download the latest stable version of the Linux kernel, print it out, give it to IBM
... except that IBM asked SCO to identify SysV code by file, version and line, not Linux code. And, presumably, IBM already has the SysV code in question, otherwise how could they allegedly copy it? They just don't know what SCO is pointing at when they bawl.
JFFS is an unacceptable alternative. The two filesystems have wildly different goals. FAT is simple and can be implemented in a small amount of space.
If JFFS is unacceptable, what about YAFFS? Its GPLd, fairly widely used already (many SBCs including my FileZerver uses it), very stable, scales well, and has a direct interface (YDI) for RTOS and embedded systems.
All it needs is a set of native Win drivers so that thumbdrives formatted that way can be read in Windows.. and for it to be distributed in all forthcoming Win service packs.. *pinch* Ouch! Oh.. was I daydreaming again?
There are existing OSS NTFS drivers that work in read-only mode right? Well, here's a way around the MS EULA for most: make loading ntfs.sys a three-step process:
Mount the NFTS partition you want write access to using the OSS read-only version,
read the winnt/system32/ntfs.sys driver into memory or RAM-disk,
remount it using the method described in the article.
This way, Knoppix (or whichever distro implements this) wouldn't have to include the EULA-protected M$ driver. Its as legal as any other WINE-like use of existing, O/S-speicific DLLs and drivers.
Obviously, this wouldn't work for NTFS partitions that don't have an actual NT-based O/S installed on it, but if that's the case, why do you have that partition on your HD in the first place?!
Sure, Javascript has some useful features. Such as:
-- Hiding the real URL of a link as the mouse hovers over it. Real useful. Thanks.
-- Drop down menus. There are plenty of ways that do this without hiding the submenues from browsers used by the handicapped. Check into CSS (or even plain HTML!) for alternatives.
-- Opening/resizing/closing browser windows. I've got the capability of doing that myself, thanks. If I want to open it within a new tab, this "feature" prevents me from doing that.
-- Playing MIDI files while I view photos of your pet dog. AAaaaaiiieeeeeeee! (that's me screaming as I hit Alt-F4.)
Now that we have those out of the way, I admit that there are some useful features. However, for each feature, there are alternatives that, in my mind, provide just as good or better ways to do it. The potential for abuse is too great, and some browsers provide too few abilities to limit abuse while retaining the usefulness. Mozilla and Privoxy in combination are doing a decent job for me for now.
In effect, your second statement is what I'm saying by simply "Voting with my Back Button." If your web site annoys me, sometimes I'll give you the courtesy of emailing to tell you why I moved on. More often, I'll just silently move on.. and my $$$ goes somewhere else than feeding your progeny.
Its hard to make something foolproof; fools are so ingenious! The advertisers/spammers will always figureout someway to screw it up..
... users like you who view the world in only black and white are going to slow down its adoption and dampen the usefulness of javascript webpages.
First off, see the comments above regarding accessibility and the hurdles it causes for accessibility.
Second, don't tell me (or xSquaredAdmin) how my browser should or should not be configured. That's one of my biggest pet peeves; seeing sites that say, for example, "Best viewed at 800x600 resolution on Internet Explorer." As if I'm going to tailor my system for your stinking little spot on the web.. Hah!
I suppose you're also the type that develops Flash intro screens with no way to bypass without loading Flash. I don't even have Flash installed. I refuse! I've seen too many annoying flash-based ads..
You've got to keep in mind the target audience of your website. The more technologically advanced they are, the more likely they are to fiddle with browser settings. I personally set my browser security settings pretty darn high and run things through Privoxy. If that messes up your website, so be it. That's a viewer that YOU lost through your attempt to introduce too much eye candy or dependancy on cookies/tags. My intent in doing this is specifically to, as you say, "slow down its adoption and dampen the usefulness of javascript webpages."
CN: lets do a poll. Lets see what percentage of our/. readers simply move on to another site when they hit a flash splash screen..
The idea is surely that SMTP servers will only trust other SMTP servers that are signed up to the tax program and are taxing users...
This would effectively kill SMTP as we know it. Only commercial entities and grandparents would still be sending tradidtional email. I'm damn sure not going to give the gub'ment a penny a piece to tell my friends some trivial joke..
On the bright side, what would replace it would most likely be better.. Be it IM, P2P, VPN, or whatever combination of those and other technologies; any new system could surely be built to leave the spammers out of the loop.
Now, perhaps some combination of the two would be the optimal solution. Something like, "Want to send me an unsolicited email? Here's my equivalent of a 900 number. Call it to get added to the list that can call my 800 number." Send a paid email to try to get me to add you to my list of accepted senders for my free email inbox. If I really want your messages, I can add you manually at the time that I give you my contact info.
I agree wholeheartedly. He is intelligent, literate, and consise, but needs a good shave and a new suit before he steps into a courtroom. Hopefully, if IBM uses him as a witness, they can keep him focused so he doesn't start scaring the jury...
"Do we lie awake at night and worry? You know Microsoft, it's the paranoid company. If someone buys just one copy of something else, we worry," Tipp said.
Guess they're not worried about free (as in beer) software after all..
eVACS(R) - the modular system for conducting elections comprising: e-set up e-voting e-data entry e-counting
Key features eVACS(R) maintains the key features of all parliamentary elections: o Privacy of voter o Authenticity of voter o Avoidance of coercion o Empty ballot box at start of polling o Security of ballot papers o One vote per person
eVACS(R) handles the simplest to the most complex of election systems, including multi-member proportional representation.
eVACS(R) enables rotation of `ballot papers'(eg Robson Rotation).
Accessibility and Privacy Guaranteed
Increase the level of accessibility and privacy for voters using eVACS(R) special features. o Audio for vision impaired voters. o Voting instructions in multiple languages. o Any alphabet or character set available for e-voting.
Integrity of eVACS(R)
eVACS(R) has been extensively tested and audited against the detailed design specification and acceptance test cases and procedures developed in accordance with IEEE Standards.
Testing methods employed: o Structured test cases in controlled situations, used to ensure individual modules perform as expected; o Scrutinies in parallel, using eVACS(R) and manual counting of known sets of ballot papers, using a variety of test election outcomes to test specific cases; o "Real user" testing, whereby large numbers of users cast electronic votes in a mock polling place and data entry operators entered the results from paper ballots, used to test useability and to simulate realistic loads on the system; o Load testing, where large quantities of ballot data was simulated and loaded into the counting system; and o Whole-of-life testing; in which the entire process was simulated, taking test electronic votes from a polling place, loading it into the counting server, adding data-entered results from paper ballots, and using the counting system to generate a Hare-Clark result.
Auditing undertaken: o Software code was independently audited and certified: o to neither gain nor lose votes; o to faithfully implement the algorithm for vote counting; and o is written in a consistent, structured and maintainable style. o The independent auditor also checked the version of the code containing actual candidate information after the close of nominations that was used in the ACT election.
Internet voting
eVACS(R) was designed to collect and count votes electronically with no less security, no impingement of voter's rights and no less anonymity than the current paper based system. Internet solutions were not acceptable due to the possibility of voter coercion and system tampering.
eVACS(R) operates on standard hardware
e-Voting Voting with eVACS(R) means using standard PCs, each with a keypad and barcode reader connected to an isolated LAN at each Polling Centre, plus a server with two hard drive disk drives and removable media drive. Vision impaired voters use the same equipment but with a larger screen and headphones.
e-Counting For data entry, standard PCs are connected to a server. For the counting system, a server with a removable media drive and a Postscript Printer is used. eVACS(R) was first used with the most complex election system, involving multi-member seat electorates with proportional representation according to the Hare-Clark electoral system. eVACS(R) is tailored for use with all other election systems, such as, for example, first past the post and single member electorates with preferential voting.
eVACS(R) in use
eVACS(R) was used for the most recent ACT Legislative Assembly Election, and the subsequent Casual Vacancy arising from the resignation of a member. The ACT has a multi-member preferential election system that follows the Hare-Clark rules. Electorates have either 5 or 7 members. Twelve
Anything that brings "spam" and "viruses" closer together in the public eye is bad for spammers in the long run.
This was my first thought as well when reading the article. I think its a case of the spammers finally taking enough rope to hang themselves with. They're feeding off of the dolts who open any old nood_pix.jpeg.exe they find, which is bad (m-kay?), but that same group will eventually turn on them in the only form of revenge such dolts are adept at: poorly written, ineffective legislation..
Well, you could make it a voluntary system. You call up people, and just ask them if they will reveal to you how they voted. Some will be concerned about their privacy, and some won't.
Then you're subject to mischief answers, liars and faulty memory.. hardly something to base an audit on.
What I can't understand is that it would be relatively straight-forward to have a good audit trail for the voting process, but the manufacturers are so, so, so resistant to the idea.
If there was an audit, randomly call people to determine their key. Although you could decrypt it, it's better than just leaving the votes lying around. Then, verify the accuracy.
I am opposed to this. Audits shouldn't involve contacting the general populace. ATMs have internal printers for similar reasons; as a permanent physical audit trail in case of power failure or such.
Since I have a printed record at the time of the voting, I can use it to verify my votes. The local voting office could decrypt it, and then I can verify my votes.
I oppose this as well for privacy reasons. There is one basic privacy tenant in ballot voting that would need to be upheld by any electronic voting system: plausible deniability.
For example, if I'm being coerced or paid by someone to vote a particular way, I need to be able to tell that person that I voted the way he/she wanted even if I didn't. There CAN NOT be a way to track down who I voted for at a later time. That's not what the paper trail is for. Once a person has the ability to decisively prove to someone else which candidate they voted for, then votes can be forced or sold.
Here is what I would suggest:
A citizen enters the voting center, is authenticated as a registered voter by the volunteer staff, and given a vote card.
The citizen enters a voting booth (behind a privacy screen) and activates the selection kiosk using their vote card.
Once their candidates and referendums have been chosen, the machine prints out a 2D barcode on the vote card and returns it to them.
The citizen exits the voting booth with his completed vote card.
The citizen has the option to verify his barcode using a separate verification kiosk which deciphers and displays the barcode (behind a privacy screen, of course). Once satisfied, the citizen leaves the verification kiosk.
While a staff member watches, the voter deposits his vote card into the official ballot kiosk's card reader.
This kiosk reads the barcode, electronically sends the vote to the regional counting center, and keeps the vote card for future audits.
This method is very similar to conventional voting methods. As far as electronic voting goes, it has several advantages. The selection and verification kiosks are not online, so would be less vulnerable to hacking. The ballot box is the only networked machine, but is under close surveillance by the staff for physical access. In case it is compromised via the network, there is a stack of 2D barcodes underneath or inside it that can be used to audit the results. As the article mentions, audits SHOULD be performed periodically, even on results that aren't suspicious, just to verify that the count is accurate and no tampering has occurred.
The vote cards can be cheap paper mag-stripe cards with signed serial numbers that are overwritten when the barcode is printed. This gives the selection kiosk the ability to reject previously used, non-activated (unsigned), or duplicated cards. If there are no privacy issues (I'd have to think about this more), the card's serial number could become part of the 2D barcode as well. The card reader/writer and printer are all OTC products, which would help keep costs down. The selection and verification kiosks could use commodity PCs with no I/O except a touchscreen and the card unit. In fact, the verification kiosk doesn't need any input other than an eject button.
While such a system would fix usability issues and paper audit trails, it doesn't touch on the issue of voter registration fraud and such. That's a whole 'nother ball of wax.
As of October 2003, an estimated 60 million Americans use P2P file-sharing software in the US alone and the number of overseas users is even higher. This level of civil disobedience sends the crystal clear message that intellectual property laws are in stark contrast with the will of the people and should be changed to clearly legalize P2P file-sharing. Without the consent of the governed, FTAA's policies have no legitimate place in an international treaty between democracies.
That's the most succinct way I've yet heard to describe the people's demand that Hollywood drag themselves into the current century!
If Windows can run faster and have better control over the hardware with this BIOS, then Linux can as well.
Come on, guys.. this is Slashdot! Are you forgetting that a very large pool of very bright individuals read this forum? Phoenix will release the specs for this new BIOS, the kernel hackers will develop a patch to support it, and before you know it, the same benefits that Windows O/Ss gain from it will be found in Linux as well. Minus the DRM, of course.. although I wouldn't be surprised to see that as a patch either.
If MS can benefit from this, so can Linux. The only way that wouldn't be true is if the specs are not public, or are licensed under a RAND license that precludes OSS participation and nobody wants to foot the bill on our behalf. Or if Phoenix tries a DMCA ploy of some sort. I can't picture them charging a license fee for using it when they can more easily enforce an outright fee for the supporting MB installation. Even so, I wouldn't be surprised to see it reverse engineered. Look at WinModems and their rise of functionality under Linux..
I realize that this thread is mostly in jest, but you're all missing the bigger point. The problem isn't the actual transfer of the file.. its indexing the files that are available. How can you legally say to the room-temp-IQ crowd that "I have a song here, but its not available.. sorta.." and still get away with it?
Remember those college students that just ran an indexing web page listing all of the songs on their fellow students' shared folders? They didn't share the files themselves, but they're now working their way out of debt thanks to the RIAA.
There are hundreds of ways of actually transfering the file without attracting undue attention (Waste would be my favorite at the moment). But how do I find the person who has that file that I want when he's not telling the world that he has it because the world includes that suit-happy association whose business model it obliterates?
How do I find that person?
Seriously, I want to know. I'd like to borrow some of his/her CDs for personal use. Of course, I have some to lend as well...
It's not free. You still have to pay for your internet connection, and it sounds like it has to be broadband, which is pricey.
... which brings up another interesting point. Don't think for a second you can cancel your primary Telco phone line and keep your DSL from them. No, no, no, no, NO! Those services are bundled together to prevent exactly this type of thing from happening.
I'll guarantee the vast majority of Vonage subscribers have a cable modem for their broadband service instead of DSL.
They're back up.. at least for now. It looks like a nice product, but I don't understand Korenglish, so won't be ordering it.
I don't understand why EaSL manufacturers don't court the largest potential consumer group with coherent sentences! Just hire a translator.. a few new sales would give a quick ROI...
Politics is politics, but business is business. He probably wouldn't be able to get insurance if he ran IIS. So, he made the sensible choice.. from a business perspective. I must give him credit for that..
And the site would obviously be a lightning bolt for IIS hackers that disagree with his assessment of Linux!
And, of course, I can't mod myself up.. that would just be narcissistic! Never fear, I'll repost the next time something like this gets some/. attention. Feel free to use it yourself as well.
And, if you're an ISP:
1. Provide a paid verification service for the RIAA/MPAA/BSA
2....
3. Profit!!!
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, Network Attached Storage to be precise.
Aaaaarrrrrrrroooooooooooo!!!!
LOL! Anyone with a dog should mod this funny!
download the latest stable version of the Linux kernel, print it out, give it to IBM
... except that IBM asked SCO to identify SysV code by file, version and line, not Linux code. And, presumably, IBM already has the SysV code in question, otherwise how could they allegedly copy it? They just don't know what SCO is pointing at when they bawl.
JFFS is an unacceptable alternative. The two filesystems have wildly different goals. FAT is simple and can be implemented in a small amount of space.
If JFFS is unacceptable, what about YAFFS? Its GPLd, fairly widely used already (many SBCs including my FileZerver uses it), very stable, scales well, and has a direct interface (YDI) for RTOS and embedded systems.
All it needs is a set of native Win drivers so that thumbdrives formatted that way can be read in Windows.. and for it to be distributed in all forthcoming Win service packs.. *pinch* Ouch! Oh.. was I daydreaming again?
Good morning, pedantic-man. Good to see you're feeling ornery today..
Guess I should have posted my previous message anon so I could mod this message "-1, Asshole"
Mount the NFTS partition you want write access to using the OSS read-only version,
read the winnt/system32/ntfs.sys driver into memory or RAM-disk,
remount it using the method described in the article.
This way, Knoppix (or whichever distro implements this) wouldn't have to include the EULA-protected M$ driver. Its as legal as any other WINE-like use of existing, O/S-speicific DLLs and drivers.
Obviously, this wouldn't work for NTFS partitions that don't have an actual NT-based O/S installed on it, but if that's the case, why do you have that partition on your HD in the first place?!
Sure, Javascript has some useful features. Such as:
-- Hiding the real URL of a link as the mouse hovers over it. Real useful. Thanks.
-- Drop down menus. There are plenty of ways that do this without hiding the submenues from browsers used by the handicapped. Check into CSS (or even plain HTML!) for alternatives.
-- Opening/resizing/closing browser windows. I've got the capability of doing that myself, thanks. If I want to open it within a new tab, this "feature" prevents me from doing that.
-- Playing MIDI files while I view photos of your pet dog. AAaaaaiiieeeeeeee! (that's me screaming as I hit Alt-F4.)
Now that we have those out of the way, I admit that there are some useful features. However, for each feature, there are alternatives that, in my mind, provide just as good or better ways to do it. The potential for abuse is too great, and some browsers provide too few abilities to limit abuse while retaining the usefulness. Mozilla and Privoxy in combination are doing a decent job for me for now.
In effect, your second statement is what I'm saying by simply "Voting with my Back Button." If your web site annoys me, sometimes I'll give you the courtesy of emailing to tell you why I moved on. More often, I'll just silently move on.. and my $$$ goes somewhere else than feeding your progeny.
Its hard to make something foolproof; fools are so ingenious! The advertisers/spammers will always figureout someway to screw it up..
... users like you who view the world in only black and white are going to slow down its adoption and dampen the usefulness of javascript webpages.
/. readers simply move on to another site when they hit a flash splash screen..
First off, see the comments above regarding accessibility and the hurdles it causes for accessibility.
Second, don't tell me (or xSquaredAdmin) how my browser should or should not be configured. That's one of my biggest pet peeves; seeing sites that say, for example, "Best viewed at 800x600 resolution on Internet Explorer." As if I'm going to tailor my system for your stinking little spot on the web.. Hah!
I suppose you're also the type that develops Flash intro screens with no way to bypass without loading Flash. I don't even have Flash installed. I refuse! I've seen too many annoying flash-based ads..
You've got to keep in mind the target audience of your website. The more technologically advanced they are, the more likely they are to fiddle with browser settings. I personally set my browser security settings pretty darn high and run things through Privoxy. If that messes up your website, so be it. That's a viewer that YOU lost through your attempt to introduce too much eye candy or dependancy on cookies/tags. My intent in doing this is specifically to, as you say, "slow down its adoption and dampen the usefulness of javascript webpages."
CN: lets do a poll. Lets see what percentage of our
The idea is surely that SMTP servers will only trust other SMTP servers that are signed up to the tax program and are taxing users...
This would effectively kill SMTP as we know it. Only commercial entities and grandparents would still be sending tradidtional email. I'm damn sure not going to give the gub'ment a penny a piece to tell my friends some trivial joke..
On the bright side, what would replace it would most likely be better.. Be it IM, P2P, VPN, or whatever combination of those and other technologies; any new system could surely be built to leave the spammers out of the loop.
Now, perhaps some combination of the two would be the optimal solution. Something like, "Want to send me an unsolicited email? Here's my equivalent of a 900 number. Call it to get added to the list that can call my 800 number." Send a paid email to try to get me to add you to my list of accepted senders for my free email inbox. If I really want your messages, I can add you manually at the time that I give you my contact info.
I agree wholeheartedly. He is intelligent, literate, and consise, but needs a good shave and a new suit before he steps into a courtroom. Hopefully, if IBM uses him as a witness, they can keep him focused so he doesn't start scaring the jury...
From the last paragraph of the article:
"Do we lie awake at night and worry? You know Microsoft, it's the paranoid company. If someone buys just one copy of something else, we worry," Tipp said.
Guess they're not worried about free (as in beer) software after all..
Oops.. I checked the "No Karma Bonus" box instead of "Post Anonymously". Guess I will get karma.. be it good or bad. 8-)
Likewise, no karma bonus for this post..
eVACS(R) - the modular system for conducting elections comprising:
e-set up
e-voting
e-data entry
e-counting
Key features
eVACS(R) maintains the key features of all parliamentary elections:
o Privacy of voter
o Authenticity of voter
o Avoidance of coercion
o Empty ballot box at start of polling
o Security of ballot papers
o One vote per person
eVACS(R) handles the simplest to the most complex of election systems, including multi-member proportional representation.
eVACS(R) enables rotation of `ballot papers'(eg Robson Rotation).
Accessibility and Privacy Guaranteed
Increase the level of accessibility and privacy for voters using eVACS(R) special features.
o Audio for vision impaired voters.
o Voting instructions in multiple languages.
o Any alphabet or character set available for e-voting.
Integrity of eVACS(R)
eVACS(R) has been extensively tested and audited against the detailed design specification and acceptance test cases and procedures developed in accordance with IEEE Standards.
Testing methods employed:
o Structured test cases in controlled situations, used to ensure individual modules perform as expected;
o Scrutinies in parallel, using eVACS(R) and manual counting of known sets of ballot papers, using a variety of test election outcomes to test specific cases;
o "Real user" testing, whereby large numbers of users cast electronic votes in a mock polling place and data entry operators entered the results from paper ballots, used to test useability and to simulate realistic loads on the system;
o Load testing, where large quantities of ballot data was simulated and loaded into the counting system; and
o Whole-of-life testing; in which the entire process was simulated, taking test electronic votes from a polling place, loading it into the counting server, adding data-entered results from paper ballots, and using the counting system to generate a Hare-Clark result.
Auditing undertaken:
o Software code was independently audited and certified:
o to neither gain nor lose votes;
o to faithfully implement the algorithm for vote counting; and
o is written in a consistent, structured and maintainable style.
o The independent auditor also checked the version of the code containing actual candidate information after the close of nominations that was used in the ACT election.
Internet voting
eVACS(R) was designed to collect and count votes electronically with no less security, no impingement of voter's rights and no less anonymity than the current paper based system. Internet solutions were not acceptable due to the possibility of voter coercion and system tampering.
eVACS(R) operates on standard hardware
e-Voting
Voting with eVACS(R) means using standard PCs, each with a keypad and barcode reader connected to an isolated LAN at each Polling Centre, plus a server with two hard drive disk drives and removable media drive.
Vision impaired voters use the same equipment but with a larger screen and headphones.
e-Counting
For data entry, standard PCs are connected to a server.
For the counting system, a server with a removable media drive and a Postscript Printer is used.
eVACS(R) was first used with the most complex election system, involving multi-member seat electorates with proportional representation according to the Hare-Clark electoral system.
eVACS(R) is tailored for use with all other election systems, such as, for example, first past the post and single member electorates with preferential voting.
eVACS(R) in use
eVACS(R) was used for the most recent ACT Legislative Assembly Election, and the subsequent Casual Vacancy arising from the resignation of a member.
The ACT has a multi-member preferential election system that follows the Hare-Clark rules.
Electorates have either 5 or 7 members.
Twelve
Anything that brings "spam" and "viruses" closer together in the public eye is bad for spammers in the long run.
This was my first thought as well when reading the article. I think its a case of the spammers finally taking enough rope to hang themselves with. They're feeding off of the dolts who open any old nood_pix.jpeg.exe they find, which is bad (m-kay?), but that same group will eventually turn on them in the only form of revenge such dolts are adept at: poorly written, ineffective legislation..
*sigh* Woe is me...
Well, you could make it a voluntary system. You call up people, and just ask them if they will reveal to you how they voted. Some will be concerned about their privacy, and some won't.
Then you're subject to mischief answers, liars and faulty memory.. hardly something to base an audit on.
What I can't understand is that it would be relatively straight-forward to have a good audit trail for the voting process, but the manufacturers are so, so, so resistant to the idea.
I couldn't agree more.
I am opposed to this. Audits shouldn't involve contacting the general populace. ATMs have internal printers for similar reasons; as a permanent physical audit trail in case of power failure or such.
Since I have a printed record at the time of the voting, I can use it to verify my votes. The local voting office could decrypt it, and then I can verify my votes.
I oppose this as well for privacy reasons. There is one basic privacy tenant in ballot voting that would need to be upheld by any electronic voting system: plausible deniability.
For example, if I'm being coerced or paid by someone to vote a particular way, I need to be able to tell that person that I voted the way he/she wanted even if I didn't. There CAN NOT be a way to track down who I voted for at a later time. That's not what the paper trail is for. Once a person has the ability to decisively prove to someone else which candidate they voted for, then votes can be forced or sold.
Here is what I would suggest:
A citizen enters the voting center, is authenticated as a registered voter by the volunteer staff, and given a vote card.
The citizen enters a voting booth (behind a privacy screen) and activates the selection kiosk using their vote card.
Once their candidates and referendums have been chosen, the machine prints out a 2D barcode on the vote card and returns it to them.
The citizen exits the voting booth with his completed vote card.
The citizen has the option to verify his barcode using a separate verification kiosk which deciphers and displays the barcode (behind a privacy screen, of course). Once satisfied, the citizen leaves the verification kiosk.
While a staff member watches, the voter deposits his vote card into the official ballot kiosk's card reader.
This kiosk reads the barcode, electronically sends the vote to the regional counting center, and keeps the vote card for future audits.
This method is very similar to conventional voting methods. As far as electronic voting goes, it has several advantages. The selection and verification kiosks are not online, so would be less vulnerable to hacking. The ballot box is the only networked machine, but is under close surveillance by the staff for physical access. In case it is compromised via the network, there is a stack of 2D barcodes underneath or inside it that can be used to audit the results. As the article mentions, audits SHOULD be performed periodically, even on results that aren't suspicious, just to verify that the count is accurate and no tampering has occurred.
The vote cards can be cheap paper mag-stripe cards with signed serial numbers that are overwritten when the barcode is printed. This gives the selection kiosk the ability to reject previously used, non-activated (unsigned), or duplicated cards. If there are no privacy issues (I'd have to think about this more), the card's serial number could become part of the 2D barcode as well. The card reader/writer and printer are all OTC products, which would help keep costs down. The selection and verification kiosks could use commodity PCs with no I/O except a touchscreen and the card unit. In fact, the verification kiosk doesn't need any input other than an eject button.
While such a system would fix usability issues and paper audit trails, it doesn't touch on the issue of voter registration fraud and such. That's a whole 'nother ball of wax.
Don't you think step two should precede, rather than follow, step one? I mean, ouch...
Now that's just deeply disturbing!
My favorite quote:
As of October 2003, an estimated 60 million Americans use P2P file-sharing software in the US alone and the number of overseas users is even higher. This level of civil disobedience sends the crystal clear message that intellectual property laws are in stark contrast with the will of the people and should be changed to clearly legalize P2P file-sharing. Without the consent of the governed, FTAA's policies have no legitimate place in an international treaty between democracies.
That's the most succinct way I've yet heard to describe the people's demand that Hollywood drag themselves into the current century!
If Windows can run faster and have better control over the hardware with this BIOS, then Linux can as well.
Come on, guys.. this is Slashdot! Are you forgetting that a very large pool of very bright individuals read this forum? Phoenix will release the specs for this new BIOS, the kernel hackers will develop a patch to support it, and before you know it, the same benefits that Windows O/Ss gain from it will be found in Linux as well. Minus the DRM, of course.. although I wouldn't be surprised to see that as a patch either.
If MS can benefit from this, so can Linux. The only way that wouldn't be true is if the specs are not public, or are licensed under a RAND license that precludes OSS participation and nobody wants to foot the bill on our behalf. Or if Phoenix tries a DMCA ploy of some sort. I can't picture them charging a license fee for using it when they can more easily enforce an outright fee for the supporting MB installation. Even so, I wouldn't be surprised to see it reverse engineered. Look at WinModems and their rise of functionality under Linux..
---
er.. um.. excuse me. I meant GNU/Linux.
I realize that this thread is mostly in jest, but you're all missing the bigger point. The problem isn't the actual transfer of the file.. its indexing the files that are available. How can you legally say to the room-temp-IQ crowd that "I have a song here, but its not available.. sorta.." and still get away with it?
Remember those college students that just ran an indexing web page listing all of the songs on their fellow students' shared folders? They didn't share the files themselves, but they're now working their way out of debt thanks to the RIAA.
There are hundreds of ways of actually transfering the file without attracting undue attention (Waste would be my favorite at the moment). But how do I find the person who has that file that I want when he's not telling the world that he has it because the world includes that suit-happy association whose business model it obliterates?
How do I find that person?
Seriously, I want to know. I'd like to borrow some of his/her CDs for personal use. Of course, I have some to lend as well...
It's not free. You still have to pay for your internet connection, and it sounds like it has to be broadband, which is pricey.
... which brings up another interesting point. Don't think for a second you can cancel your primary Telco phone line and keep your DSL from them. No, no, no, no, NO! Those services are bundled together to prevent exactly this type of thing from happening.
I'll guarantee the vast majority of Vonage subscribers have a cable modem for their broadband service instead of DSL.
Ah, zmodem... *wistful look*
The first shareware program I actually registered... *sigh*
They're back up.. at least for now. It looks like a nice product, but I don't understand Korenglish, so won't be ordering it.
I don't understand why EaSL manufacturers don't court the largest potential consumer group with coherent sentences! Just hire a translator.. a few new sales would give a quick ROI...
Politics is politics, but business is business. He probably wouldn't be able to get insurance if he ran IIS. So, he made the sensible choice.. from a business perspective. I must give him credit for that..
And the site would obviously be a lightning bolt for IIS hackers that disagree with his assessment of Linux!
*sigh*
/. attention. Feel free to use it yourself as well.
...
And, of course, I can't mod myself up.. that would just be narcissistic! Never fear, I'll repost the next time something like this gets some
And, if you're an ISP:
1. Provide a paid verification service for the RIAA/MPAA/BSA
2.
3. Profit!!!
(Sorry, it had to be said...)