Splendid explanation. Thank you. I concur that the one-way distinction is helpful, and I think I'm starting to agree with your welding mask analogy. The way you said it originally, I thought (reading into it too much perhaps) that you were talking about two-way: data is never code AND code is never data. Thanks for clearing it up for me.
I'm sorry I'm so confused by your posts, but I am.
That's a parallel to the feature where every process has write access to its own segment of the execution mask.
If every thread still has write access to its own execution stream, isn't that the same as treating code as data? Am I misunderstanding your terminology?
Or did I miss your original premise? Are you saying that ONLY data should never be allowed to be treated as code, but NOT vice-vera?
Having just read the chapter of "The Law" that was added for the "protection of new varieties of plants" I think I can safely say that Mr. Bremer is paving a new path for our world domination.
I was unaware that non-citizens, such as "new varieties of plants" needed protection under the law.
If the terminator infected plants infect your original crop, you are now screwed. Your natural plants will produce sterile seeds, and then you'll have to buy a fresh batch of seeds (wich of course, also have terminator genes.)
Outlawing divorce, and or removing the females finacial incentive for divorce would be a much better approach for them to take, than this bullshit. They can't be stupid enough to not see that!
Thanks for your explanation. I think the welding bench analogy is way off, but that's just my opinion - I very rarely code in C.
I wonder what the effects of your proposed solution would be. Very few modern exploits would be affected. And it seems like a huge effort to implement your concept (both at the hardware level and the compiler layer.) Again, that is just my opinion.
Every time I see this, or similar arguments, I always wonder where people draw the line, distinguishing code from data.
Assuming that *every* language out there could adapt to the arduous layer of flagging executable code, there are probably as many "scripting solutions" as there are programmers. For any "generic" report writer, how much table driven logic is there? At what point do you say that the code in the table is abstract enough to be data? User defined meta-code has to get evaluated at some stage. Where ever you draw the line in the sand, would be the exact point that the programmer implements an elaborate work-around to achieve the same original functionality.
Drawing a line in the sand as you seem to be suggesting might be useful for occasional limited functions. For example, a letter writing program (but *not* a word processor.) But the tendency of many programmers is to add the capability anyhow. Way back in VAX/VMS days we could write TPU scripts, which were bona fida programs. These days, people embed VBscripts into word documents for custom corporate forms.
Would it be "better" to never allow VBscripts in Word? I think so. I can't tell from your post precicely where you'd draw that line though.
Are you suggesting that various "scripts" be treated as data? If so, all the effort going into implementing your idea would only address a (rather small, I think) portion of the exploits that affect people these days.
Erasers? One trick I learned a very very long time ago was to clean electrical contacts with a #2 lead pencil. Not only does the tip of the pencil scrape any micro-thin (and not-so-micro-thin) corrosion away, it adds small amounts of lead (a good conductor) to the mix. YMMV.
I still don't think I am saying that I *trust* the government; but in my opinion, it clearly is the government's responsibility. I do not feel it is appropriate for them to abdicate that coveted responsibility to ANYONE. (Especially not any corporation that is begging for it!) Your point that the US government has been subverted by corporations is not lost on me. But I feel that extricating those influences is mostly a separate problem.
I do agree that the haves and have mores obviously would prefer to run amok without the formality of government oversight.
[Now a random thought tangent from my sleep deprived brain...]
For most industries though, which flavor (Dem/Rep) doesn't matter a whole lot. Hmmmm...which ones lean one way or the other?
Churches (as an industry) clearly favor one. The automotive industry (also including refineries as a sub-category) clearly favor one. Entertainment (Music, Hollywood, consumer electronics) clearly favors one. [Note: these are the ones "counting" the unofficial results.] Banks clearly favor one. Farming owes its subsidised existence to one. Legal favors one. Patentable research clearly favors one. Unemployed resent their dependence on the other.
Health care clearly favors the other. Insurance owes its continued existence to the other. Government workers always do better under the other. Most schools clearly favor the other.
Merchant industries (Retail/wholesale/Grocers) could care less. Resturants could care less. Black market (drugs,prostitution, crime) could care less. Construction could care less.
Hmmmm. This is an interesting list I seem to have started here. Filling it out more might detract from it. Probably not very original, but that's what it all looks like to me today.
About returning power to citizens...
Even in my most manic state of optimism, I can't see the situation improving without some fundamental realignment. Nor do I see any sucessful path to true government change.
Violence? Nah. The current state of the military is actually quite impressive. An asasination of one (or a hundred) would be pointless: the surface wouldn't even be scratched, and the politicans would be granted a martyr PLUS a target for further citizen suppression and subversion.
Even if China, Slovenia or Korea were to nuke Washington DC, we'd still be stuck with hundreds of survivors and lawyers from everywhere ready to step in.
Worse still, what would the result of a sucessful revolution be? If it were my revolution, I'd drop the original constitution back in place, thereby starting the whole cycle over again. The same avenues of corruption would occur (with different flavors) again eventually. But probably faster the second time around.
We're gripped by the Dem/Rep death spiral. I wish I could see a way to save the US. I don't understand why "they" can't see that anything that increases the income-gap only accellerates that race to the bottom.
My appoligies. I am emotional about the election process, as it afects my quality of living directly and indirectly.
In your previous posts, you seem to be advocating proprietary software in this realm. That is abhorrent, in my humble opinion.
If you are suggesting GPL software, that is better, but probably not realistic in the next decade...the US government is too corrupt at higher levels to allow such a massive change in the way it operates. (Very unfortunate.) Powers that be would of course initiate a round of "GPL is COMMUNISM" again to quash any pretense of validity (speaking of naieve public opinion here) for any GPL solution.
That leaves government owned software as the remaining viable option. FOIA requests often have been honored (in fact, usually are.) Furthermore, government controlled software has the possibility of convincing the typical midwest voter of some amount of legitamacy. The US government is not particularly likely to throw together a poorly written body of software for this purpose, especially under tremendous public scrutiny. Tin-foil-hat-slashdotters (such as you and I) will remain sceptical up until the first public available release.
From that point forward, however, there would be a central "authority" to verify software against. There (inevitably) would be multiple rounds of software verification (international even!)
The example you gave of public disclosure being quashed for National Security I agree is a very real threat.
But I honestly think that our government could be convinced that no US citizen currently belives in the veracity of their vote. Using that as leverage, the US government could eventually (2 to 5 years) be pressured into Doing the Right Thing(tm).
------
Using the other side of my brain, (taxing both those poor brain cells) I remember that this is a US government election. For the interest of National Security, no one outside of the US should be allowed to submit code to the election software. The implication is that China (bad example) could throw our elections if their software mainipulations were subtle enough.
That is the main reason I believe the software *must* be owned by the US government. (Note, I'm not talking about availablity; I'm focusing more on *credibility* of the software.)
If we (the intelligent/. community, concerned citizens) are trying to do this hard-sell, and forget that critical point, we'll end up smacked around silly, and worse than where we started (which is really, really bad right now.)
-----
As far as software *availability* goes, if it is government owned software, but not publicly available, the situation would merely be equally as bad as it is now (that is to say; totally unacceptable.)
But at least the socialist hidden way down in my inner child would then have the impression that the elections were being thrown by "accountable" government personnel, instead of unaccountable corporations.
-----
No matter how I look at this though, not having the code publicly available guarantees the election(s) are being thrown.
Where did I say I trust the government?! Holy sweet blessed fallacy!
Of all the words to put in my mouth...WHAT THE FUCK?
Wow.
My point was that a Freedom Of Information Act request (FOIA request) is all it takes to get your hands on something like, say, the Veteran's Administration source code. Here in the real world, it is very easy to download a copy of it from the vista web site. That is a product of that group of software being in the public domain.
You have an INCORRECT OPINION about what public domain means. I was talking about FACTS.
Any proprietary (e.g. Diebold, Microsoft) voting software is CERTAIN to be compromised, either internally or externally. The same is not as likely for completely open public domain software!
And that is why I am of the opinion that *all* voting and voting related software should be "owned" by the government. Said another way, it is simply because I do NOT trust the US Government, that the source code should be public.
If the government "owns" the code, it is therefore in the public domain: neither GPL nor proprietary.
One simple FOIA request becomes all that is needed for whomever wants to, to see the code, point out any deficiencies, submit corrections, etc. Being in the public domain, *anyone* can then reuse it (yes, even MS or Db.)
But the code that is used for a government election IMHO *should* be government "owned."
Honestly, I don't have a problem with Mrs. Clinton.
My comment is merely meant to inspire people to consider also this ramification of a GWB win in 2004.
Most conservatives I've met consider the idea of a female President reprehensible. Not sure if that's a vestige of the bible belt mentality, or what.
Mrs. Clinton is putting on an ass-kicking show as a NY State Senator. If Kerry loses this round, then she will practically be a shoo-in going against Mr. Cheney in 2008.
Unfortunately, that requires an unbearable four more years of GWB bungling.
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything." - Josef Stalin
Since our collective laziness has changed nothing significant between 2000 and 2004, we should honestly be expecting the same manipulation (at the precinct level) this time around.
Since I expect the same amount of underhanded vote manipulation, I'd like to make an observation. That is, there are two problems with G.W. Bush re-stealing the election in 2004:
1) Four more years of the same does irreparable damage.
2) Hillary Clinton will become the first female U. S. President in 2008.
Having just read much of the transcript from the session, I am appalled at how out of touch our lawmakers are with their constituents!
At no time did they reflect on how distorted the current laws are! At no time did any representative ask if this would help the public good! At no time did they consider if this would help promote the creative arts!
They did reflect that it would increase H$$llyw$$d revenue. And artists themselves get 8 cents each.
Do they ONLY represent the mega-corporation producers?
Actually, if you RTA it describes how because of a language anomality (John) google pulls up fringe sites when quryying for John Kerry. Similar queries for GWB pull up more actual news sites that at least try to honor their duty to report both sides.
So basically, visiting a flame site is not the same as visiting a biased news site that honors it's duty to give inches of column space to both sides of the spectrum. Yes, they pick and choose, but at least somtehing from the opposising side is there.
Crying that/. moderators mod anti-conservative posts as flamebait won't get me far...but anyone who moderates at -1 is supposed to look out for abuses like this. Ah well, life isn't fair, it is?
Anyone know how to research large institutional purchases of google stock?
Hrumph. You just want to spoil all our fun, don't you? What next? Have the two machines be built by manufacturers who support opposing parties?
I do like the vote identifier bit though. Just using the timestamps alone, our cronies staking out poll booths can then tell who voted for who, therefore whose knees get broken.
You propose a flawed premise: the invalid ballot is torn up and discarded.
Step one: Voter checks in Step two: Voter enters votes on machine one Step three: Ballot is printed Step four: Voter verifies ballot Step five: voter tears up incorrect ballot Step six: voter enters votes on machine one again Step seven: new ballot printed Step eight: voter verifies it is now correct Step nine: Voter put ballot in ballot box Step ten: At end of voting, box is emptied into a card reader that counts votes. Step eleven: volunteers manally count votes Step twelve: Count for that polling place is approved. Step thirteen: polling place results are uploaded Step fourteen: results are tallied Step fifteen: results are returned to polling places indicating their vote and all subsequent sub-totals. Step sixteen: results are printed and posted for public display at polling place.
Step seventeen: ballots are recounted at a later date
If any of these steps are missing, then you have a fixed elections - my kind of election!!!
What the grand-grand-grand....grandparent post was proposing was a verifyable paper ballot. In essence, the first voting machine should generate a paper ballot that is subsequently fed into a counting machine, with the ballots retained.
Your psychotic instistence that machine one could not be designed to accomodate visually imparied voters is intentionally FALSE.
You have an evil streak in you that I therefore like! You make that lie sound *so* convincing!
I guess you haven't been following much of the electronic voting initiatives. The simple fact is that if you find yourself at an electronic voting booth, you will (by merely showing up) have cast your vote for GWB.
I think I'll vote republican this time. Our system actually needs to get significantly worse before people will get their lasy butts off the couch and throw a molitov cocktail at the nearest judge/preacher/politician.
Slashdot Mirror
After all, is the term "later version" legally defined?
<obligatory pun>
After the whole Clinton fiasco, the USA's confused about the legal definition of "is"!
</obligatory pun>
Splendid explanation. Thank you. I concur that the one-way distinction is helpful, and I think I'm starting to agree with your welding mask analogy. The way you said it originally, I thought (reading into it too much perhaps) that you were talking about two-way: data is never code AND code is never data. Thanks for clearing it up for me.
If every thread still has write access to its own execution stream, isn't that the same as treating code as data? Am I misunderstanding your terminology?
Or did I miss your original premise? Are you saying that ONLY data should never be allowed to be treated as code, but NOT vice-vera?
I was unaware that non-citizens, such as "new varieties of plants" needed protection under the law.
If the terminator infected plants infect your original crop, you are now screwed. Your natural plants will produce sterile seeds, and then you'll have to buy a fresh batch of seeds (wich of course, also have terminator genes.)
Outlawing divorce, and or removing the females finacial incentive for divorce would be a much better approach for them to take, than this bullshit. They can't be stupid enough to not see that!
Thanks for your explanation. I think the welding bench analogy is way off, but that's just my opinion - I very rarely code in C.
I wonder what the effects of your proposed solution would be. Very few modern exploits would be affected. And it seems like a huge effort to implement your concept (both at the hardware level and the compiler layer.) Again, that is just my opinion.
Every time I see this, or similar arguments, I always wonder where people draw the line, distinguishing code from data.
Assuming that *every* language out there could adapt to the arduous layer of flagging executable code, there are probably as many "scripting solutions" as there are programmers. For any "generic" report writer, how much table driven logic is there? At what point do you say that the code in the table is abstract enough to be data? User defined meta-code has to get evaluated at some stage. Where ever you draw the line in the sand, would be the exact point that the programmer implements an elaborate work-around to achieve the same original functionality.
Drawing a line in the sand as you seem to be suggesting might be useful for occasional limited functions. For example, a letter writing program (but *not* a word processor.) But the tendency of many programmers is to add the capability anyhow. Way back in VAX/VMS days we could write TPU scripts, which were bona fida programs. These days, people embed VBscripts into word documents for custom corporate forms.
Would it be "better" to never allow VBscripts in Word? I think so. I can't tell from your post precicely where you'd draw that line though.
Are you suggesting that various "scripts" be treated as data? If so, all the effort going into implementing your idea would only address a (rather small, I think) portion of the exploits that affect people these days.
Erasers? One trick I learned a very very long time ago was to clean electrical contacts with a #2 lead pencil. Not only does the tip of the pencil scrape any micro-thin (and not-so-micro-thin) corrosion away, it adds small amounts of lead (a good conductor) to the mix. YMMV.
Very well said.
I still don't think I am saying that I *trust* the government; but in my opinion, it clearly is the government's responsibility. I do not feel it is appropriate for them to abdicate that coveted responsibility to ANYONE. (Especially not any corporation that is begging for it!) Your point that the US government has been subverted by corporations is not lost on me. But I feel that extricating those influences is mostly a separate problem.
I do agree that the haves and have mores obviously would prefer to run amok without the formality of government oversight.
[Now a random thought tangent from my sleep deprived brain...]
For most industries though, which flavor (Dem/Rep) doesn't matter a whole lot. Hmmmm...which ones lean one way or the other?
Churches (as an industry) clearly favor one.
The automotive industry (also including refineries as a sub-category) clearly favor one.
Entertainment (Music, Hollywood, consumer electronics) clearly favors one. [Note: these are the ones "counting" the unofficial results.]
Banks clearly favor one.
Farming owes its subsidised existence to one.
Legal favors one.
Patentable research clearly favors one.
Unemployed resent their dependence on the other.
Health care clearly favors the other.
Insurance owes its continued existence to the other.
Government workers always do better under the other.
Most schools clearly favor the other.
Merchant industries (Retail/wholesale/Grocers) could care less.
Resturants could care less.
Black market (drugs,prostitution, crime) could care less.
Construction could care less.
Hmmmm. This is an interesting list I seem to have started here. Filling it out more might detract from it. Probably not very original, but that's what it all looks like to me today.
About returning power to citizens...
Even in my most manic state of optimism, I can't see the situation improving without some fundamental realignment. Nor do I see any sucessful path to true government change.
Violence? Nah. The current state of the military is actually quite impressive. An asasination of one (or a hundred) would be pointless: the surface wouldn't even be scratched, and the politicans would be granted a martyr PLUS a target for further citizen suppression and subversion.
Even if China, Slovenia or Korea were to nuke Washington DC, we'd still be stuck with hundreds of survivors and lawyers from everywhere ready to step in.
Worse still, what would the result of a sucessful revolution be? If it were my revolution, I'd drop the original constitution back in place, thereby starting the whole cycle over again. The same avenues of corruption would occur (with different flavors) again eventually. But probably faster the second time around.
We're gripped by the Dem/Rep death spiral. I wish I could see a way to save the US. I don't understand why "they" can't see that anything that increases the income-gap only accellerates that race to the bottom.
My appoligies. I am emotional about the election process, as it afects my quality of living directly and indirectly.
/. community, concerned citizens) are trying to do this hard-sell, and forget that critical point, we'll end up smacked around silly, and worse than where we started (which is really, really bad right now.)
In your previous posts, you seem to be advocating proprietary software in this realm. That is abhorrent, in my humble opinion.
If you are suggesting GPL software, that is better, but probably not realistic in the next decade...the US government is too corrupt at higher levels to allow such a massive change in the way it operates. (Very unfortunate.) Powers that be would of course initiate a round of "GPL is COMMUNISM" again to quash any pretense of validity (speaking of naieve public opinion here) for any GPL solution.
That leaves government owned software as the remaining viable option. FOIA requests often have been honored (in fact, usually are.) Furthermore, government controlled software has the possibility of convincing the typical midwest voter of some amount of legitamacy. The US government is not particularly likely to throw together a poorly written body of software for this purpose, especially under tremendous public scrutiny. Tin-foil-hat-slashdotters (such as you and I) will remain sceptical up until the first public available release.
From that point forward, however, there would be a central "authority" to verify software against. There (inevitably) would be multiple rounds of software verification (international even!)
The example you gave of public disclosure being quashed for National Security I agree is a very real threat.
But I honestly think that our government could be convinced that no US citizen currently belives in the veracity of their vote. Using that as leverage, the US government could eventually (2 to 5 years) be pressured into Doing the Right Thing(tm).
------
Using the other side of my brain, (taxing both those poor brain cells) I remember that this is a US government election. For the interest of National Security, no one outside of the US should be allowed to submit code to the election software. The implication is that China (bad example) could throw our elections if their software mainipulations were subtle enough.
That is the main reason I believe the software *must* be owned by the US government. (Note, I'm not talking about availablity; I'm focusing more on *credibility* of the software.)
If we (the intelligent
-----
As far as software *availability* goes, if it is government owned software, but not publicly available, the situation would merely be equally as bad as it is now (that is to say; totally unacceptable.)
But at least the socialist hidden way down in my inner child would then have the impression that the elections were being thrown by "accountable" government personnel, instead of unaccountable corporations.
-----
No matter how I look at this though, not having the code publicly available guarantees the election(s) are being thrown.
Where did I say I trust the government?! Holy sweet blessed fallacy!
Of all the words to put in my mouth...WHAT THE FUCK?
Wow.
My point was that a Freedom Of Information Act request (FOIA request) is all it takes to get your hands on something like, say, the Veteran's Administration source code. Here in the real world, it is very easy to download a copy of it from the vista web site. That is a product of that group of software being in the public domain.
You have an INCORRECT OPINION about what public domain means. I was talking about FACTS.
Any proprietary (e.g. Diebold, Microsoft) voting software is CERTAIN to be compromised, either internally or externally. The same is not as likely for completely open public domain software!
And that is why I am of the opinion that *all* voting and voting related software should be "owned" by the government. Said another way, it is simply because I do NOT trust the US Government, that the source code should be public.
Um, I think you may have missed something.
If the government "owns" the code, it is therefore in the public domain: neither GPL nor proprietary.
One simple FOIA request becomes all that is needed for whomever wants to, to see the code, point out any deficiencies, submit corrections, etc. Being in the public domain, *anyone* can then reuse it (yes, even MS or Db.)
But the code that is used for a government election IMHO *should* be government "owned."
Re: Guliani
I've been told (but never cared enough to verify) that there are published pictures of Rudy dressed in drag on stage, wooing the gay/lesbian vote.
He simply cannot ever become president if that is true.
Now if pictures were published of Hillary Clinton wearing a dress...bah, never mind. It might have been a cute joke but I blew the punchline.
Honestly, I don't have a problem with Mrs. Clinton.
My comment is merely meant to inspire people to consider also this ramification of a GWB win in 2004.
Most conservatives I've met consider the idea of a female President reprehensible. Not sure if that's a vestige of the bible belt mentality, or what.
Mrs. Clinton is putting on an ass-kicking show as a NY State Senator. If Kerry loses this round, then she will practically be a shoo-in going against Mr. Cheney in 2008.
Unfortunately, that requires an unbearable four more years of GWB bungling.
Bwahahahahahahahaha!
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything." - Josef Stalin
Since our collective laziness has changed nothing significant between 2000 and 2004, we should honestly be expecting the same manipulation (at the precinct level) this time around.
Since I expect the same amount of underhanded vote manipulation, I'd like to make an observation. That is, there are two problems with G.W. Bush re-stealing the election in 2004:
1) Four more years of the same does irreparable damage.
2) Hillary Clinton will become the first female U. S. President in 2008.
Speaking about power corrupting...
Having just read much of the transcript from the session, I am appalled at how out of touch our lawmakers are with their constituents!
At no time did they reflect on how distorted the current laws are! At no time did any representative ask if this would help the public good! At no time did they consider if this would help promote the creative arts!
They did reflect that it would increase H$$llyw$$d revenue. And artists themselves get 8 cents each.
Do they ONLY represent the mega-corporation producers?
How did they get *so* out of touch?
Actually, if you RTA it describes how because of a language anomality (John) google pulls up fringe sites when quryying for John Kerry. Similar queries for GWB pull up more actual news sites that at least try to honor their duty to report both sides.
/. moderators mod anti-conservative posts as flamebait won't get me far...but anyone who moderates at -1 is supposed to look out for abuses like this. Ah well, life isn't fair, it is?
So basically, visiting a flame site is not the same as visiting a biased news site that honors it's duty to give inches of column space to both sides of the spectrum. Yes, they pick and choose, but at least somtehing from the opposising side is there.
Crying that
Anyone know how to research large institutional purchases of google stock?
I'm shocked! When will we find out that Fox has been making huge institutional purchases of google stock?
So much for not being evil.
Hrumph. You just want to spoil all our fun, don't you? What next? Have the two machines be built by manufacturers who support opposing parties?
I do like the vote identifier bit though. Just using the timestamps alone, our cronies staking out poll booths can then tell who voted for who, therefore whose knees get broken.
Joseph Stalin
You propose a flawed premise: the invalid ballot is torn up and discarded.
Step one: Voter checks in
Step two: Voter enters votes on machine one
Step three: Ballot is printed
Step four: Voter verifies ballot
Step five: voter tears up incorrect ballot
Step six: voter enters votes on machine one again
Step seven: new ballot printed
Step eight: voter verifies it is now correct
Step nine: Voter put ballot in ballot box
Step ten: At end of voting, box is emptied into a card reader that counts votes.
Step eleven: volunteers manally count votes
Step twelve: Count for that polling place is approved.
Step thirteen: polling place results are uploaded
Step fourteen: results are tallied
Step fifteen: results are returned to polling places indicating their vote and all subsequent sub-totals.
Step sixteen: results are printed and posted for public display at polling place.
Step seventeen: ballots are recounted at a later date
If any of these steps are missing, then you have a fixed elections - my kind of election!!!
You are so full of shit, it amuses me!
What the grand-grand-grand....grandparent post was proposing was a verifyable paper ballot. In essence, the first voting machine should generate a paper ballot that is subsequently fed into a counting machine, with the ballots retained.
Your psychotic instistence that machine one could not be designed to accomodate visually imparied voters is intentionally FALSE.
You have an evil streak in you that I therefore like! You make that lie sound *so* convincing!
Erm, 100k? What happened to the reports of Saddam's 1 million man army?
Who YOU vote for is irelevant.
I guess you haven't been following much of the electronic voting initiatives. The simple fact is that if you find yourself at an electronic voting booth, you will (by merely showing up) have cast your vote for GWB.
I think I'll vote republican this time. Our system actually needs to get significantly worse before people will get their lasy butts off the couch and throw a molitov cocktail at the nearest judge/preacher/politician.
Why the fsck isn't this on the main page?