Yes, how dare a foreign citizen break U.S. law while never stepping foot inside the U.S. What was he thinking? After this precedent has been set, I hope you don't violate another country's laws on the internet, because it means you could be extradited.
Does everyone remember the large protests over the last couple decades against what people perceived as the formation of a one world government? They are usually based in the U.S. and targeted at the WTO, World Bank, and U.N. I guess the Christian bible has a couple verses people interpret to mean "no one world government". Who would have thought it would be the U.S. that became the world government? I say all of us should go out tomorrow and protest our government. Also, before I get a whole bunch of conservatives calling me a troll and arguing that patriotism is defined as agreeing with the government, Let's not forget that one can hate his government, but love his country.
IU-Bloomington has the same idea. The use a basterdized half SRC, half crossover wiring diagram. It looks like this:
12345678 --- 56781234
When I worked in the support center I could always tell when a convention or a bunch of other guests were on campus. Imagine telling a thousand people that there is a reason they can't hook up their laptop to check their mail... on a near weekly basis.
And the wireless network used to exist, but it was taken down because (holy shit!) students were sitting out in the parking lot using it.
What? Were they sitting in the parking lot doing illegal stuff? What's it matter if they are wireless users with laptops lookign up porn in the parking lot or they have a desktop connected with patch cable looking up porn in their room?
Are we seeing the day when college students make their school of choice not based solely on academics or athletics, but also on tech freebies like these?
"Freebies" my ass. Do you have any idea what tuition is up to these days? Anyone who thinks that either the students or taxpayers didn't pay for that nifty Napster service or shiny iPod's must not have majored in Econ. The iPod's I don't much care about; at least Apple has a record of being kind to educational institutions and new uses will be devised. To hell with the industry lapdog known as Napster; the only reason the schools purchase it for their students is to get a reprieve from the flood of lawsuits. I guarantee, even if the p2p traffic from the campus doubles, we won't see any new lawsuits.
#1. So, you'd rather we didn't invade at all? Is that it? You'd like it if Osama took over the US!
Saddam was a socialist dictator. Osama is on record, repeatedly, as calling Saddam a socialst, infidel, dog. They hated each other. Dictators are generally insecure and fear losing their power. If Saddam were helping out Bin Laden he would be sharing (which means giving up) some of his power. Every weapon Saddam gave him would be a weapon he is no longer in control of. Dictatorship is all about control.
#2. Gay agenda/Gay marriage.
Really, you're gay? I had no idea this affected you. Oh, you aren't gay? So it doesn't affect you? Good, Good, Because it must be a weak marraige if yours and your wifes bonds can be weakened by the new neighbors down the street.
But seriously, how naive are you? Who controls the media in this country?
Rupert Murdoch, GE, Ted Turner, and a couple other bodies control the media. All conservative republicans (not sure about Ted) and all with monetary incentive to fight Iraq and keep Bush in office. People bitch left and right about media slant, but if you find the money, you find the motive.
Liberal journalists SERIOUSLY outnumber conservative ones.
No, you just quickly forget people you agree with but rememebr the people you disagree with. It's not your fault, it's human nature. That's why liberals bitch about Fox News and conservatives bitch about the New York Times, but forget that they can just pick up a different paper or change the channel.
Maybe political power rests with the "right" but the last time I checked the balance of power in the Senate and House was pretty evenly matched.
The republicans control the 3 branches (and many argue the 4th estate) and a majority of governorships.
If I had to choose the most biased news outlets I would put Fox in the top seat and the NYT just behind. I chose Fox first because they use the words "Fair and Balanced" and "We report, You Decide" when they are obviously the opposite. When confronted about their bias Fox responds by deflecting attention to how biased the NYT is instead of addressing the accusations. The NYT is also quite obviously biased, but at least they don't actively bill themselves as totally impartial.
It should be no surprise that the media actively "buries" stories; it's been this way for a very long time. Politicians give outlets "favors" in exchange for leading with a different story. Critical reporters are often banned from the White House press core. Every politician is guilty of this manipulation. It becomes dangerous when this bias leads nearly a thousand soldiers to their death with little or no direct benefit to the citizens they've sworn to protect. Look around; consider the movements of your daily life. Did the war with Iraq ad the fall of Saddam have any measurable impact on your daily life? Are we in fact more secure, or do we just feel more secure? Was it worth sending nearly a thousand Americans to their death? Would you sacrifice yourself or your children to stop Saddam and his stockpile of weapons of mass destruction?
People are distrusting of the press because their bias over the last few years is at a previously unheard of. Every time Clinton launched missiles it was followed by impartial analysis of the reasons for attack and possible outcome. There was even some dissent in the press over the first Iraq war. If you pay attention to the news between 9/11 and the start of the war you will notice how all media outlets were actively selling it. There were no serious questions asked, partially based on the idea that nobody expected the Bush and Powell to make very important speeches using false information they didn't bother to verify first. They heard what they wanted to hear, and that was the end of the story. Even after the WMD threat was proven as false, and the White House slowly changed their story from weapons, to labs, to programs, to research, to liberating the people; the news kept echoing their spin. No outlet began to raise serious questions until the election year, after thousands of more people have died.
When people call the press the fourth estate, they are being about as literal as possible. The press has more control over the [mis]education and opinion of the public than any other body. They are allowed to report the most slanted stories, label themselves and impartial, and hide behind the first amendment. Meanwhile the overly trusting public tends to believe that what they read and watch is fact. It's a shame that the right to speech can't be balanced with accountability of truth or impartiality; especially in an election year.
Good God, I was wondering how long it would take before politics would be brought into this.
Everything in life is politics. I will be voting in Nov. I will also continue to whine about everything I can until that time. I don't buy a PC. I never have bought a PC. I buy parts and assemble them. And BTW: IE comes pre installed with OSX, but at least Safari is also included.
IE isn't some horrible virus MS installs by defauly on everyone's computer
Yes it is. What's the last version of Windows you bought that did't come with a version of IE with ActiveX enabled and a handful of other security holes on top of that.
It isn't the governments job to stop companies from making their product as they see fit to their target audience.
It's called the Sherman Anti-Trust act. MS used it's massive Windows base to kill the browser wars by building IE into the OS thereby removing consumers' choice.
As the customer you have the option to get another web browser and as the customer if you think MS is "shitting all over you" you wouldn't buy MS thus detering MS from "shitting all over consumers."
The internet is a community just like any other. The biggest difference is how it's regulated. In the real world, if someone is being a detriment to society they are breaking the law and are taken to court. When they get to court, they can NOT plead ignorance of the law. It's the opposite on the net. There is no law from me installing an OS and letting it get as infected as possible. I can't be forced to upgrade, or patch, or clean my system. In the mean time a good portion of the spam you get is probably being routed thru my box. I just dont care though. As long as my email and solitare work, it's your problem. Microsoft chose to not give the consumer a choice of browers. Instead they author one of the buggiest applications ever conceived, and distributed en mass, built into it's desktop dominating OS.
This isn't communist China, you have a choice. Why is it that every day China gets a step further than America in technology and freedom? They may not be gaining many freedoms, but at the rate we let the governemnt and corporations take ours we are going to be very close, very soon.
Which means that your scheme would have them paying for their web browser.
How? Mozilla, Firefox, IE, and (sort of) Opera are all free. It just takes time to download the latest versions. Last time I checked people pay for an ISP so that would be the only associated fee.
The solution would be including (either on the OS CD or a second disc) a list of browsers and other neat things, like plugins.
I can't stress this enough: Saving ignorant users 2 minutes is no excuse for promoting software monoculture. Microsoft gave up on educating it's users long ago; they decided it was easier to not give them a choice at all. That's why IE is built into windows, and why Office outputs IE only HTML.
Look where convienence has landed us now. Microsoft was so kind and thoughtful to make my life easier by making my choice for me. Their decision to not let me decided for myself has saved me literally minutes on a download. Every minute not downloading porn is truly a minute lost.
Make their devlopment tools be as compliant as posible. It's actually better for browsers to not be completely bound by standards. Browsers don't have to be as long as they can render compliant code properly. It would actually be better for the average person. That way any page written by the laziest, poorest educated author can still be seen.
I just find it amazing that tools like frontpage output HTML looking code that isn't true HTML. Non-IE browsers will choke and render the page so poorly that it's unreadable, yet IE has no problem. First MS gets sued for using their desktop base to force IE on people, then they use their Office base to force the creation and publishing of IE only pages.
If it's not on the CD, how are they supposed to download it?
I prefer ssh or ftp, but for the uneducated masses a simple COM can access the net and download one. Imagine a screen after reboot asking you to choose a web browser. You have 4 choices, IE, Mozilla, Firefox, and Opera. Now campare file sizes and estimated download times. Imagine which one the average user will go with. Please remember that a lot of people still use dial-up.
And what happens when their software is found to be unintentionally buggy?
what do you mean "WHEN"? It already has been found to be buggy.
You can't force people to be perfect.
You can't force people to be perfect, but if they are playing a game you can force them to play fair, or throw them out. It's no secret MS used it's large Windows user base to force people to use IE. The average user see's that they already have a browser so they have no desire to consider any others. It's also no secret that MS development tools are not standards compliant. They just happen to be broken in such a way that only IE can render it correctly. The average person will think that the new browser their son downloaded is broken, when in fact it's Micrsoft that is broken.
The anti-trust suits against Microsoft would have resulted in at least one of two things. The first would be removing IE so the person has to manually install it from the CD or download it after install. Second, force all of Microsoft's web development tools to be 100% standards compliant. Instead, the Bush administration gives them a get out of jail free pass and California accepts coupons for MS products which is the anti-solution for software monoculture in schools.
How much longer will people vote for politicians who let corporations shit all over consumers in the name of profit?
Amen. The quintessential college experience summed up in 7 easy steps. I'd like to add a couple very important points. Women love Jagermeister. Always keep some in your room so you can offer it to that hot girl you just met in the quad. Also, the hot chicks are all taking Psych or Sociology.
Also, most schools use packet shapers and otehr tools to prevent P2P apps from forming connections. If your school is part of the Internet2 project, you can try this. It operates outside of the internet, is uber-fast, and the RIAA spies don't have access to spy on you.
That's not the whole story. Look at it this way. A man has to dig a hole. He can do it with his hands. Give him a pointed rock and he can do it a bit faster. Now give him a shovel. Without mechanized equipment, he can't do it much faster. Now give him 2 shovels. Does his productivity increase after he got the second shovel?
Here's a second example: There is a secretary that can type over 60 words per minute with over 98% accuracy on a vintage typewriter. If you give her a computer with a word processor does she become more productive?
I used the PDA as an example that most people can identify with. Where you would have a notepad and pen, a rolodex, and a calendar, you now have one device. On the surface it appears to simplify things because you now have 1 thing to track instead of three. That forgets to include battery life/replacement, software upgrades, crashes, and data loss, to name a few. Let's not forget that a PDA is more sensitive to shock and damage than a notepad or rolodex. In the end, you remain just as productive, if not declining.
Check out this PDF for more info. It's under section 3.0. It was written by one of my old profs.
Everything. Especially the MAC addresses of all your devices. Most people who would steal a laptop wouldn't be smart enough to change it. When I was in college I would occasionally run into a student who had the foresight to do that. When they came in to report something stolen we could help them out. It's relatively easy to search a network for a specific MAC address and determine which ethernet port or WAP it's connected to. The only people who got their gear back did that, or got really lucky.
Paper seemed to work for the longest time. Hell, it still does. The scandals with voting machines are just another aspect of the productivity paradox. People continue to look towards technology to simplify our lives, when in fact, it tends to make it more complex. For example: That nice little PDA that was supposed to make your notepad and address book outdated requires more effort to maintain than what it replaced. Electronic voting machines fall right in line.
Actually, there is a solid rationale for pointing at Republicans first. Our current president--the Republican incumbent--has already deceived the American people on numerous occasions. Additionally the legitimacy of the 2000 election (which was in Bush's and Republicans' favor) is still debated today.
I'm not sure why this was moded a troll. Isn't one of the requirements of being a troll stating uncorroborated opinion or outright lies?
Lemme guess. This is all about how the Republicans are going to steal the election... Again.
Insecure Republicans with superiority complex's always give my the best laughs. No, this is not about some vast liberal conspiracy theory. This is about someone with a bit of computer knowledge subverting the elections. Imagine your suprise if you woke one day to realize Calero won the election.
I can't believe they're actually trusting some random company with handling and counting votes. What makes this company so secure? I've personally never heard of them, and I'm sure most others haven't either, so why should I trust them?
They probably make the ATM's you use, among other things that need to be secure.
For all the banter that goes on here, we all know how this is going to turn out. Everybody bitches and moans about it, and the mainstream press runs toned down stories. In the mean time, people who know what's going on continue to look like crazy conspiracy theorists. End result: The public won't know or won't care until a massive mistake is uncovered after the person enters office and everyone realizes that they've been living under the authority of a false representative. Of course, that's provided said person doesn't pass a law to protect people in his situation once they're discovered.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, how dare a foreign citizen break U.S. law while never stepping foot inside the U.S. What was he thinking? After this precedent has been set, I hope you don't violate another country's laws on the internet, because it means you could be extradited.
You should read the first thread of the original artice.
d =8561985
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=100421&ci
You'd better believe that people would protest the extradition of a U.S. citizen to the Saudi's for criticizing Islam.
Perhaps you've ben asleep lately. It's a trend for first world nations to give more rights to corporations than individuals.
We now return you to our regularly scheduled reprogramming.
Does everyone remember the large protests over the last couple decades against what people perceived as the formation of a one world government? They are usually based in the U.S. and targeted at the WTO, World Bank, and U.N. I guess the Christian bible has a couple verses people interpret to mean "no one world government". Who would have thought it would be the U.S. that became the world government? I say all of us should go out tomorrow and protest our government. Also, before I get a whole bunch of conservatives calling me a troll and arguing that patriotism is defined as agreeing with the government, Let's not forget that one can hate his government, but love his country.
IU-Bloomington has the same idea. The use a basterdized half SRC, half crossover wiring diagram. It looks like this:
12345678 --- 56781234
When I worked in the support center I could always tell when a convention or a bunch of other guests were on campus. Imagine telling a thousand people that there is a reason they can't hook up their laptop to check their mail... on a near weekly basis.
And the wireless network used to exist, but it was taken down because (holy shit!) students were sitting out in the parking lot using it.
What? Were they sitting in the parking lot doing illegal stuff? What's it matter if they are wireless users with laptops lookign up porn in the parking lot or they have a desktop connected with patch cable looking up porn in their room?
Are we seeing the day when college students make their school of choice not based solely on academics or athletics, but also on tech freebies like these?
"Freebies" my ass. Do you have any idea what tuition is up to these days? Anyone who thinks that either the students or taxpayers didn't pay for that nifty Napster service or shiny iPod's must not have majored in Econ. The iPod's I don't much care about; at least Apple has a record of being kind to educational institutions and new uses will be devised. To hell with the industry lapdog known as Napster; the only reason the schools purchase it for their students is to get a reprieve from the flood of lawsuits. I guarantee, even if the p2p traffic from the campus doubles, we won't see any new lawsuits.
The response to Rush:
#1. So, you'd rather we didn't invade at all? Is that it? You'd like it if Osama took over the US!
Saddam was a socialist dictator. Osama is on record, repeatedly, as calling Saddam a socialst, infidel, dog. They hated each other. Dictators are generally insecure and fear losing their power. If Saddam were helping out Bin Laden he would be sharing (which means giving up) some of his power. Every weapon Saddam gave him would be a weapon he is no longer in control of. Dictatorship is all about control.
#2. Gay agenda/Gay marriage.
Really, you're gay? I had no idea this affected you. Oh, you aren't gay? So it doesn't affect you? Good, Good, Because it must be a weak marraige if yours and your wifes bonds can be weakened by the new neighbors down the street.
But seriously, how naive are you? Who controls the media in this country?
Rupert Murdoch, GE, Ted Turner, and a couple other bodies control the media. All conservative republicans (not sure about Ted) and all with monetary incentive to fight Iraq and keep Bush in office. People bitch left and right about media slant, but if you find the money, you find the motive.
Liberal journalists SERIOUSLY outnumber conservative ones.
No, you just quickly forget people you agree with but rememebr the people you disagree with. It's not your fault, it's human nature. That's why liberals bitch about Fox News and conservatives bitch about the New York Times, but forget that they can just pick up a different paper or change the channel.
Maybe political power rests with the "right" but the last time I checked the balance of power in the Senate and House was pretty evenly matched.
The republicans control the 3 branches (and many argue the 4th estate) and a majority of governorships.
If I had to choose the most biased news outlets I would put Fox in the top seat and the NYT just behind. I chose Fox first because they use the words "Fair and Balanced" and "We report, You Decide" when they are obviously the opposite. When confronted about their bias Fox responds by deflecting attention to how biased the NYT is instead of addressing the accusations. The NYT is also quite obviously biased, but at least they don't actively bill themselves as totally impartial.
It should be no surprise that the media actively "buries" stories; it's been this way for a very long time. Politicians give outlets "favors" in exchange for leading with a different story. Critical reporters are often banned from the White House press core. Every politician is guilty of this manipulation. It becomes dangerous when this bias leads nearly a thousand soldiers to their death with little or no direct benefit to the citizens they've sworn to protect. Look around; consider the movements of your daily life. Did the war with Iraq ad the fall of Saddam have any measurable impact on your daily life? Are we in fact more secure, or do we just feel more secure? Was it worth sending nearly a thousand Americans to their death? Would you sacrifice yourself or your children to stop Saddam and his stockpile of weapons of mass destruction?
People are distrusting of the press because their bias over the last few years is at a previously unheard of. Every time Clinton launched missiles it was followed by impartial analysis of the reasons for attack and possible outcome. There was even some dissent in the press over the first Iraq war. If you pay attention to the news between 9/11 and the start of the war you will notice how all media outlets were actively selling it. There were no serious questions asked, partially based on the idea that nobody expected the Bush and Powell to make very important speeches using false information they didn't bother to verify first. They heard what they wanted to hear, and that was the end of the story. Even after the WMD threat was proven as false, and the White House slowly changed their story from weapons, to labs, to programs, to research, to liberating the people; the news kept echoing their spin. No outlet began to raise serious questions until the election year, after thousands of more people have died.
When people call the press the fourth estate, they are being about as literal as possible. The press has more control over the [mis]education and opinion of the public than any other body. They are allowed to report the most slanted stories, label themselves and impartial, and hide behind the first amendment. Meanwhile the overly trusting public tends to believe that what they read and watch is fact. It's a shame that the right to speech can't be balanced with accountability of truth or impartiality; especially in an election year.
Good God, I was wondering how long it would take before politics would be brought into this.
Everything in life is politics. I will be voting in Nov. I will also continue to whine about everything I can until that time. I don't buy a PC. I never have bought a PC. I buy parts and assemble them. And BTW: IE comes pre installed with OSX, but at least Safari is also included.
OK, then start the download at the beginning of this seasons latest reality show. It still beats a IE6 and the standard options and a size of 12+ MB.
IE isn't some horrible virus MS installs by defauly on everyone's computer
Yes it is. What's the last version of Windows you bought that did't come with a version of IE with ActiveX enabled and a handful of other security holes on top of that.
It isn't the governments job to stop companies from making their product as they see fit to their target audience.
It's called the Sherman Anti-Trust act. MS used it's massive Windows base to kill the browser wars by building IE into the OS thereby removing consumers' choice.
As the customer you have the option to get another web browser and as the customer if you think MS is "shitting all over you" you wouldn't buy MS thus detering MS from "shitting all over consumers."
The internet is a community just like any other. The biggest difference is how it's regulated. In the real world, if someone is being a detriment to society they are breaking the law and are taken to court. When they get to court, they can NOT plead ignorance of the law. It's the opposite on the net. There is no law from me installing an OS and letting it get as infected as possible. I can't be forced to upgrade, or patch, or clean my system. In the mean time a good portion of the spam you get is probably being routed thru my box. I just dont care though. As long as my email and solitare work, it's your problem. Microsoft chose to not give the consumer a choice of browers. Instead they author one of the buggiest applications ever conceived, and distributed en mass, built into it's desktop dominating OS.
This isn't communist China, you have a choice.
Why is it that every day China gets a step further than America in technology and freedom? They may not be gaining many freedoms, but at the rate we let the governemnt and corporations take ours we are going to be very close, very soon.
Which means that your scheme would have them paying for their web browser.
How? Mozilla, Firefox, IE, and (sort of) Opera are all free. It just takes time to download the latest versions. Last time I checked people pay for an ISP so that would be the only associated fee.
The solution would be including (either on the OS CD or a second disc) a list of browsers and other neat things, like plugins.
I can't stress this enough: Saving ignorant users 2 minutes is no excuse for promoting software monoculture. Microsoft gave up on educating it's users long ago; they decided it was easier to not give them a choice at all. That's why IE is built into windows, and why Office outputs IE only HTML.
Look where convienence has landed us now. Microsoft was so kind and thoughtful to make my life easier by making my choice for me. Their decision to not let me decided for myself has saved me literally minutes on a download. Every minute not downloading porn is truly a minute lost.
Make their devlopment tools be as compliant as posible. It's actually better for browsers to not be completely bound by standards. Browsers don't have to be as long as they can render compliant code properly. It would actually be better for the average person. That way any page written by the laziest, poorest educated author can still be seen.
I just find it amazing that tools like frontpage output HTML looking code that isn't true HTML. Non-IE browsers will choke and render the page so poorly that it's unreadable, yet IE has no problem. First MS gets sued for using their desktop base to force IE on people, then they use their Office base to force the creation and publishing of IE only pages.
If it's not on the CD, how are they supposed to download it?
I prefer ssh or ftp, but for the uneducated masses a simple COM can access the net and download one. Imagine a screen after reboot asking you to choose a web browser. You have 4 choices, IE, Mozilla, Firefox, and Opera. Now campare file sizes and estimated download times. Imagine which one the average user will go with. Please remember that a lot of people still use dial-up.
And what happens when their software is found to be unintentionally buggy?
what do you mean "WHEN"? It already has been found to be buggy.
You can't force people to be perfect.
You can't force people to be perfect, but if they are playing a game you can force them to play fair, or throw them out. It's no secret MS used it's large Windows user base to force people to use IE. The average user see's that they already have a browser so they have no desire to consider any others. It's also no secret that MS development tools are not standards compliant. They just happen to be broken in such a way that only IE can render it correctly. The average person will think that the new browser their son downloaded is broken, when in fact it's Micrsoft that is broken.
The anti-trust suits against Microsoft would have resulted in at least one of two things. The first would be removing IE so the person has to manually install it from the CD or download it after install. Second, force all of Microsoft's web development tools to be 100% standards compliant. Instead, the Bush administration gives them a get out of jail free pass and California accepts coupons for MS products which is the anti-solution for software monoculture in schools.
How much longer will people vote for politicians who let corporations shit all over consumers in the name of profit?
Amen. The quintessential college experience summed up in 7 easy steps. I'd like to add a couple very important points. Women love Jagermeister. Always keep some in your room so you can offer it to that hot girl you just met in the quad. Also, the hot chicks are all taking Psych or Sociology.
Also, most schools use packet shapers and otehr tools to prevent P2P apps from forming connections. If your school is part of the Internet2 project, you can try this. It operates outside of the internet, is uber-fast, and the RIAA spies don't have access to spy on you.
That's not the whole story. Look at it this way. A man has to dig a hole. He can do it with his hands. Give him a pointed rock and he can do it a bit faster. Now give him a shovel. Without mechanized equipment, he can't do it much faster. Now give him 2 shovels. Does his productivity increase after he got the second shovel?
Here's a second example: There is a secretary that can type over 60 words per minute with over 98% accuracy on a vintage typewriter. If you give her a computer with a word processor does she become more productive?
I used the PDA as an example that most people can identify with. Where you would have a notepad and pen, a rolodex, and a calendar, you now have one device. On the surface it appears to simplify things because you now have 1 thing to track instead of three. That forgets to include battery life/replacement, software upgrades, crashes, and data loss, to name a few. Let's not forget that a PDA is more sensitive to shock and damage than a notepad or rolodex. In the end, you remain just as productive, if not declining.
Check out this PDF for more info. It's under section 3.0. It was written by one of my old profs.
Everything. Especially the MAC addresses of all your devices. Most people who would steal a laptop wouldn't be smart enough to change it. When I was in college I would occasionally run into a student who had the foresight to do that. When they came in to report something stolen we could help them out. It's relatively easy to search a network for a specific MAC address and determine which ethernet port or WAP it's connected to. The only people who got their gear back did that, or got really lucky.
Paper seemed to work for the longest time. Hell, it still does. The scandals with voting machines are just another aspect of the productivity paradox. People continue to look towards technology to simplify our lives, when in fact, it tends to make it more complex. For example: That nice little PDA that was supposed to make your notepad and address book outdated requires more effort to maintain than what it replaced. Electronic voting machines fall right in line.
Lemme guess. This is all about how the Republicans are going to steal the election... Again.
Insecure Republicans with superiority complex's always give my the best laughs. No, this is not about some vast liberal conspiracy theory. This is about someone with a bit of computer knowledge subverting the elections. Imagine your suprise if you woke one day to realize Calero won the election.
I can't believe they're actually trusting some random company with handling and counting votes. What makes this company so secure? I've personally never heard of them, and I'm sure most others haven't either, so why should I trust them?
They probably make the ATM's you use, among other things that need to be secure.
For all the banter that goes on here, we all know how this is going to turn out. Everybody bitches and moans about it, and the mainstream press runs toned down stories. In the mean time, people who know what's going on continue to look like crazy conspiracy theorists. End result: The public won't know or won't care until a massive mistake is uncovered after the person enters office and everyone realizes that they've been living under the authority of a false representative. Of course, that's provided said person doesn't pass a law to protect people in his situation once they're discovered.