Speaking of fools, you clearly don't understand the point I am trying to make. It has nothing to do with ballots of even voting. It has to do with reliability and assurance. It doesn't matter if we are talking about voting or redundant guidance systems on the space shuttle. If you have two systems to track a state (in this case the vote count) and the the two systems differ in their estimate of the state - you have no idea which system is correct and which is in error. Adding that second system buys you nothing but controversy. Two systems can validate a result (if they agree) but you need threeindependent systems to both detect and identify the system malfuncion.
Pray tell... what is the "purpose for backslash"? I am not trolling.. I just reviewed the FAQ, and did the requisite google search - both yield nothing. I *thought* the purpose was a way to revisit a somewhat recent topic in today's context - something of an update - and in many cases in the past backslash stories have been quite interesting. But the original story and the backslash to it were posted within 24 hrs of each other. The content appeared to be nothing more than the most intersting of the comments. My point is how is this any different than simply reading the story at threshold 5, given that the details of the underlying story hadn't changed at all since the story was published.
I hate to break it to you but ballot fraud pre-existed electronic balloting so yes, there is fraud with paper ballots. Now if you are talking about an independent paper trail (something I haven't heard anyone express an implementation of) that would be one thing. Everything I have heard are paper trails that address what happens in the counting/tabulating process - that is to say the paper is a record of what was input in the machine. Again - if it is so easy to manipulate the voting machines, why not manipulate the code that prints the receipts so that the receipt the voter gets prints what the voter wanted but the receipt that gets put in the "lock-box" says something else? Surely the receipt and the paper trail aren't the same piece of paper, because you would never let the voter have access to the ballot box (less he be able to add/remove ballots).
Personally, I am in favor of optically scanned ballots - you can see what you chos and the ballot is the paper trail plus they are easily transferred to a computer.
Several hundred readers commented on yesterday's Slashdot post about citizens arrested for photographing police either in public or in the photographer's own property. Read on for some of the comments which defined the conversation in today's Backslash summary.
Translation: "I feel really strongly about this issue and regret that it was posted on a weekend. I want to make sure all the weekday slashdot readers read about how evil the police are."
Seriously folks, what's with the all the backslash lately. This story was posted yesterday. It is still listed in the right "Older Stuff" frame. If I want to know what topics "defined the conversation", I'd just click the link and surf it at +5. Slow news day?
I don't understand this obsession with having a "paper trail". How does having a paper trail make the results any more verifiable? What if there is fraud in the paper trail? What if ballots are (somehow) stolen from (or added to) the paper trail container? How would one distinguish between a good electronic count with a bad paper trail, and a fraudulant electronic count with an accurate paper trail? My point is, without a third independent source, all you know is that there is a disagreement - there is no way to know for sure which count is accurate. Paper trails are just as susceptible to fraud as electronic systems.
Bush either did what he did because he really felt the bill was wrong for his own personal religious reasons (which would have been hard had he actually read the bill, seeing as though the embryos are destroyed either way,
You, another person and a child are locked in a room. The other person holds a gun to both your and the child's head. He slides you a gun and orders you to shoot the child. If you refuse, he will shoot the child himself. In practical terms the child dies either way. Is there an ethical difference?
Now, before I get deluged with responses... I am not claiming that child == embryo. Merely that equal potential outcomes do not make ethical decisions indistinguishable.
Claiming that jobs will be lost due to an increase in minimum wage is total propaganda. Nobody can predict with certainty exactly what would happen to the economy if the minimum wage was raised.
Yeah... it's all propaganda... well, and economictheory based on math... but don't let that get in the way. Freaking read a book on economics, preferrably by thisguy.
Seriously... what is next? Not letting parents cover their childrens' eyes or the slightly more technical variation - pressing "skip track" or "ffwd" at key moments?
My son is a Star Wars fanatic and had seen all the movies except Episode III which I thought was too dark for him. After endless begging and pleading, I edited Episode III a bit to bring it closer in line with the other episodes. I removed a beheading, Anking slautering the "younglings" and the bits where Anakin is smoldering and crawling out of the lava. I know my son very well, thank you very much, and I know that these scenes (totaling about 30 seconds) were beyond his maturity level. Sue me for being a good parent.
We are... we currently buy both Progress and Soyuz missions to meet our requirements. We can't continue to do this because there is a law on the book that says we can't. It is called the Iran and Syria Nonproliferation Act. Relief has been extended but it prohibits us from dealing with countries that share technology with Iran and Syria. After 2011, it will be illegal to buy Soyuz and Progress flights.
As a Naval Academy graduate ('94) with bad vision... I'll chime in here. When I was a midshipman, I would say that most students that wanted to go aviation but happened to have bad vision did what I did and selected Naval Flight Officer (NFO) with the remainder going subs or surface warfare (SWO). (Oh, keep in mind that when I selected, students got their assignments based on choice in order of class rank as opposed to the current method of being assigned based on their preference sheet.) The NFO community is filled with many very intelligent officers - many at the top of their class- who wanted to be aviators despite not having the vision to be a pilot. I can't help but wonder what will happend to the NFO community in the future if all the students are getting their vision corrected. I hope it doesn't instead become a community of "pilots that couldn't hack it" or "academy underachievers".
That said, if this had been offered to me when I was a mid, I would have jumped at the chance...
I have never understoon the line of thinking that "the US knew there were no WMD's in Iraq". What people seem to miss is the follow-through... believing the above also implies that the US knew it would not find any WMDs. I think it is safe to say that the failure to find/false precepts of WMDs has been the biggest failure of the Bush administration. It has destroyed US credibility, destroyed Bush's hope of having any sort of (positive) legacy, crippled his power to pursue an agenda, etc...
Rather, in an odd (and tragic) way I think that the lack of WMDs actually proves that the administration really believed they were there. If they were really corrupt enough to build a war on a lie, why not go the extra half-mile and plant the evidence as well? Incompetence - yes, but a knowing lie? I djust deon't make sense when you think it through...
Just imagine: that leaked corporate email that proves corruption? Unreadable! Those White House recordings that provide damning evidence of some plot? Gone! That electronic map image showing that we've "always" been at war with Afghani... whoops, sorry, it shows Iraq now!
Have you ever heard of a printer? Or a camera? Or testimony? Or handwritten notes?
Tell me something: is it currently illegal for a 14 year old kid to buy an R rated movie? Last I checked, it wasn't. Why hold video games to a higher standard?
Excellent point. We shouldn't hold video games to a higher standard... it should be illegal for kids to buy "mature" video games and also illegal to buy "mature" movies. I wasn't aware that kids could buy R-rated movies - strikes me as odd since they can't see R-rated movies in a theater without a parent.
Ridiculous. Cant we let the parents do the parenting? It's really their responsibility for watching what their kids are doing, not the governments.
Odd,... I thought that was exactly what this bill does... it lets parents choose what video games they can play instead of letting the kids or government choose. Kids still have the right to play games under every piece of legislation mentioned. I am curious, should kids be allowed to purchase fireworks, firearms, cigarettes and alcohol too? (note: I am not equating the effect of video games with the others... simply the legality of sales)
Part two is becoming empowered by the state to carry out that agenda through censorship.
Who says that only the government can censor? Schools, the media, televsion networks... they all censor. This highlights the issue that people have trouble understanding the differnce between censorship and loss of free speech rights. Only governement can do the later, but anyone can do the former.
No, it is a free speech issue, or more correctly a censorship issue. The politician used a rule to have the site shut down (the site had been registered anonymously). How many other sites with incomplete or anonymous registration info did he request to have shut down? None? Just the one critical of him? That sounds like censorship to me... just because he worked within the framework of the system doesn't make it (morally) wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh oh... who has the patent on restore/recovery points? I smell a lawsuit!
Speaking of fools, you clearly don't understand the point I am trying to make. It has nothing to do with ballots of even voting. It has to do with reliability and assurance. It doesn't matter if we are talking about voting or redundant guidance systems on the space shuttle. If you have two systems to track a state (in this case the vote count) and the the two systems differ in their estimate of the state - you have no idea which system is correct and which is in error. Adding that second system buys you nothing but controversy. Two systems can validate a result (if they agree) but you need three independent systems to both detect and identify the system malfuncion.
And my point is that if you are going to go through all that trouble - why bother with e-voting at all? Just use optical scanned ballots.
Pray tell... what is the "purpose for backslash"? I am not trolling.. I just reviewed the FAQ, and did the requisite google search - both yield nothing. I *thought* the purpose was a way to revisit a somewhat recent topic in today's context - something of an update - and in many cases in the past backslash stories have been quite interesting. But the original story and the backslash to it were posted within 24 hrs of each other. The content appeared to be nothing more than the most intersting of the comments. My point is how is this any different than simply reading the story at threshold 5, given that the details of the underlying story hadn't changed at all since the story was published.
I was going to say it differently: {jobs for the otherwise uneducated} U {math teacher}
Personally, I am in favor of optically scanned ballots - you can see what you chos and the ballot is the paper trail plus they are easily transferred to a computer.
Translation: "I feel really strongly about this issue and regret that it was posted on a weekend. I want to make sure all the weekday slashdot readers read about how evil the police are."
Seriously folks, what's with the all the backslash lately. This story was posted yesterday. It is still listed in the right "Older Stuff" frame. If I want to know what topics "defined the conversation", I'd just click the link and surf it at +5. Slow news day?
You, another person and a child are locked in a room. The other person holds a gun to both your and the child's head. He slides you a gun and orders you to shoot the child. If you refuse, he will shoot the child himself. In practical terms the child dies either way. Is there an ethical difference?
Now, before I get deluged with responses... I am not claiming that child == embryo. Merely that equal potential outcomes do not make ethical decisions indistinguishable.
Let me save you the trouble: "CPE1704TKS"
Yeah... it's all propaganda... well, and economic theory based on math... but don't let that get in the way. Freaking read a book on economics, preferrably by this guy.
Thank you for highlighting that one of the problems with the progressive agenda is that they have no idea where the center is.
My son is a Star Wars fanatic and had seen all the movies except Episode III which I thought was too dark for him. After endless begging and pleading, I edited Episode III a bit to bring it closer in line with the other episodes. I removed a beheading, Anking slautering the "younglings" and the bits where Anakin is smoldering and crawling out of the lava. I know my son very well, thank you very much, and I know that these scenes (totaling about 30 seconds) were beyond his maturity level. Sue me for being a good parent.
We are... we currently buy both Progress and Soyuz missions to meet our requirements. We can't continue to do this because there is a law on the book that says we can't. It is called the Iran and Syria Nonproliferation Act. Relief has been extended but it prohibits us from dealing with countries that share technology with Iran and Syria. After 2011, it will be illegal to buy Soyuz and Progress flights.
Which ET server do you play on? I play on et.tjw.org
That said, if this had been offered to me when I was a mid, I would have jumped at the chance...
The same people who will be recognized in the silence of obscurity if the mission goes off flawlessly.
Rather, in an odd (and tragic) way I think that the lack of WMDs actually proves that the administration really believed they were there. If they were really corrupt enough to build a war on a lie, why not go the extra half-mile and plant the evidence as well? Incompetence - yes, but a knowing lie? I djust deon't make sense when you think it through...
Have you ever heard of a printer? Or a camera? Or testimony? Or handwritten notes?
Goodluck with a beer bong in space... If you get the chance, I would recommend shotgunning it instead... the physics are more in your favor.
Excellent point. We shouldn't hold video games to a higher standard... it should be illegal for kids to buy "mature" video games and also illegal to buy "mature" movies. I wasn't aware that kids could buy R-rated movies - strikes me as odd since they can't see R-rated movies in a theater without a parent.
Odd,... I thought that was exactly what this bill does... it lets parents choose what video games they can play instead of letting the kids or government choose. Kids still have the right to play games under every piece of legislation mentioned. I am curious, should kids be allowed to purchase fireworks, firearms, cigarettes and alcohol too? (note: I am not equating the effect of video games with the others... simply the legality of sales)
Who says that only the government can censor? Schools, the media, televsion networks... they all censor. This highlights the issue that people have trouble understanding the differnce between censorship and loss of free speech rights. Only governement can do the later, but anyone can do the former.
woops... i meant "right"
No, it is a free speech issue, or more correctly a censorship issue. The politician used a rule to have the site shut down (the site had been registered anonymously). How many other sites with incomplete or anonymous registration info did he request to have shut down? None? Just the one critical of him? That sounds like censorship to me... just because he worked within the framework of the system doesn't make it (morally) wrong.