Started of with LinuxPPC on my PowerComputing Mac clone.
After that, I believe was Yellow Dog Linux, although I toyed around a bit with MkLinux on pre-PPC Mac hardware.
Then SuSE at work on IBM PPC servers, and Mandrake at home. I loved Mandrake! Pretty sure Mandrake was my first x86 Linux.
At some point I moved to Fedora because of the good MythTV documentation for that distro. Also toyed around with Linux From Scratch.
At work, we used to use CentOS and now are on Scientific Linux.
I've suggested to The Honchos that all videos on Slashdot should have a "video" topic marker, so that those who don't want to watch any videos, period, will be able to completely ignore them.
Thank you Rob. I would very much like to completely block all video posts.
I took an excellent Science Fiction literature class at the University of Nottingham (England) several years ago.
I don't remember everything that we read, but I know that there were some truly mind-bending Phillip K. Dick short stories regarding time paradoxes.
If you contact their English department, I'm sure the prof who taught the course could provide some good reading suggestions.
Being required to show ID whenever and wherever you are is very much a cause worth fighting.
There are certainly occasions when being asked to show ID is legal and justified. Shopping is not one of them. Being questioned by police after you call 911 is not one of them.
Neither retail stores nor law enforcement have an inherent right to see your identification. There are certainly times and places when it's appropriate to show ID, but whenever someone fights against an arbitrary and illegal requirement to show ID, that person should be applauded.
So Sweden is a totalitarian country because we have a national ID card? Wow, I didn't know that!
Not all countries with national ID cards are totalitarian. But, most totalitarian countries do require national ID cards. As the OP said, Americans have tended to resist national ID cards partly on this basis - if you want to minimize the opportunity for your own government to oppress you, you should fight measures which allow the government to monitor you.
It may be helpful to consider the following. Nearly all of the European countries that I'm familiar with have parliaments, and most have executive power resting with the ministers selected by that parliament. These goverments are elected on a manifesto, and many people within those countries tend to think of their government as a collective unit, representing the people's will (in terms specified by the manifesto of the majority party or coalition). Contrast that with the US government, where executive power rests with a strong president who is independent of the legislature. The legislature itself is split into two bodies, both of which are elected. All members of the House are elected every two years, there is no equivalent to a parliamentary election manifesto, and when you vote, the politics and personality of the particular person on the ballot often matter far more than the stated platform of the party. The Senate has 6 year terms, and every 2 years, one third of the members are up for election. I say all this to drive home the point that Americans, even liberal Americans, have a distrust of their own government, and that distrust is built into the very structure of the branches of government.
And besides, isn't a passport a form of national ID card? You DO have passports over in the US I presume?
In some ways, yes, in some ways no. Passports are issued by the US Federal government, so they are national in that sense. They can also be used as ID. The big difference, though, is that the primary purpose of a passport is not for domestic use as ID or tracking within the country of issue. A US passport is the US government's official mechanism for requesting that other countries allow the bearer into that country. Consider the text on a US passport: "The Secretary of State requests all whom it may concern to permit safely and freely to pass and in case of need to give all lawful aid to ___ the named person ___ a citizen of the United States."
In addition, passports are completely non-mandatory. I can get a passport if I need or want to travel outside the country. But since I am never required to show a passport when travelling within the US, the fears provoked by the threat of national IDs (especially mandatory national IDs) tend not to apply to US passports.
Wow, apparently you didnt read it then, here is one... Note the:"excused from securing a warrant only when the surveillance is conducted 'primarily' for foreign intelligence reasons" 1980 A 4th Circuit decision, U.S. v. Truong Dinh Hung, applying pre-FISA standards, holds that "the executive branch should be excused from securing a warrant only when the surveillance is conducted 'primarily' for foreign intelligence reasons" (629 F.2d 908, 439 U.S. 1326, 667 F.2d 1105 (4th Cir. 1981)). The decision will influence interpretations of FISA language "the purpose" of surveillance is to collect foreign intelligence information as meaning "the primary purpose".
I read the entire article that you linked to. As I said, the article you linked to mentions no presidents other than George W Bush who authorizing surveillance of Americans without warrants or other judicial-branch oversight. Now, the first couple items (from 1972-74) do reference warrantless surveillance. They don't mention who authorized it. That would have been Nixon.
There's are reasons that we have FISA and other laws which regulate surveillance. Chief among them are that President Nixon proved that the executive branch is highly capable of using the intelligence services for unconstitutional purposes. There are parts of those laws which I disagree with. But they are meant to prevent the kinds of executive branch abuse seen in the Nixon admininstration and again today.
The story you linked to includes zero references to previous presidents authorizing surveillance of Americans without warrants or other judicial-branch oversight.
Game Politics notes that Co-Sponsors Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT) and Rep. Mike McIntyre (D-NC) are up for re-election this November along with Congressman Cliff Stearns."
All members of the US House of Representatives are up for election this November.
That's the way it works. Every member of the House is elected every two years.
Yeah.:) Until you try calling a function with a struct as a parameter. Or try doing anything even remotely object-oriented.
Those are the two big things that finally drove me from Perl to Ruby. I could never go back. Ruby has almost all of the nice things of Perl, with almost none of the insanely stupid bits.
Also, here's how to manually create a Mac OS X application bundle from a Java program. The example is for an SWT program, but there would be no changes needed for a Swing app. In the shell script, just make sure that you add all necessary Mac-specific command line options.
How about Java? You run it on Mac OS-X and it looks just like an OS-X app, complete with top menu bar. All this and you don't have to change the source from Windows. I don't know if there are subtle differences to "real" OS-X apps that Mac heads would see, but from my point of view it works well.
A properly configured Java Swing application is, as far as I can tell, indistinguishable from an ObjC-Cocoa application from the end-user's perspective.
I haven't developed using SWT, but the only SWT app that I'm aware of using, Eclipse, is not very well integrated as a native OS X app. That's not to say that it's a bad app on OS X. It's just that it has some...quirks... It doesn't behave properly in the dock. It doesn't use native accellerators for all key commands. Now to be fair, this is almost certainly not a problem with SWT, but rather with Eclipse.
My point is, there is no need to use SWT on OS X if you want a more native look and feel. Mac OS X was built from the ground up with Java and Swing as first-class citizens.
It always gives me a kick to see my Java app, developed solely on Windows work almost flawlessly on Linux or OS X. I say almost but there are some minor UI inconsistencies that I need to fix. You mention for example the menu bar should go at the top, but it doesn't in my app. Also, my menus look a bit stupid since it uses the Windows conventions for menu structure for underlining accelerator keys, e.g. File.
Both Apple and Sun have developer guides for fully integrating your Java Swing app into Mac OS X. Here is Apple's guide and Java system properties to help with Mac integration.
How to fix the menu bar: Add -Dapple.laf.useScreenMenuBar=true to the command line when you call your app.
How to fix the application name (so it doesn't show up as com.mypackage.foobar): Add -Xdock:name="My Application's Name" to the command line when you call your app.
How to make your custom icon show up in the dock when you launch your app: Add -Xdock:icon="/path/to/custom_icon.png" to the command line when you call your app.
How to make menu shortcuts use the proper keys, regardless of what OS you're on:
Also, the best thing you can do is to make your app a regular Mac application bundle. You can use/Developer/Applications/Java Tools/Jar Bundler.app to do this. Or, you can do it via an ant task. Take a look at the macBuild target of the build.xml file for TripleA an example of how to make a Mac OS X application bundle from Java code using ant.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
the simple fact is that C/C++ is the standard for writing native code
On many operating systems, this is true. But it doesn't have to be this way. Take a look at OS X. By using objective c as the primary language, programmers can get a well-designed pure oo language, and still have access to the low-level functionality that C provides for the few occasions when it is needed.
I hope they did a lot of user testing with this because it looks like they missed some obvious possible problems. First, try telling a clueless user to right-click or even left-click over the phone. Not only is there the confusion of multiple buttons, but they are invisible buttons.
The mouse is set up by default to act like a single button mouse. Multi-button functionality won't be there unless you (the user) enable it. Plus, all Apple apps, including the OS, are designed to function perfectly with a 1 button mouse. You can use right-click and other functionality if you have and understand a multibutton mouse, but you never have to if you don't understand it.
I use Dvorak, but occassionally use qwerty on my wife's computer. My qwerty skills really vary depending on how much I practice. If I use qwerty at least occasionally then I pick it up reasonably well after a bit of use.
Lets take a walk through a house built by our illustrious legion of very ordinary Software Developers we've seen over the last few posts..
You arrive at a friends new house and step up to the front door.. well, you do after finding it around the side of the house..
You press the door bell but dont hear the reassuring ding dong sound coming from inside the house, you ponder if you missed hearing it and wait a few moments before politely pressing it again, this time you're SURE, there was NO doorbell sound coming from inside. You peer at the doorbell, its a button, how much more complicated can it be? You DOUBLE CLICK it and hear a loud DINGDONG coming from inside..
Your Friend, Herbert's footsteps approach the door from inside and you straighten your tie ready for the door to open. Herbert unlocks the door and the damn thing swings OUTWARDS knocking you back a step or two. Apologetically the owner explains that's how it was when they bought the house "it fools everyone and it'll be a great source of converation at our Dinner Parties".
You politely chuckle and hope they get the damn thing fixed.
Herbert invites you into the house, you step unsurely into the hallway and peer around.
The ceiling has a sort of mauvy pink color, not dissamilar to your Grandmother's slippers, the walls are mostly red.
Herbert offers you the grand tour of his new home and gestures towards what you assume is the Lounge room thru a doorway off the hallway. You wander in suprised to find that you're in the toilet.. nervously Herbert chuckles and explains that to get to the Lounge you have to pass through the 2 Way Toilet.
You emerge on the other side of the toilet into a long narrow room that stretches the length of the house, its about 5 feet wide and 45 feet long. At the far end of this poorly lit room you can see a Television. The only light coming into the room is from a small window at about knee height.
Herbert explains the Lounge Room is really an extension that wasn't planned very well, he invites you into the kitchen through a revolving door. You step into a large circular room after missing the first few exits of the rapidly revolving entrance. In the middle of the room is a large Island Bench, its working surface is about 5 foot high. there's no other furniture in the room, but there's 9 doors evenly spaced around the room. Herbert explains that through each door is an appliance, there's the Fridge Room, the Oven Room, the Freezer Room, the Dishwasher Room, the Food Room, the Microwave room etc.. Its a pain Herbert says, taking things from one to the next, but you get used to it he says... you feel doubtful.
Herbet is keen to show you the Master Bedroom, but he's not sure which door its through, he tries three then finds the right one.
As usual, the damn thing opens outwards.. You dutifully but somewhat hesitantly follow Herbert through the Master Bedroom, you wonder what bizarre idea you're going to be introduced to next.
Herbet gestures around what appears to be an empty room with a self-satisfied smirk on his face. You peer around trying to work out what bizarre idea the builder has foisted upon the house now. "Where's the BED, Herbert?" Herbert theatrically claps his hands together twice and stamps his foot.. the bed silently descends from an opening that appeared in the ceiling, you jump
out of the way just in time and the bed neatly touches down in the centre of the room. "Neat hey!" Herbert prompts you.. "Ah yeah, thats great Herbert".. You gingerly sit on the bed, it promptly collapses.. "Ah, yeah that happens a bit, you get used to it."..
"Come and see the Garden!" Herbert excitedly exclaims. Herbet opens a small trap door hidden under a rug and descends a small ladder.. you follow him down. The Garden has a concrete floor and
BTW, the Nazi's were never elected, they came into power by force, pay attention to history.
Not true.
In the early 1930s, the National Socialist (Nazi) party candidates received a significant percentage of the votes in parliamentary elections.
In 1933, Adolf Hitler, supported by the Nazi members of parliament (and other members of parliament), became Chancellor.
After an attack of the parliament building, Hilter suspended civil rights. Hitler expanded executive powers, eventually assumed dictatorial powers, and things continued going downhill from there.
The rest of your solutions are quite sound, and I don't find any unreasonable fault with them, given my limited experience. Finally, rational discussion!
Thank you, too. It is nice to occasionally have rational discussions on/.
Just to be clear - I was never stating that I agree with all of the solutions I wrote down. In most circumstances, only S2, S10, S11, S12 and sometimes S6 should be used.
For P8, P9, and P10, we've heard about this happening in companies. Here's a simple yet effective measure, introduce a n amendment to pre-existing law....
This is totally unnecessary.
P8, P9, and P10 are already utterly illegal.
The good news is, they are currently quite rare because it's difficult to know for sure how someone voted. OTOH, if you enacted your suggestion to allow voters to verify their votes after the election, vote-purchasing and punishment for "incorrect" voting would pay since the person bribing or coercing could verify the vote.
The UK is actually struggling with this issue. Parliament has considered making all voting done via mail (as is done in Washington State, I believe). Absentee voting is a tradeoff. You get more freedom to cast your vote when it's convenient, but you have to worry more about bribery, vote-purchasing, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Started of with LinuxPPC on my PowerComputing Mac clone. After that, I believe was Yellow Dog Linux, although I toyed around a bit with MkLinux on pre-PPC Mac hardware. Then SuSE at work on IBM PPC servers, and Mandrake at home. I loved Mandrake! Pretty sure Mandrake was my first x86 Linux. At some point I moved to Fedora because of the good MythTV documentation for that distro. Also toyed around with Linux From Scratch. At work, we used to use CentOS and now are on Scientific Linux.
I've suggested to The Honchos that all videos on Slashdot should have a "video" topic marker, so that those who don't want to watch any videos, period, will be able to completely ignore them.
Thank you Rob. I would very much like to completely block all video posts.
OK. I'm inclined to believe you that the videos aren't sponsored. But is there a way for me to change my settings so that NO videos show up for me?
Slashdot is not and should not be a place for videos. Please stop.
Thanks for the site, Rob. :) I only wish I'd found it sooner.
I took an excellent Science Fiction literature class at the University of Nottingham (England) several years ago. I don't remember everything that we read, but I know that there were some truly mind-bending Phillip K. Dick short stories regarding time paradoxes. If you contact their English department, I'm sure the prof who taught the course could provide some good reading suggestions.
This battle just wasn't worth it.
And why not?
Being required to show ID whenever and wherever you are is very much a cause worth fighting. There are certainly occasions when being asked to show ID is legal and justified. Shopping is not one of them. Being questioned by police after you call 911 is not one of them.
Neither retail stores nor law enforcement have an inherent right to see your identification. There are certainly times and places when it's appropriate to show ID, but whenever someone fights against an arbitrary and illegal requirement to show ID, that person should be applauded.
Not all countries with national ID cards are totalitarian. But, most totalitarian countries do require national ID cards. As the OP said, Americans have tended to resist national ID cards partly on this basis - if you want to minimize the opportunity for your own government to oppress you, you should fight measures which allow the government to monitor you.
It may be helpful to consider the following. Nearly all of the European countries that I'm familiar with have parliaments, and most have executive power resting with the ministers selected by that parliament. These goverments are elected on a manifesto, and many people within those countries tend to think of their government as a collective unit, representing the people's will (in terms specified by the manifesto of the majority party or coalition). Contrast that with the US government, where executive power rests with a strong president who is independent of the legislature. The legislature itself is split into two bodies, both of which are elected. All members of the House are elected every two years, there is no equivalent to a parliamentary election manifesto, and when you vote, the politics and personality of the particular person on the ballot often matter far more than the stated platform of the party. The Senate has 6 year terms, and every 2 years, one third of the members are up for election. I say all this to drive home the point that Americans, even liberal Americans, have a distrust of their own government, and that distrust is built into the very structure of the branches of government.
And besides, isn't a passport a form of national ID card? You DO have passports over in the US I presume?In some ways, yes, in some ways no. Passports are issued by the US Federal government, so they are national in that sense. They can also be used as ID. The big difference, though, is that the primary purpose of a passport is not for domestic use as ID or tracking within the country of issue. A US passport is the US government's official mechanism for requesting that other countries allow the bearer into that country. Consider the text on a US passport: "The Secretary of State requests all whom it may concern to permit safely and freely to pass and in case of need to give all lawful aid to ___ the named person ___ a citizen of the United States."
In addition, passports are completely non-mandatory. I can get a passport if I need or want to travel outside the country. But since I am never required to show a passport when travelling within the US, the fears provoked by the threat of national IDs (especially mandatory national IDs) tend not to apply to US passports.
Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
Translation? :)
Wow, apparently you didnt read it then, here is one... Note the :"excused from securing a warrant only when the surveillance is conducted 'primarily' for foreign intelligence reasons" 1980 A 4th Circuit decision, U.S. v. Truong Dinh Hung, applying pre-FISA standards, holds that "the executive branch should be excused from securing a warrant only when the surveillance is conducted 'primarily' for foreign intelligence reasons" (629 F.2d 908, 439 U.S. 1326, 667 F.2d 1105 (4th Cir. 1981)). The decision will influence interpretations of FISA language "the purpose" of surveillance is to collect foreign intelligence information as meaning "the primary purpose".
I read the entire article that you linked to. As I said, the article you linked to mentions no presidents other than George W Bush who authorizing surveillance of Americans without warrants or other judicial-branch oversight. Now, the first couple items (from 1972-74) do reference warrantless surveillance. They don't mention who authorized it. That would have been Nixon.
There's are reasons that we have FISA and other laws which regulate surveillance. Chief among them are that President Nixon proved that the executive branch is highly capable of using the intelligence services for unconstitutional purposes. There are parts of those laws which I disagree with. But they are meant to prevent the kinds of executive branch abuse seen in the Nixon admininstration and again today.
I hope everyone was this angry when all the previous presidents did the same thing, or when this FISA BS was passed.... http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Warrantless_Eavesdr opping_Timeline
The story you linked to includes zero references to previous presidents authorizing surveillance of Americans without warrants or other judicial-branch oversight.
All members of the US House of Representatives are up for election this November.
That's the way it works. Every member of the House is elected every two years.
So does Perl.
Yeah. :) Until you try calling a function with a struct as a parameter. Or try doing anything even remotely object-oriented.
Those are the two big things that finally drove me from Perl to Ruby. I could never go back. Ruby has almost all of the nice things of Perl, with almost none of the insanely stupid bits.
Seriously, though, can we get a C-syntax version of it already? It's FRICKING UNREADABLE.
I hope you're joking, but I don't think you are. Objective C has one of the most readable syntax of any language I know.
[newImage initWithContentsOfFile:fileName];
Also, here's how to manually create a Mac OS X application bundle from a Java program. The example is for an SWT program, but there would be no changes needed for a Swing app. In the shell script, just make sure that you add all necessary Mac-specific command line options.
http://www.eclipse.org/swt/macosx/
How about Java? You run it on Mac OS-X and it looks just like an OS-X app, complete with top menu bar. All this and you don't have to change the source from Windows. I don't know if there are subtle differences to "real" OS-X apps that Mac heads would see, but from my point of view it works well.
A properly configured Java Swing application is, as far as I can tell, indistinguishable from an ObjC-Cocoa application from the end-user's perspective.
I haven't developed using SWT, but the only SWT app that I'm aware of using, Eclipse, is not very well integrated as a native OS X app. That's not to say that it's a bad app on OS X. It's just that it has some...quirks... It doesn't behave properly in the dock. It doesn't use native accellerators for all key commands. Now to be fair, this is almost certainly not a problem with SWT, but rather with Eclipse.
My point is, there is no need to use SWT on OS X if you want a more native look and feel. Mac OS X was built from the ground up with Java and Swing as first-class citizens.
It always gives me a kick to see my Java app, developed solely on Windows work almost flawlessly on Linux or OS X. I say almost but there are some minor UI inconsistencies that I need to fix. You mention for example the menu bar should go at the top, but it doesn't in my app. Also, my menus look a bit stupid since it uses the Windows conventions for menu structure for underlining accelerator keys, e.g. File.
Both Apple and Sun have developer guides for fully integrating your Java Swing app into Mac OS X. Here is Apple's guide and Java system properties to help with Mac integration.
How to fix the menu bar: Add -Dapple.laf.useScreenMenuBar=true to the command line when you call your app.
How to fix the application name (so it doesn't show up as com.mypackage.foobar): Add -Xdock:name="My Application's Name" to the command line when you call your app.
How to make your custom icon show up in the dock when you launch your app: Add -Xdock:icon="/path/to/custom_icon.png" to the command line when you call your app.
How to make menu shortcuts use the proper keys, regardless of what OS you're on:
Or, if you need to organize your menus differently for each OS, you can check what OS you are on as you are building the menus:
Also, the best thing you can do is to make your app a regular Mac application bundle. You can use /Developer/Applications/Java Tools/Jar Bundler.app to do this. Or, you can do it via an ant task. Take a look at the macBuild target of the build.xml file for TripleA an example of how to make a Mac OS X application bundle from Java code using ant.
On many operating systems, this is true. But it doesn't have to be this way. Take a look at OS X. By using objective c as the primary language, programmers can get a well-designed pure oo language, and still have access to the low-level functionality that C provides for the few occasions when it is needed.
The mouse is set up by default to act like a single button mouse. Multi-button functionality won't be there unless you (the user) enable it. Plus, all Apple apps, including the OS, are designed to function perfectly with a 1 button mouse. You can use right-click and other functionality if you have and understand a multibutton mouse, but you never have to if you don't understand it.
I use Dvorak, but occassionally use qwerty on my wife's computer. My qwerty skills really vary depending on how much I practice. If I use qwerty at least occasionally then I pick it up reasonably well after a bit of use.
If some Software Developers built houses?
Lets take a walk through a house built by our illustrious legion of very ordinary Software Developers we've seen over the last few posts..
You arrive at a friends new house and step up to the front door.. well, you do after finding it around the side of the house..
You press the door bell but dont hear the reassuring ding dong sound coming from inside the house, you ponder if you missed hearing it and wait a few moments before politely pressing it again, this time you're SURE, there was NO doorbell sound coming from inside. You peer at the doorbell, its a button, how much more complicated can it be? You DOUBLE CLICK it and hear a loud DINGDONG coming from inside..
Your Friend, Herbert's footsteps approach the door from inside and you straighten your tie ready for the door to open. Herbert unlocks the door and the damn thing swings OUTWARDS knocking you back a step or two. Apologetically the owner explains that's how it was when they bought the house "it fools everyone and it'll be a great source of converation at our Dinner Parties".
You politely chuckle and hope they get the damn thing fixed.
Herbert invites you into the house, you step unsurely into the hallway and peer around.
The ceiling has a sort of mauvy pink color, not dissamilar to your Grandmother's slippers, the walls are mostly red.
Herbert offers you the grand tour of his new home and gestures towards what you assume is the Lounge room thru a doorway off the hallway. You wander in suprised to find that you're in the toilet.. nervously Herbert chuckles and explains that to get to the Lounge you have to pass through the 2 Way Toilet.
You emerge on the other side of the toilet into a long narrow room that stretches the length of the house, its about 5 feet wide and 45 feet long. At the far end of this poorly lit room you can see a Television. The only light coming into the room is from a small window at about knee height.
Herbert explains the Lounge Room is really an extension that wasn't planned very well, he invites you into the kitchen through a revolving door. You step into a large circular room after missing the first few exits of the rapidly revolving entrance. In the middle of the room is a large Island Bench, its working surface is about 5 foot high. there's no other furniture in the room, but there's 9 doors evenly spaced around the room. Herbert explains that through each door is an appliance, there's the Fridge Room, the Oven Room, the Freezer Room, the Dishwasher Room, the Food Room, the Microwave room etc.. Its a pain Herbert says, taking things from one to the next, but you get used to it he says... you feel doubtful.
Herbet is keen to show you the Master Bedroom, but he's not sure which door its through, he tries three then finds the right one.
As usual, the damn thing opens outwards.. You dutifully but somewhat hesitantly follow Herbert through the Master Bedroom, you wonder what bizarre idea you're going to be introduced to next.
Herbet gestures around what appears to be an empty room with a self-satisfied smirk on his face. You peer around trying to work out what bizarre idea the builder has foisted upon the house now. "Where's the BED, Herbert?" Herbert theatrically claps his hands together twice and stamps his foot.. the bed silently descends from an opening that appeared in the ceiling, you jump out of the way just in time and the bed neatly touches down in the centre of the room. "Neat hey!" Herbert prompts you.. "Ah yeah, thats great Herbert".. You gingerly sit on the bed, it promptly collapses.. "Ah, yeah that happens a bit, you get used to it."..
"Come and see the Garden!" Herbert excitedly exclaims. Herbet opens a small trap door hidden under a rug and descends a small ladder.. you follow him down. The Garden has a concrete floor and
Not true.
In the early 1930s, the National Socialist (Nazi) party candidates received a significant percentage of the votes in parliamentary elections.
In 1933, Adolf Hitler, supported by the Nazi members of parliament (and other members of parliament), became Chancellor.
After an attack of the parliament building, Hilter suspended civil rights. Hitler expanded executive powers, eventually assumed dictatorial powers, and things continued going downhill from there.
Thank you, too. It is nice to occasionally have rational discussions on /.
Just to be clear - I was never stating that I agree with all of the solutions I wrote down. In most circumstances, only S2, S10, S11, S12 and sometimes S6 should be used.
This is totally unnecessary.
P8, P9, and P10 are already utterly illegal.
The good news is, they are currently quite rare because it's difficult to know for sure how someone voted. OTOH, if you enacted your suggestion to allow voters to verify their votes after the election, vote-purchasing and punishment for "incorrect" voting would pay since the person bribing or coercing could verify the vote.
The UK is actually struggling with this issue. Parliament has considered making all voting done via mail (as is done in Washington State, I believe). Absentee voting is a tradeoff. You get more freedom to cast your vote when it's convenient, but you have to worry more about bribery, vote-purchasing, etc.