You can solve those problems without using a pencil or pen. Advocating for a return to hand-filled ballots is a quixotic quest: we're not going back to that world.
When you visit one of their pages, it makes about 10 million GET requests
That's the modern style of web front-end programming. Get used to it: if you can't do it (as a front-end programmer), you probably won't be able to find a job.
Once the paper ballot goes into the box then counting accurately is remarkably easy.
If you are talking about hand-counting ballots by people, it's just not true. People make mistakes, and sometimes they do it on purpose. It scales by adding more people, assuming you can find volunteers.
Subways in Japan are very nearly perfect, for the modern man.
Easy to say until you are pressed against the flesh of your fellow riders on a rush hour train in the middle of a hot humid summer, realizing that the train's air conditioning doesn't really work so great in those conditions. That's if you were lucky enough to get on the train in the first place.
Japanese trains are great for tourists because tourists have abnormal travel patterns and can avoid rush hour trains.
I agree with your final statement, and most of the first few statements, but human vote counters are a huge vulnerability and weakness. It is better to have a computer count them, and then if there is any suspicion of fraud, require the paper ballots to be scanned and put on the internet for anyone to count.
The "proof of work" is only meaningful in the presence of more computing power than any one person can control. If the computers providing the power of the proof of work is provided by the voting office, then the proof of work could be forged by the exact same computers in the amount of time it took to calculate the proof of work in the first place.
In my precinct, they print the voting results out on paper, the voter can look at it, verify that it is correct (or discard it and try again) then the paper result gets stored by machine. That gives you a full paper trail if you want to go back and verify.
That's possible, too. Earlier I forgot to mention that a lot of districts are gerrymandered by Republicans, so that's another thing that makes it hard to take back the house (I'm equal opportunity here: I know the Dems would do the same if they had the chance, that's how politics works for better or worse. For worse. But reps just got lucky at the redistricting time).
Yeah, you are right. If Mueller reveals a bombshell before the election that would totally reverse my prediction. I think: like I said before, Trump is charismatic in ways I don't understand.
"Recommended
perfusion therapies for AMI in women are similar to those in
men, yet bleeding risks and other complications remain greater
in women. Women are undertreated with guideline-based
recommendations, leading to worse outcomes and increased
rates of readmission, reinfarction, and deaths in the first year
after MI. CR is underused and underprescribed for women,
but novel approaches to increase participation by women are
promising. To further compound undertreatment, women’s
adherence to these evidence-based recommendations is sub-
optimal."
Also, there is a very interesting graph on the previous page depicting the AMI-related deaths for both sexes, with female deaths due to cardiovascular faults being in sharp decline since 2000. So either something happened around that time that made women less susceptible to dying from a heart attack, or something else took over as the big lady killer.
Here is the same graph (not divided by gender, though). The trend increases and decreases, To some degree matching cigarette consumption over the same period. Of course medical care has improved also over that time. Male cigarette smokers dropped more sooner, and farther, than women. There were more male smokers, too, so they had farther to drop. Currently rates between the two are the same.
The link between cigarettes and heart disease doesn't explain everything but it does explain a lot.
I don't understand how Trump is charismatic. He really annoys me as a person, always has, but somehow people like him. And he's getting calmer, and better at it, and more people are coming to his side. Look even here on Slashdot, it seems more people are openly Republican, and even getting modded up. So unless something happens, if the current trend continues, by the time midterms come, Republicans will do well.
Slashdot Mirror
lol. What kind of companies does that attract?
You can solve those problems without using a pencil or pen. Advocating for a return to hand-filled ballots is a quixotic quest: we're not going back to that world.
When you visit one of their pages, it makes about 10 million GET requests
That's the modern style of web front-end programming. Get used to it: if you can't do it (as a front-end programmer), you probably won't be able to find a job.
Indeed.
Yes.
Paper ballots have all kinds of problems, though, including people marking two different candidates, and sometimes needing recounts.
I think it's also reasonable to demand that the ballot machines be open source. Machine makers will complain but it's a fair requirement.
Are you saying scrutineers/observers will prevent all problems in human vote counting?
I think it's a state of insanity and we are all here.
Where do you get the idea of human vote counters being a huge vulnerability/risk?
Basically from a long history of humans manipulating the vote.
Once the paper ballot goes into the box then counting accurately is remarkably easy.
If you are talking about hand-counting ballots by people, it's just not true. People make mistakes, and sometimes they do it on purpose. It scales by adding more people, assuming you can find volunteers.
Subways in Japan are very nearly perfect, for the modern man.
Easy to say until you are pressed against the flesh of your fellow riders on a rush hour train in the middle of a hot humid summer, realizing that the train's air conditioning doesn't really work so great in those conditions. That's if you were lucky enough to get on the train in the first place.
Japanese trains are great for tourists because tourists have abnormal travel patterns and can avoid rush hour trains.
So the proof of work is there to verify that the machine actually recorded your vote? Is that what you are saying?
I can't audit that my vote was accurately counted,
Yeah. And there's probably not any way to do that while maintaining anonymity.
but an audit can be done globally.
Which is an ideal Georgia is obviously still working towards.
Right. The important thing is that you realize what "proof of work" means.
I agree with your final statement, and most of the first few statements, but human vote counters are a huge vulnerability and weakness. It is better to have a computer count them, and then if there is any suspicion of fraud, require the paper ballots to be scanned and put on the internet for anyone to count.
The "proof of work" is only meaningful in the presence of more computing power than any one person can control. If the computers providing the power of the proof of work is provided by the voting office, then the proof of work could be forged by the exact same computers in the amount of time it took to calculate the proof of work in the first place.
In my precinct, they print the voting results out on paper, the voter can look at it, verify that it is correct (or discard it and try again) then the paper result gets stored by machine. That gives you a full paper trail if you want to go back and verify.
Want to know who has power over you? That person you dare not criticise.
Maybe you should have criticized your girlfriend a little less, it would have gone easier.
That's possible, too. Earlier I forgot to mention that a lot of districts are gerrymandered by Republicans, so that's another thing that makes it hard to take back the house (I'm equal opportunity here: I know the Dems would do the same if they had the chance, that's how politics works for better or worse. For worse. But reps just got lucky at the redistricting time).
Yeah, you are right. If Mueller reveals a bombshell before the election that would totally reverse my prediction. I think: like I said before, Trump is charismatic in ways I don't understand.
"Recommended perfusion therapies for AMI in women are similar to those in men, yet bleeding risks and other complications remain greater in women. Women are undertreated with guideline-based recommendations, leading to worse outcomes and increased rates of readmission, reinfarction, and deaths in the first year after MI. CR is underused and underprescribed for women, but novel approaches to increase participation by women are promising. To further compound undertreatment, women’s adherence to these evidence-based recommendations is sub- optimal."
Also, there is a very interesting graph on the previous page depicting the AMI-related deaths for both sexes, with female deaths due to cardiovascular faults being in sharp decline since 2000. So either something happened around that time that made women less susceptible to dying from a heart attack, or something else took over as the big lady killer.
Here is the same graph (not divided by gender, though). The trend increases and decreases, To some degree matching cigarette consumption over the same period. Of course medical care has improved also over that time. Male cigarette smokers dropped more sooner, and farther, than women. There were more male smokers, too, so they had farther to drop. Currently rates between the two are the same.
The link between cigarettes and heart disease doesn't explain everything but it does explain a lot.
I don't understand how Trump is charismatic. He really annoys me as a person, always has, but somehow people like him. And he's getting calmer, and better at it, and more people are coming to his side. Look even here on Slashdot, it seems more people are openly Republican, and even getting modded up. So unless something happens, if the current trend continues, by the time midterms come, Republicans will do well.
The main issue seems to be that although there are effective treatments they are underprescribed for women.
Why do you think this? Is there a citation?
It seems like if it were due to age, then the effect wouldn't disappear when female doctors were treating them.