The key line in the whole story is when the writer says "Let me tell you..." What he doesn't get is that we no longer want him and his cronies to tell us anything.
Actually we don't care that we have aliented you. We seem to alienate the rest of the world on a pretty regular basis- see Reagan.
As a matter of fact, the only time the rest of the world doesn't hate us is when we are dragging your facist, socialist, communist asses out of another war. Do you understand now why we (the majority of Americans) don't give a rat's ass what you think of us? Do you understand that your superior attitude doesn't matter to us? Do you understand now that Europe's highly educated losers don't matter to us?
My appoligies. I am emotional about the election process, as it afects my quality of living directly and indirectly.
As it does all of us.
In your previous posts, you seem to be advocating proprietary software in this realm. That is abhorrent, in my humble opinion.
If this is what I expressed then I am not doing a good job of fully communicating what I think. I believe (at least I did before this exchange) that there are three possibilities of ownership:
1- Corporate - Blah! Not even a consideration
2- Government - Might just be the same as #1 above.
3- Open - Preferable, since I trust the people
If you are suggesting GPL software, that is better, but probably not realistic in the next decade.
You are probably correct in this. The truth is that the American people no longer trust each other, preferring to trust the "government" as socialism is want to teach them to do. I think I agree that the corporate/government powers will never allow power (in this case in the form of ownership) to be returned to the people without violent revolution.
On the points of credibility, etc. I honestly think that the elites don't really give a damn about what the common man thinks and would really us stupid folk just not have the vote at all. The fact that the unwashed masses are able to vote is likely the biggest unsolved 'problem' the elites have and it upsets their little world and plans immeasureably. All that aside, the fact remains that the entity that sadly has the most credibility is the US government.
So I guess that, given the current state of affairs, I would have to agree that most people trust the corrupt government to guarantee a fair election. I find that sad.
No need to flip out, we just need another couple of go-rounds to clarify positions. Your comments interest me so I will continue.
Your statement that one can get government "owned" source code via FOIA request indicates that you trust the government enough to cough up what you request. I used several examples to show what the government could do to deny your request. In a theoretical way you are correct, just as you would have been correct if you had stated that "anyone can be President" - the reality is different.
I do not understand why you believe that the government *must* own the code? Is it so the American people will trust the voting process? An esrow thing? I guess I could buy that. However, I don't think it is necessary for the government to own the code to ensure the code's availability. Could you expand on that?
I think you and I may have a difference of opinion about how the government "owns" things.
While you are technically correct that government ownership meaning that techically the people have ownership by virtue of the goverment being "..of the people, by the...blah, blah, blah." However, since we are dealing with reality here I have to mention that in the real world, once the government "owns" something it is no longer truly owned by the people. Simply classifying the voting source as "vital to national security" - an easy argument, or stating that the encryption makes it a "munition" and therefore subject to a whole set of rules, means that government ownership is not what you say it is. Oh that it truly worked that way, and maybe it did in a farway time and place when Americans were truly willing to take back their government if necessary.
You trust the government- I don't. History shows that governments tend to tyranny and the current trend indicates that I don't want them holding the source for my vote.
... the US government MUST OWN the code that counts the votes.
While I certainly understand your concerns I would disagree with your assertion that the government MUST OWN the code. The government has the highest vested interest in controlling the results of voting, even more so than the simple and predictable profit motive of Diebold. I do not trust "the government" to be a good custodian of the source code contolling voting. I trust the people of the United States and noone else. Open Source comes the closest to granting all rights to "the people" and is thus the best method of ensuring a valid vote.
All of our rights as Americans flow from the ability to control who leads us. The importance of a clean vote that everyone believes in cannot be overstated. This is far too important to be entrusted to Diebold or the government- don't trust either.
... I don't recall them getting stuck like we currently are.
You don't recall? Yeah, and I don't recall that Nixon was such a bad guy...but I have read about it. That comment is a bit weasly.
British colonial history is replete with stories of the hatred the British stirred up. The 12 year Malaysian guerilla was is an example of them "getting stuck." Perhaps that was a bit before your time so you might have difficulty "recalling" that.
"...should become a mandatory read at all high schools..."
While I agree that it would be a good book to read I am not sure why anything, including high school should be mandatory.
I think better would be allowing children to grow up with free minds and then they would not need a book to tell them someone was lying to them...using statistics. American's used to be able to smell bullshit twenty miles away.
Read a book or two about coal, railroads, oil, computers and you'll find the verbiage and scare tactics used by the leaders of these industries are pretty similar to what Microsoft is saying now.
"Open Source Software is inherently dangerous"
Weasel words like "inherent" are convincing to dumbed-down folks../ ain't buying it though. God bless individualism.
"Statistics 'prove'..."
Ahhhh, the old "who can argue with scientific fact" line.
Provide us with "science" to back up this claim. Properly vetted, peer-reviewed science from an unbiased source, unfunded by those with a vested interest in the outcome please.
The psychological use of fear and "scientific" studies to convince the average American is not new. Read carefully the language of Microsoft and you'll hear JD Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, JP Morgan, etc. What you have to read carefully to find is their own fear that they are losing monopoly control. Big Oil was able to buy corrupt officials and maintain their decidedly un-capitalist ways. Will Microsoft?
I lived in Memphis for a short while. It did not rain often but when it did rain it was usually a storm. All the water ran off into the muddy river nearby and was gone.
I happen to know Chuck Floyd, having worked with him six or seven years ago.
I can tell you that when appraised of the attention he got from this he would remark "Good". He is onme of the most positive people I ever met, able to see the good in almost any circumstance. He is a true believer that is most of you met (and were not aware of his party affiliation) you would admire for his stance on many issues matches what I see here on/.
It is truly a shame that the leader for the story prominently mentioned that he was a Republican. I think that fact made the decision for many here, regardless of their true beliefs on the subject. Truly a shame that partisanship has become more important than values and integrity.
Anyway, I am betting that Chuck is happy that this got the reaction that he sought.
Win or not, we must continue to fight tyranny even in mild forms. The power of government must be constrained on a constant, consistent basis in order for freedom to flourish.
The FCC is obviously outside of its mandate and that fact will be communicated just by the very fact act of taking to the courts.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not a hard-core gamer but I don't think I will get this game if it is such a hassle to play what you paid for.
N2TL
R Bruce Peters
203 Collingsworth Dr Rochester NY 14625
The key line in the whole story is when the writer says "Let me tell you..." What he doesn't get is that we no longer want him and his cronies to tell us anything.
Don't sweat it. You've got a military right?
Some people register Democrat in order to be able to vote in primaries.
Yeah but 1.5.4 was really good. I still use it also.
I was wondering if you could articulate five concrete, lasting things that Bill Clinton did for blacks?
1- Anyone who disagrees with you is an unthinking sheep
2- Educated people like you ....blah, blah, blah.
You make me laugh...but I am just a stupid,
If things don't go your way then obviously everyone else must be a moron right?
I am laughing at you right now, how's that feel?
As a matter of fact, the only time the rest of the world doesn't hate us is when we are dragging your facist, socialist, communist asses out of another war. Do you understand now why we (the majority of Americans) don't give a rat's ass what you think of us? Do you understand that your superior attitude doesn't matter to us? Do you understand now that Europe's highly educated losers don't matter to us?
Do you get it now?
Don't sweat it, sour grapes is simply a psychological coping mechanism and serves as an acceptable, safe outlet.
So does that mean that I can take that plastic cover off now?
As it does all of us.
In your previous posts, you seem to be advocating proprietary software in this realm. That is abhorrent, in my humble opinion.
If this is what I expressed then I am not doing a good job of fully communicating what I think. I believe (at least I did before this exchange) that there are three possibilities of ownership:
1- Corporate - Blah! Not even a consideration
2- Government - Might just be the same as #1 above.
3- Open - Preferable, since I trust the people
If you are suggesting GPL software, that is better, but probably not realistic in the next decade.
You are probably correct in this. The truth is that the American people no longer trust each other, preferring to trust the "government" as socialism is want to teach them to do. I think I agree that the corporate/government powers will never allow power (in this case in the form of ownership) to be returned to the people without violent revolution.
On the points of credibility, etc. I honestly think that the elites don't really give a damn about what the common man thinks and would really us stupid folk just not have the vote at all. The fact that the unwashed masses are able to vote is likely the biggest unsolved 'problem' the elites have and it upsets their little world and plans immeasureably. All that aside, the fact remains that the entity that sadly has the most credibility is the US government.
So I guess that, given the current state of affairs, I would have to agree that most people trust the corrupt government to guarantee a fair election. I find that sad.
Your statement that one can get government "owned" source code via FOIA request indicates that you trust the government enough to cough up what you request. I used several examples to show what the government could do to deny your request. In a theoretical way you are correct, just as you would have been correct if you had stated that "anyone can be President" - the reality is different.
I do not understand why you believe that the government *must* own the code? Is it so the American people will trust the voting process? An esrow thing? I guess I could buy that. However, I don't think it is necessary for the government to own the code to ensure the code's availability. Could you expand on that?
So said the Bolsheviks in Russia...
While you are technically correct that government ownership meaning that techically the people have ownership by virtue of the goverment being "..of the people, by the...blah, blah, blah." However, since we are dealing with reality here I have to mention that in the real world, once the government "owns" something it is no longer truly owned by the people. Simply classifying the voting source as "vital to national security" - an easy argument, or stating that the encryption makes it a "munition" and therefore subject to a whole set of rules, means that government ownership is not what you say it is. Oh that it truly worked that way, and maybe it did in a farway time and place when Americans were truly willing to take back their government if necessary.
You trust the government- I don't. History shows that governments tend to tyranny and the current trend indicates that I don't want them holding the source for my vote.
While I certainly understand your concerns I would disagree with your assertion that the government MUST OWN the code. The government has the highest vested interest in controlling the results of voting, even more so than the simple and predictable profit motive of Diebold. I do not trust "the government" to be a good custodian of the source code contolling voting. I trust the people of the United States and noone else. Open Source comes the closest to granting all rights to "the people" and is thus the best method of ensuring a valid vote.
All of our rights as Americans flow from the ability to control who leads us. The importance of a clean vote that everyone believes in cannot be overstated. This is far too important to be entrusted to Diebold or the government- don't trust either.
You don't recall? Yeah, and I don't recall that Nixon was such a bad guy...but I have read about it. That comment is a bit weasly.
British colonial history is replete with stories of the hatred the British stirred up. The 12 year Malaysian guerilla was is an example of them "getting stuck." Perhaps that was a bit before your time so you might have difficulty "recalling" that.
He says from the safe comfort of his home...
While I agree that it would be a good book to read I am not sure why anything, including high school should be mandatory.
I think better would be allowing children to grow up with free minds and then they would not need a book to tell them someone was lying to them...using statistics. American's used to be able to smell bullshit twenty miles away.
"Open Source Software is inherently dangerous"
Weasel words like "inherent" are convincing to dumbed-down folks. ./ ain't buying it though. God bless individualism.
"Statistics 'prove'..."
Ahhhh, the old "who can argue with scientific fact" line.
Provide us with "science" to back up this claim. Properly vetted, peer-reviewed science from an unbiased source, unfunded by those with a vested interest in the outcome please.
The psychological use of fear and "scientific" studies to convince the average American is not new. Read carefully the language of Microsoft and you'll hear JD Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, JP Morgan, etc. What you have to read carefully to find is their own fear that they are losing monopoly control. Big Oil was able to buy corrupt officials and maintain their decidedly un-capitalist ways. Will Microsoft?
I lived in Memphis for a short while. It did not rain often but when it did rain it was usually a storm. All the water ran off into the muddy river nearby and was gone.
Anyone interested in buying some ham radio gear?
I can tell you that when appraised of the attention he got from this he would remark "Good". He is onme of the most positive people I ever met, able to see the good in almost any circumstance. He is a true believer that is most of you met (and were not aware of his party affiliation) you would admire for his stance on many issues matches what I see here on /.
It is truly a shame that the leader for the story prominently mentioned that he was a Republican. I think that fact made the decision for many here, regardless of their true beliefs on the subject. Truly a shame that partisanship has become more important than values and integrity.
Anyway, I am betting that Chuck is happy that this got the reaction that he sought.
The FCC is obviously outside of its mandate and that fact will be communicated just by the very fact act of taking to the courts.
Be not afraid.