But how do you tell that they weren't actually errors? Your only evidence seems to be that there were more errors favoring repubs than dems. This is still not valid evidence.
It's a statistical impossibility... and vote counts in all previous elections have strongly reflected the exit poles. In both of the last presidential elections the errors fell in favor of republicans across the board and neither election reflected the exit poles.
In the world-wide history of voting machines there have been problems and errors. Same with non-electronic. The machines must do much, much more than incrememt a value but feel free to reduce it to 'counting by ones'. I'm sure a typical voting machine developer would really agree.
True... all of our elections are fuzzy... but the margin of error has always been in both directions. Clearly Diabolds' programmers would disagree with me, but, it is, in fact counting by ones. A voter casts a vote, a record of that vote is logged, those votes are totalled. It's not rocket surgery. I'm not the best programmer in the world but I've written far more complex systems than simple one-to-one tabulation and I can guarantee, without doubt, that in all my software the data entered into the interface is the data that gets written to the database, gets printed on the reports, and gets transmitted to outside systems with 100% accuracy, and in a form that's externally verifiable.
There may, in fact, be no criminal action here. It may be simple GROSS incompetance... but the irregulatities are so obvious and so consistant, at the very least, there should be an investigation based on the overwhelming evidence that something is wrong.
Actually no one has shown intent. To show intent you'd have to establish what was in his mind at the time he commited an act. You have to have an act before you can establish intent.
As for evidence, a machine that consistantly makes mistakes in favor of an ally of the person accused establishes means, motive and opportunity.
But I wouldn't expect that to be understood by people defending the CEO of a computer company that can't build a computer who's sole purpose is to COUNT BY ONES.
The voting machines that were tested post election consistantly made "mistakes" in favor of republicans... and now there's a Diebold insider that confirms those reports.
"Mommy where's the movie?" "It's still downloading honey" "Mommy where's the movie?" "It's still downloading honey" "Mommy where's the movie?" "It's still downloading honey" "Mommy where's the movie?"
"The proposal, made by a presidential commission, would transform CIFA from an office that coordinates Pentagon security efforts -- including protecting military facilities from attack -- to one that also has authority to investigate crimes within the United States such as treason, foreign or terrorist sabotage or even economic espionage."
Isn't Bush guilty of at least two of the four crimes mentioned here?
Once again the "moral" morons of the world shoot themselves in the foot.
The easiest way to have been able to block all porn would have been to restrict porn to the.porn domain. But "no one " wanted the.porn domain becasue it would encourage porn... sounds like the same stupid argument used against contraception.
So... no we're going to break tcp/ip to do the same thing we could have done easily with the.porn domain?
From what I've read about it he was retested twice after his initial test came back positive and tested positive all three times. There is a chance the recent negative test was false I suppose.
"Learn to tell the difference between someone making a reasonable and realistic point about a subject and someone bashing Microsoft or people are just going to asssume you're a troll."
Are you giving me advice, or are you telling me something you just learned the hard way? I ask because this started with you not being able to tell the difference between a realistic point and a troll, but I'm under the distinct impression that you're actually trying to accuse me of it. (... and then claim you're one who seeks truth. Heh.)
No, I am accusing you of it troll. If you consider attacking an entire community based on someone asking a legitimate question then you are a troll. You sidestepped the question and whined.
As for your little treatise about people being biased, well yes, of coures people are, as you've shown in your post by sidestepping the question and whining about the entire community.
If you're going to make a point about people showing an unfair bias agaiunst Microsoft I suggest you find someone that's making an unfair or incorrect statement about Microsoft to attach it to.
Now I've answered your question... answer mine.
The question I posed wasn't a troll... proved, I'd say, by the fact that you haven't even tried to answer it. All you've done is whine about people doing the very same thing you're doing right now. You've assumed I'm a MS basher and you're whining.
But I guess you don't mind being childish, whiny and wrong... you are a troll after all.
"A rebuttal to what, your whining?" To the point that others got but you don't want to hear. Your whining?
"Technicality? Not answering the question and whining is a tehnicality?" Let me put it this way: If my post had been about Microsoft Apologists, you would not have demanded I answer the question. You make a lot of assumptions. I ask something that you percieve to be anti-microsoft and assume I'm someone that ignores the problems with other products and companies? I see no difference between apologists and whiners that assume the entire character of someone based on asking a simple question they don't have an answer to.
"Like minded? You mean people who like the truth..." You'd think that somebody who was so into 'the truth' wouldn't oversimplify and dismiss that lengthy paragraph that I wrote. The whining about how people whine about things they don't like?
Tit for tat sucks, doesn't it? I wouldn't know, you have yet to make a point that had anything to do with the subject or contradict what I said to you in the first place.
Learn to tell the difference between someone making a reasonable and realistic point about a subject and someone bashing Microsoft or people are just going to asssume you're a troll.
You'll pardon me for taking these broadly painted highly modded comments with a grain of salt. Slashdot's comments on Microsoft are about as credible as a Star Wars fan's advice on picking up chicks.
Uh... you didn't answer the question... what has Microsoft invented?
If you can't answer a question you simply go after the entire community? Your advice seems even less valid than the advice you're taking with a grain of salt.
I know a very long list of technologies that MS claims to have invented... but buying a company that invented something and inventing something isn't the same thing.
The term Hacking was coined at the MIT model railroad club and it's absolute definition can be read in, of all things: "Hackers" ISBN: 0141000511 a book about the computer revolution from the inside. A very good and entertaining read I might add.
The original meaning of the word, that was immediatly lost when the media and people who weren't hackers but wanted to be got hold of it, was: To make something do something it wasn't necessarily designed to do.
I believe it came about when one of the MIT engineers, working on a brand new and unbelieveably expensive new computer donated to the school added functionality to the computer by jamming a screwdriver into one of the circuits.
Consider the cost of pressing a vinyl record. Consider the cost of manufacturing a cassette tape. Consider the cost of producing those tapes in Mexico insted of the US. Consider the cost of pressing a compact disk.
Consider that the enormous cost savings, as technology continously reduced the overhead of the music industry, has NEVER been passed on to the consumer.
How much does a CD cost now? $17.99US
If the entertainment industry is on the verge of collapse I think they need to look into their management.
Can I point out that the majority of the 911 terrorists were on FBI watch lists? If the FBI can't watch the people they're already watching they don't need to expand laws to watch people they aren't going to watch.
Let's do something reasonable, like putting trained air marshalls on flights.
Slashdot Mirror
But how do you tell that they weren't actually errors? Your only evidence seems to be that there were more errors favoring repubs than dems. This is still not valid evidence.
It's a statistical impossibility... and vote counts in all previous elections have strongly reflected the exit poles. In both of the last presidential elections the errors fell in favor of republicans across the board and neither election reflected the exit poles.
In the world-wide history of voting machines there have been problems and errors. Same with non-electronic. The machines must do much, much more than incrememt a value but feel free to reduce it to 'counting by ones'. I'm sure a typical voting machine developer would really agree.
True... all of our elections are fuzzy... but the margin of error has always been in both directions. Clearly Diabolds' programmers would disagree with me, but, it is, in fact counting by ones. A voter casts a vote, a record of that vote is logged, those votes are totalled. It's not rocket surgery. I'm not the best programmer in the world but I've written far more complex systems than simple one-to-one tabulation and I can guarantee, without doubt, that in all my software the data entered into the interface is the data that gets written to the database, gets printed on the reports, and gets transmitted to outside systems with 100% accuracy, and in a form that's externally verifiable.
There may, in fact, be no criminal action here. It may be simple GROSS incompetance... but the irregulatities are so obvious and so consistant, at the very least, there should be an investigation based on the overwhelming evidence that something is wrong.
Actually no one has shown intent. To show intent you'd have to establish what was in his mind at the time he commited an act. You have to have an act before you can establish intent.
As for evidence, a machine that consistantly makes mistakes in favor of an ally of the person accused establishes means, motive and opportunity.
But I wouldn't expect that to be understood by people defending the CEO of a computer company that can't build a computer who's sole purpose is to COUNT BY ONES.
The voting machines that were tested post election consistantly made "mistakes" in favor of republicans... and now there's a Diebold insider that confirms those reports.
2 7222&tid=172&tid=103&tid=219l eges_company_plagued_1206.htmlh arris/index_np.html
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28174
http://ideamouth.com/voterfraud.htm
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/19/17
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Diebold_insider__al
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/09/23/bev_
Anything else I can do for you?
Can you imagine?:
"Mommy where's the movie?"
"It's still downloading honey"
"Mommy where's the movie?"
"It's still downloading honey"
"Mommy where's the movie?"
"It's still downloading honey"
"Mommy where's the movie?"
Begin crying, screaming tantrum here.
Do we really need to have some whining troll as a topic of conversation on Slashdot? Doesn't that happen enough already by itself?
Use whatever OS you want to and STFU.
"The proposal, made by a presidential commission, would transform CIFA from an office that coordinates Pentagon security efforts -- including protecting military facilities from attack -- to one that also has authority to investigate crimes within the United States such as treason, foreign or terrorist sabotage or even economic espionage."
Isn't Bush guilty of at least two of the four crimes mentioned here?
Until they make what you're not hiding illegal.
Once again the "moral" morons of the world shoot themselves in the foot.
.porn domain. But "no one " wanted the .porn domain becasue it would encourage porn... sounds like the same stupid argument used against contraception.
.porn domain?
The easiest way to have been able to block all porn would have been to restrict porn to the
So... no we're going to break tcp/ip to do the same thing we could have done easily with the
I guess it was just a matter of time.
We stole your code to prevent people from stealing our product.
Who says the music industry's not just a bunch of scumbag thieves?
From what I've read about it he was retested twice after his initial test came back positive and tested positive all three times. There is a chance the recent negative test was false I suppose.
No kidding!
A company that thinks they have the right to use my machine without my permission shouldn't expect their EULA to be respected.
They have to write SCO System VI somehow.
"Learn to tell the difference between someone making a reasonable and realistic point about a subject and someone bashing Microsoft or people are just going to asssume you're a troll."
Are you giving me advice, or are you telling me something you just learned the hard way? I ask because this started with you not being able to tell the difference between a realistic point and a troll, but I'm under the distinct impression that you're actually trying to accuse me of it. (... and then claim you're one who seeks truth. Heh.)
No, I am accusing you of it troll. If you consider attacking an entire community based on someone asking a legitimate question then you are a troll. You sidestepped the question and whined.
As for your little treatise about people being biased, well yes, of coures people are, as you've shown in your post by sidestepping the question and whining about the entire community.
If you're going to make a point about people showing an unfair bias agaiunst Microsoft I suggest you find someone that's making an unfair or incorrect statement about Microsoft to attach it to.
Now I've answered your question... answer mine.
The question I posed wasn't a troll... proved, I'd say, by the fact that you haven't even tried to answer it. All you've done is whine about people doing the very same thing you're doing right now. You've assumed I'm a MS basher and you're whining.
But I guess you don't mind being childish, whiny and wrong... you are a troll after all.
"A rebuttal to what, your whining?"
..."
To the point that others got but you don't want to hear.
Your whining?
"Technicality? Not answering the question and whining is a tehnicality?"
Let me put it this way: If my post had been about Microsoft Apologists, you would not have demanded I answer the question.
You make a lot of assumptions. I ask something that you percieve to be anti-microsoft and assume I'm someone that ignores the problems with other products and companies? I see no difference between apologists and whiners that assume the entire character of someone based on asking a simple question they don't have an answer to.
"Like minded? You mean people who like the truth
You'd think that somebody who was so into 'the truth' wouldn't oversimplify and dismiss that lengthy paragraph that I wrote.
The whining about how people whine about things they don't like?
Tit for tat sucks, doesn't it?
I wouldn't know, you have yet to make a point that had anything to do with the subject or contradict what I said to you in the first place.
Learn to tell the difference between someone making a reasonable and realistic point about a subject and someone bashing Microsoft or people are just going to asssume you're a troll.
If you can't offer a rebuttal, you simply go after a technicality that only a like minded person would see any value in.
A rebuttal to what, your whining?
Technicality? Not answering the question and whining is a tehnicality?
Like minded? You mean people who like the truth and don't like it when a company claims to invent something they didn't invent?
I would imagine those people would find value in someone asking a perfectly reasonable question.
Indeed.
I can't wait until Longhorn comes out so they can start claiming all the new things they've invented that have existed in KDE and Gnome for years.
Uh... you didn't answer the question... what has Microsoft invented?
If you can't answer a question you simply go after the entire community? Your advice seems even less valid than the advice you're taking with a grain of salt.
Would you like some crow to go with that?
I'm just curious.
I know a very long list of technologies that MS claims to have invented... but buying a company that invented something and inventing something isn't the same thing.
Why should Apple be treated differently than all the other music player manufacturers in history?
Did the music industry get a cut of Sony's CD player sales? Toshiba's? JVC's?
It's time for the RIAA to have a RICO case brought against it.
Programming, by definition, cannot be hacking.
The term Hacking was coined at the MIT model railroad club and it's absolute definition can be read in, of all things: "Hackers" ISBN: 0141000511 a book about the computer revolution from the inside. A very good and entertaining read I might add.
The original meaning of the word, that was immediatly lost when the media and people who weren't hackers but wanted to be got hold of it, was: To make something do something it wasn't necessarily designed to do.
I believe it came about when one of the MIT engineers, working on a brand new and unbelieveably expensive new computer donated to the school added functionality to the computer by jamming a screwdriver into one of the circuits.
Who do those sort of things more often in the first place.
REMEMBER: the decline in the number of pirates on Earth is the cause for the rise in global temperatures.
Agreed!
Consider the cost of pressing a vinyl record.
Consider the cost of manufacturing a cassette tape.
Consider the cost of producing those tapes in Mexico insted of the US.
Consider the cost of pressing a compact disk.
Consider that the enormous cost savings, as technology continously reduced the overhead of the music industry, has NEVER been passed on to the consumer.
How much does a CD cost now? $17.99US
If the entertainment industry is on the verge of collapse I think they need to look into their management.
Can I point out that the majority of the 911 terrorists were on FBI watch lists? If the FBI can't watch the people they're already watching they don't need to expand laws to watch people they aren't going to watch.
Let's do something reasonable, like putting trained air marshalls on flights.
Nope... not a surprise at all.
My prediction the day I heard about the product: How long before it becomes the default gateway for installing spyware on my machine.