and do a bill search on "anti-spam" and read the Senate version, from which I quote:
...the term `unsolicited commercial electronic mail message' does not include an electronic mail message sent by or on behalf of one or more lawful owners of copyright, patent, publicity, or trademark rights to an unauthorized user of protected material notifying such user that the use is unauthorized and requesting that the use be terminated or that permission for such use be obtained from the rights holder or holders.
Your rantings resemble a crazed lunatic in a padded cell. Monster?
Yes, monster. As in somebody who violates the law and kills tens of thousands of people with no cause, and who risks the lives of us all in the process.
And if you can't recognize this very simple fact, there is no use in conversing further with you.
Your "evidence" is from a middle-aged freelance writer who found a Web site "on about the 15th page of Google" with this information.
Yes, we should all restrict ourselves to viewing only the first page of Google results. Especially if we're a freelance writer.
I fail to see how this could have anything to do with Bush "buying" the election.
Well, that's probably because you aren't middle-aged. The state government in Florida was obviously extremely friendly to the Bush candidacy, and it is measures of exactly the sort that have been shown to have taken place in Florida that have been historically used to deny people the right to vote in democratic/minority precincts.
Read history sometime. The south has been pulling shit like this ever since blacks won the right to vote. What happened in Florida is little better than what happened under Jim Crow.
Katherine Harris and the US Supreme court enforced the laws as they were written.
And exactly what law is it that you believe the supreme Court enforced? Their guilt isn't in what they did, but rather, what they didn't.
And by calling the President names, I guess you don't really try to hide your bias.
Absolutely not. And why should I? The man doesn't bother to hide his many crimes against humanity or the Constitution. He steals from us in plain sight, and with a straight face. There hasn't ever been as contemptable a president as George Bush. It's not even close. The man is a monster.
You'll come around to my point of view here soon enough. And there will be plenty of time to rue the day this man seized the office.
You mean the war on drugs that Clinton increase spending by 10% each year on?
Yes. If you want to make the claim that the democrats deserved Florida for their complicity in the war on drugs, you will get no debate here.
That the nation is made to bear this humiliation on the other hand is very disturbing to me.
Maybe you don't remember that it was Gore who was limiting recounts to 3 counties where he thought he could gain the most votes, and it was Gore who was trying to block absentee ballots that were perfectly valid according to Florida state law.
Even assuming this is true it doesn't change the fact that this election was a fraud.
I'm not a democrat, but thank you for stereotyping me anyways.
There are enough opportunities to despise this "president" without invoking Kenny Boy, his single-handedly destroying what little hope this nation had for a peaceful and prosperous future being chief amongst them.
And the notion that they need more evidence for a KB conviction is preposterous. They went after Martha Stewart with but a fraction of the evidence available against KB and for a crime that was a fraction of what KB has committed, with the specific intent of appearing tough on white-collar criminals even while the most egregious cases remain in a perpetual state of look-the-other-way.
They are not enforced, because as it stands now, it is next to impossible to prove.
However, with a publicly-available record of how everyone votes available, making the case against those who engage in vote-buying and intimidation becomes almost trivial. The evidence would be in the logs. The fact that everybody in a company or in a community voted for exactly the same candidate would constitute sufficient grounds to open up an investigation, without even having anyone file a complaint.
Please think it through. Don't just recite what your social studies teacher taught you... think it through for yourself. This would be a far superior system to that which we have now, in so many ways.
It's hard to believe it has lasted as long as it has.
We could go on with how the war on drugs disenfranchised some hundreds of thousands of blacks thus preventing them from voting, in violation of the Constitution, or we could talk about how recounts were illegally obstructed and in some cases denied.
Talk about losing credibility! Damn body, where have you been these last few years?
As far as I know there was a crackdown on Enron as a company.
ROTFLMAO!!!
Yeah, Kenny Boy is doing his 10 years at Leavenworth, even as we speak!
NOT!
Who would it benefit if the executives were thrown in prison for life and told to pay billions in damages (which they'd never be able to do)?
How about all the victims to come from the next set of CEO/thieves who will do whatever they want secure in the knowledge that if they get caught nothing really bad will happen to them?
One of the reasons we put people in prison is to discourage others from committing the same crimes.
Using your logic, we should be freeing all sorts of criminals.
(of course, if we are talking about non-violent drug offenders who never hurt anybody then I would wholeheartedly agree.)
It's the only way to be sure that the system hasn't been corrupted.
By publishing votes you make it possible for a person to check at any time to make sure his vote was registered correctly.
The arguments against doing this aren't very persuasive. For instance, the idea that people won't vote if their choices are made public is nonsense. Who wants these people voting anyways? If you can't stand up for your beliefs, you have no business voting.
The notion that you would be pressured by an employer is equally ludicrous. There are already laws on the books that make it a crime to do this. And with all votes being made public, it becomes so much easier to prove: you can look at how all employees of a company vote and if they all vote for the same candidate then you have good evidence against the employer.
The very idea of the secret ballot is suspicious to me. It only serves the interests of those who would choose to aggregate power unto themselves.
The issue isn't one of computerized voting vs. non-computerized voting. It should be one of open polls vs. closed.
Once we lose our right to vote, then it's gone. Period. Good bye. It will take nothing short of a blood bath to bring it back.
That is why this issue is so important. It is not possible to overstate the importance of what is going on here.
To dismiss people who are concerned for the fate of their democracy as Tin Foil Hatters is disgusting, especially when you consider all the lives sacrificied throughout history so we can have democracy.
Bush stole 2000, and now Bush's buddies are busy building voting machines that a) they won't let us see inside of and b) won't produce auditable paper trails. This is indisputable.
It's way past time to get excited over this.
People should be buying guns and stocking up on ammunition.
Bush's Justice Dept. doesn't go after his buddies. That should be obvious to everybody by now.
There is a demonstrable and proven effort under way to compromise democracy in this country. That you are too blind or too stupid to see it doesn't make it not so.
No, if you read the press release you will see that they were releasing software and documentation as far back as 1998. The May 2003 date is simply when they reached version 1.0.
Job losses in the tech industry and an overthrow of the government do not go hand in hand.
Sure they do. These jobs in the tech industry were the ones hailed by Clinton as those that would be aplenty with the passage of GATT and NAFTA. These were to be the good paying jobs that would emerge once we got rid of all those nasty low-paying jobs, or so they said.
Not only does that turn out to be wrong, but it now appears they knew it was shit all along. The same corrupt politicians who brought us NAFTA and GATT also brought us the H1B visa and otherwise paved the way for the exodus of the same new jobs they claimed would be created by NAFTA/GATT.
But, hey... if you really think you can "hack into Access" and prevent Bush from being re-elected in 2004, then I'm your new best friend.
You haven't been paying attention. Chief amongst the exploits being performed against Diebold's "voting systems" are compromising the database used to tally the results, which, incredibly, is MS Access.
Keep up the conspiracy theories, friend. I'm sure you'll prove them someday.
They're already proven! Diebold has already been shown to be corrupt! The exodus of good-paying jobs from America under a policy advertised as securing these jobs instead is a fact! Exactly what conspiracy theory are you referring to here? The one that accuses the government of doing something they've already been proven to do?
The nation being promised on the one hand that free trade would bring better jobs to the U.S. while the other hand was busy making sure those better jobs ended up anywhere but here.
Read the news sometime. There's more to it than Dilbert and the lingerie ads.
Slashdot Mirror
Now I do. Thanks.
Ah, it depends on the meaning of the word booth, doesn't it?
If we're talking about the classic style, where you have a curtain and all that, then yes, I'd agree with you.
But isn't likely that we'll migrate to booths similiar to those used by banks for their ATM's? Just enough privacy to ensure that nobody can peek and see what your passcode is, nevertheless you are still in full view the entire time.
So tell me, Mr. Oh-so-intelligent-person, how do you know that the votes in the machine don't match the votes on the receipts if you don't count the receipts in the first place?
Read the article again, and this time, try to understand what is being said. The receipts are only used in the event of an "irregularity", ergo, no irregularity, no recount, and the tally maintained by the machine stands.
What you're describing is where the receipts are always counted. This isn't what California is proposing. And as I've commented elsewhere here, that is too bad. I'd prefer that they did this.
So of course the guy goes nuts.
Now I see that they are able to send you animations/videos that get past Mozilla's image-blocking feature. Saw the first one yesterday, trying to sell me a Sony VAIO. How long is it going to be before I get one featuring erotic acts with barnyard animals?
The only thing that surprises me about this is that it wasn't a father who went nuts when seeing his little boy or girl subjected to some of this crap. Yeah, the penis ads are truly obnoxious... but to see your kids exposed to this some of this stuff? I could really sympathethize with someone going postal because of this.
It is funny. I mean, we all know that nobody would ever go to such lengths to obtain power.
Nobody would ever do that.
Not once in the history of this nation, or of the world for that matter, has anyone ever conspired to steal power.
All those stories you hear about fraud and elections in the past, they're all made up. Nobody ever stuffed ballot boxes. Nobody ever denied the right to vote to minorities. Nobody ever bought votes, or intimidated voters on their way to the booth, or bribed election officials, or tampered with ballots.
I mean, that's just crazy, right? It's all a great big conspiracy theory.
LOL
Better a tinfoil hat than a blindfold made of iron.
mp3.com introduced me to the Industrial genre, and I can't seem to find any of my favorite groups elsewhere.
Like Enrapture.
I think maybe you're the one who is retarded. Read the fucking post. The question is whether the voter will actually bother confirming whether the receipt accurately reflects his or her choice(s), and was clearly stated as such.
It would be wise to incorporate into the system some means of requiring the voter to examine their receipt.
Perhaps they could use printers like the ones used at a grocery store I used to go to. They take *forever* to print out, and the customer and the check-out lady are forced to sit there and watch the thing print out the receipt line-by-line.
I know it would probably create long lines at the polls, but I for one would be more than happy to wait an hour or more if I could know that my vote wasn't being rewritten by some unseen entity.
It's easy to envision an instance where an individual dedicated to corrupting the vote stations himself within the voting station, observing the voters as they leave the booth and deposit their receipt.
Those voters that don't bother examining their receipts can be easily discerned, and the voting machine could conceivably be instructed remotely to change that voter's vote.
This is a very good step being taken by California, but I think they need to go one step further and mandate a recount for every election, regardless of whether it is seen to have irregularities or not.
Your overly emotional tirade needs to stop.
It's not just me and it has only just begun.
Grow up and participate in the ADULT world. Your exactly the type of person who gets laughed at. I bet your easily tweaked about other subjects as well.
If the other subjects involve runaway aggregation of power or the wholesale killing or brutalization of people, then yes, you are correct.
It would be absolutely hilarious watching you attempt to argue your point with intelligent people - in other words you would be "toast".
So if we look at the banter you and I are having, we can only come to one of two conclusions: either I am "toast", which certainly isn't the case as you've largely evaded the substantive points I've made, or, you're not an intelligent person.
I love the line about he didn't win the popular vote, guess what, neither did Kennedy - hell Kennedy lost by a bigger margin.
Speaking of not being very intelligent, this is incorrect.
Finally, don't look for salvation in either the Democrats or Republicans. They both suck...
At least we agree about something.
So hate on haters.
Wow.
You're missing the point. The question isn't so much whether their email should be considered spam, as it is the fact that such a provision is front-loaded into legislation that on its face has absolutely nothing to do with copyright issues.
This is particularly relevant given the past instances of industry involvement in the legislative process, and most especially the DMCA itself, which it has been alleged saw language included at the last moment on behest of the RIAA that was never approved by any member of the House or Senate.
In other words, it is just another example of corruption of our government by the "entertainment" industry.
Maybe if these people spent less time choking our freedoms with self-serving laws and spent more time on creating art we wouldn't have to deal with fare such as Matrix: Sucks and Matrix: Really Sucks.
Unbelievable.
Your rantings resemble a crazed lunatic in a padded cell. Monster?
Yes, monster. As in somebody who violates the law and kills tens of thousands of people with no cause, and who risks the lives of us all in the process.
And if you can't recognize this very simple fact, there is no use in conversing further with you.
Your "evidence" is from a middle-aged freelance writer who found a Web site "on about the 15th page of Google" with this information.
Yes, we should all restrict ourselves to viewing only the first page of Google results. Especially if we're a freelance writer.
I fail to see how this could have anything to do with Bush "buying" the election.
Well, that's probably because you aren't middle-aged. The state government in Florida was obviously extremely friendly to the Bush candidacy, and it is measures of exactly the sort that have been shown to have taken place in Florida that have been historically used to deny people the right to vote in democratic/minority precincts.
Read history sometime. The south has been pulling shit like this ever since blacks won the right to vote. What happened in Florida is little better than what happened under Jim Crow.
Katherine Harris and the US Supreme court enforced the laws as they were written.
Actually, Katherine Harris has been found guilty of violating election laws in the past, so I wouldn't be too confident if I were you that she was innocent in the 2000 election. It is simply a question of the Bush bros. being unwilling to investigate her conduct.
And exactly what law is it that you believe the supreme Court enforced? Their guilt isn't in what they did, but rather, what they didn't.
And by calling the President names, I guess you don't really try to hide your bias.
Absolutely not. And why should I? The man doesn't bother to hide his many crimes against humanity or the Constitution. He steals from us in plain sight, and with a straight face. There hasn't ever been as contemptable a president as George Bush. It's not even close. The man is a monster.
You'll come around to my point of view here soon enough. And there will be plenty of time to rue the day this man seized the office.
You mean the war on drugs that Clinton increase spending by 10% each year on?
Yes. If you want to make the claim that the democrats deserved Florida for their complicity in the war on drugs, you will get no debate here.
That the nation is made to bear this humiliation on the other hand is very disturbing to me.
Maybe you don't remember that it was Gore who was limiting recounts to 3 counties where he thought he could gain the most votes, and it was Gore who was trying to block absentee ballots that were perfectly valid according to Florida state law.
Even assuming this is true it doesn't change the fact that this election was a fraud.
And a harbinger of things to come.
I'm not a democrat, but thank you for stereotyping me anyways.
There are enough opportunities to despise this "president" without invoking Kenny Boy, his single-handedly destroying what little hope this nation had for a peaceful and prosperous future being chief amongst them.
And the notion that they need more evidence for a KB conviction is preposterous. They went after Martha Stewart with but a fraction of the evidence available against KB and for a crime that was a fraction of what KB has committed, with the specific intent of appearing tough on white-collar criminals even while the most egregious cases remain in a perpetual state of look-the-other-way.
They are not enforced.
They are not enforced, because as it stands now, it is next to impossible to prove.
However, with a publicly-available record of how everyone votes available, making the case against those who engage in vote-buying and intimidation becomes almost trivial. The evidence would be in the logs. The fact that everybody in a company or in a community voted for exactly the same candidate would constitute sufficient grounds to open up an investigation, without even having anyone file a complaint.
Please think it through. Don't just recite what your social studies teacher taught you... think it through for yourself. This would be a far superior system to that which we have now, in so many ways.
It's hard to believe it has lasted as long as it has.
I don't see any links to Kenny Boy! Why not?
Oh, right, because he's a buddy of Bush and these other people you're linking aren't!
Which underscores the validity of my original statement: Bush's Justice Dept. doesn't go after his buddies.
You've got to be kidding me!
We've got evidence that Diebold tampered with results, we've got evidence that blacks were denied the opportunity to vote, we've got Katherine Harris and we've got the supreme Court and oh yeah we've got the Governor of Florida who just happens to be the First Retard's brother.
We could go on with how the war on drugs disenfranchised some hundreds of thousands of blacks thus preventing them from voting, in violation of the Constitution, or we could talk about how recounts were illegally obstructed and in some cases denied.
Talk about losing credibility! Damn body, where have you been these last few years?
As far as I know there was a crackdown on Enron as a company.
ROTFLMAO!!!
Yeah, Kenny Boy is doing his 10 years at Leavenworth, even as we speak!
NOT!
Who would it benefit if the executives were thrown in prison for life and told to pay billions in damages (which they'd never be able to do)?
How about all the victims to come from the next set of CEO/thieves who will do whatever they want secure in the knowledge that if they get caught nothing really bad will happen to them?
One of the reasons we put people in prison is to discourage others from committing the same crimes.
Using your logic, we should be freeing all sorts of criminals.
(of course, if we are talking about non-violent drug offenders who never hurt anybody then I would wholeheartedly agree.)
It's the only way to be sure that the system hasn't been corrupted.
By publishing votes you make it possible for a person to check at any time to make sure his vote was registered correctly.
The arguments against doing this aren't very persuasive. For instance, the idea that people won't vote if their choices are made public is nonsense. Who wants these people voting anyways? If you can't stand up for your beliefs, you have no business voting.
The notion that you would be pressured by an employer is equally ludicrous. There are already laws on the books that make it a crime to do this. And with all votes being made public, it becomes so much easier to prove: you can look at how all employees of a company vote and if they all vote for the same candidate then you have good evidence against the employer.
The very idea of the secret ballot is suspicious to me. It only serves the interests of those who would choose to aggregate power unto themselves.
The issue isn't one of computerized voting vs. non-computerized voting. It should be one of open polls vs. closed.
There's nothing stupid about any of this.
Once we lose our right to vote, then it's gone. Period. Good bye. It will take nothing short of a blood bath to bring it back.
That is why this issue is so important. It is not possible to overstate the importance of what is going on here.
To dismiss people who are concerned for the fate of their democracy as Tin Foil Hatters is disgusting, especially when you consider all the lives sacrificied throughout history so we can have democracy.
Bush stole 2000, and now Bush's buddies are busy building voting machines that a) they won't let us see inside of and b) won't produce auditable paper trails. This is indisputable.
It's way past time to get excited over this.
People should be buying guns and stocking up on ammunition.
Witness Enron.
Bush's Justice Dept. doesn't go after his buddies. That should be obvious to everybody by now.
There is a demonstrable and proven effort under way to compromise democracy in this country. That you are too blind or too stupid to see it doesn't make it not so.
No, if you read the press release you will see that they were releasing software and documentation as far back as 1998. The May 2003 date is simply when they reached version 1.0.
Job losses in the tech industry and an overthrow of the government do not go hand in hand.
Sure they do. These jobs in the tech industry were the ones hailed by Clinton as those that would be aplenty with the passage of GATT and NAFTA. These were to be the good paying jobs that would emerge once we got rid of all those nasty low-paying jobs, or so they said.
Not only does that turn out to be wrong, but it now appears they knew it was shit all along. The same corrupt politicians who brought us NAFTA and GATT also brought us the H1B visa and otherwise paved the way for the exodus of the same new jobs they claimed would be created by NAFTA/GATT.
But, hey... if you really think you can "hack into Access" and prevent Bush from being re-elected in 2004, then I'm your new best friend.
You haven't been paying attention. Chief amongst the exploits being performed against Diebold's "voting systems" are compromising the database used to tally the results, which, incredibly, is MS Access.
Keep up the conspiracy theories, friend. I'm sure you'll prove them someday.
They're already proven! Diebold has already been shown to be corrupt! The exodus of good-paying jobs from America under a policy advertised as securing these jobs instead is a fact! Exactly what conspiracy theory are you referring to here? The one that accuses the government of doing something they've already been proven to do?
Hilarious!
Nafta, GATT... H1B visas.
The nation being promised on the one hand that free trade would bring better jobs to the U.S. while the other hand was busy making sure those better jobs ended up anywhere but here.
Read the news sometime. There's more to it than Dilbert and the lingerie ads.