If you are sharing your files via napster, you could hardly claim that it was invasive for someone to look at the shared file names.
Yes, but as the copyright holder, you have the right to control to whom, and under what terms, your copyright protected list of filenames can be accessed by. I compiled the list, so I hold the copyright. I am, therefore, entitled to control access to the list according to any criteria I see fit. The RIAA can't argue with this point, it's the exact point they've been trying to make.
All that's left is to add a flag to the database where you must, upon logging on to the service, identify yourself as a private individual, a corporate entity, court official, government agency, etc...
Then I could choose to which categories of users I wish to make my (copyright protected) list of filenames available.
Napster is going to die either way. The RIAA has decided that they want Napster gone, and they've got the money to get it done. The only point that's really up for argument is how long it's going to take.
Taking that as a given, why not use the remaining time to have a little fun and point out the ridiculousness of the DMCA?
The perfect reason for sending her to this timeframe: The Enterprise crew caused all sorts of time line problems during their assistance of Cochran in First Contact. Obviously, these need to be fixed. She's the perfect choice since she's already been tapped for the role previously, and can be trusted to follow protocol. And, of course, she'd be the perfect choice to cleanse the Earth of the bits and pieces of Borg technology that was left behind during that movie.
Maybe she simply decides to stay in order to escape the anti-Borg prejudices she encounters in the 24th century, since these people don't yet have knowledge of the Borg.
Have faith, there's all sorts of good ways to get her back there.
However, if the timeline is where I think it'll be, warp wouldn't have been discovered by that point in time!
What makes you think that? It was established in ST:FC that we made contact with the Vulcans AFTER Cochran made his first warp flight. So, how could we possibly have humans and vulcans serving on the same ship before the discovery of warp drive?
The rumours have been about the new series being pre-Federation, not pre-warp.
It does seem that they put some thought into setting a consistent stage for the 29th century during Voyager.
They've established the "Temporal Prime Directive", several viable characters, some of the basic rules of time travel (only 4 jumps per person, then bad things happen).
Also, up to this point, new ST series have definitely had a tie-in with previous series. DS9 carried on the story of the Bajoran occupation and the Maquis, which was established during TNG. Voyager also used the Maquis tie-in.
Setting the new series in the 29th century aboard the Federation TimeShip Relativity would be a nice tie-in for the new series. Also, setting it further out in the future would (presumably) allow for much greater velocities, making galaxy-wide travel a routine matter. This could open up the gate for interaction with the species introduced in Voyager, and even a fresh conflict with the (once again powerful) Dominion. Or, perhaps the Dominion is now on the side of "good", under the leadership of Odo.:) (has it ever been established how long those guys live?) Or, perhaps the Borg have by now assimilated the Founders and are capable of shape-shifting themselves.:)
Given that there's no real evidence out there other than previous patterns, I think a "TimeShip Relativity" based show is more likely than a Pre-Federation show.
Federation officials from the future have already "recruited" her (in "Relativity") to travel into the past and repair damage to the time line.
Seems quite simple for them to concoct a story about them tapping her one more time, then having to leave her in the past because she's already used up all of her allotted "time jumps". (A reasoning that was already established in that episode)
Problem is can we trust software and electronic voting?
We can trust software and electronic voting just as much as we can trust the current paper-based methods. There's plenty of room for fraud and error either way. What we need to do is PICK ONE!!! and stick with it. The current fiasco in Florida reminds me of a person who loses a coin toss and immediately wants to go 2 out of 3, then 3 out of 5, then 5 out of 7, and on and on....
What we need to avoid, at all costs, is Internet voting. Not because it couldn't be done securely, it could. It needs to be avoided because it would simply make it too easy to vote.
This election saw roughly a 50% voter turnout rate. That leaves 50% of our population that simply doesn't care enough to get off their butts and vote. These people might very well be willing to vote if they could do it from the comfort and convenience of their own home, thus increasing the voter turnout rate. Most people seem to think that this would be a good thing, it wouldn't. It would be a disaster.
While home based voting may prompt these people to vote, it would do nothing to make them less apathetic regarding the issues of the election. It would not prompt them to research the candidates, it would not assist them in casting an informed vote. Can you imagine the turmoil that would arise in our country if our leaders start being selected by people who don't even care enough to leave their house to vote under the current system?
Voting is already a simple process. To insist that it needs to be made easier is the height of laziness.
Re:Just how hard CAN it be??
on
eLection '04
·
· Score: 1
I have no idea how you get people to use the help that's available to them...
Perhaps their participation in a very close national election, coupled with the realization that their own vote was not counted due to their own carelessness/incompetence, will drive home the point that they need to seek out such help next time around.
If the ballot was confusing, they should have put forth the minimal effort required to clear up that confusion before they cast their vote. If they are now upset because their irresponsibility at the polls may have a consequence, then I can understand their frustration, but the opportunity to do something about it existed, and they let it slip through their fingers. Perhaps they'll be more observant in 2004.
Voting is a right. Along with that right comes the responsibility to make sure you understand the mechanism used to exercize that right.
Last, I keep hearing stories of 'thousands' calling up the Gore campaign in tears saying the voted for the wrong person because of the ballot. How on Earth did you realise that at home, hours later, and not WHEN YOU VOTED? The whole thing sounds pretty suspicious.
Yes, sounds very suspicious.
Here's another point worth considering: How many of these easily confused people actually DID cast their vote properly, but after seeing the coverage on television got nervous and managed to convince themselves that they had botched it?
Personally, I think the whole Palm Beach issue is being blown out of proportion by nervous Democrats who see their 8 year reign slipping away and are willing to grasp at any available straw to try and hang on to it.
You know, after seeing the actual picture of the ballot (rather than the artist's renderings), it is even MORE apparent that anyone who was confused by this thing just flat out didn't care enough to slow down, take a careful look, and make sure they cast an accurate vote.
It's also worth pointing out that the electors are primarily chosen based on years of devoted and dedicated service to their party. These are people who take politics VERY seriously, and have strongly aligned themselves with one party for a good number of years.
For one of these people to choose to vote for the opposing candidate would be a very rare occurence.
Add to that the disturbing number of people polled who could not name the three branches of government, or even the running mate of the candidate that they had voted for, it's quite easy to imagine 4% of the voters spoiling their ballot.
(No, I don't have links to those polls. But they're out there, if anyone cares to find them. Those who don't care to find them may feel free to ignore my comment.)
The time to correct this was while they were at the polls, or if they had to leave to use a phone, at least while the polls were still open.
Sadly, these people couldn't be bothered to go through the hassle of dealing with it at the time. But suddenly, once they found out how close the election was, they're raising hell.
Should they complain? Absolutely. These issues need to be resolved for the next election. But to say that the Florida election should be held over again, simply because some people didn't address these issues at the appropriate time is wrong.
Certain actions that you take are irreversible, even if they were a mistake. It's a fact of life.
Casting a ballot is one of those things. It NEEDS to be one of those things in order for the election process to maintain any sort of legitimacy.
Or do you think there are a lot of people who go vote just because they like punching holes/flipping levers/completing arrows, and thus punch more than one?
Take a walk through the downtown area of pretty much any large metropolitan area in the US and take a good look around. I bet lots of folks vote for precisely that reason.
It would be quite simple to ask for help without divulging your intended vote.
"Now, how does this ballot work?"
"So I punch this one for Bush? And this one's for Gore?"
Probably a hundred other ways to phrase it.
Besides, it's usually pretty easy to figure out who a person is voting for, anyway. At my polling place, you could be pretty certain that the people who weren't embarrassed by their vote and were filling it out in the open (because there was a HUGE line for the booths) were voting a straight Republican ticket. I hung around the polls for awhile and "eavesdropped" on the exit pollers, and with only one exception, every person they interviewed had voted exactly as I would have guessed based purely on their appearance.
If they are truly interested in checking for irregularities, why not check election procedures in all 50 states?
Why not check Iowa, too. Gore carried this state by only (roughly) 5000 votes.
In the precinct I voted in, there was quite a long line of us waiting to get a "special" ballot because our names did not appear on the rolls, even though we had all registered well (months or years) in advance. Those of us in that line also had one other thing in common, we were all registered Republicans.
Personally, I'm willing to chalk that up to an honest mistake, a simple matter of some paperwork falling through the cracks. And I did get to vote, but my trip to the polls took me over an hour, when it should have been just a few minutes.
My points are:
A.) If anyone wants to whine and cry about irregularities, then we need to go back and look at things nationwide, and...
B.) Anyone who felt there was a problem at the polls should have done as I did, and resolved the issue right then and there.
I don't see that it's reasonable for one district to get to vote again (assuming that happens) and not let the whole state, or even the whole nation, vote again.
If they to allow the district to vote again, is it OK for me to go down there and cast a ballot?
I found the map confusing. I really MEANT to move to Florida, but because of the confusing layout of the map I was looking at, I ended up here in Iowa.
Clearly, I should be allowed to cast a vote in any re-vote that is held in the state of Florida.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are sharing your files via napster, you could hardly claim that it was invasive for someone to look at the shared file names.
Yes, but as the copyright holder, you have the right to control to whom, and under what terms, your copyright protected list of filenames can be accessed by. I compiled the list, so I hold the copyright. I am, therefore, entitled to control access to the list according to any criteria I see fit. The RIAA can't argue with this point, it's the exact point they've been trying to make.
All that's left is to add a flag to the database where you must, upon logging on to the service, identify yourself as a private individual, a corporate entity, court official, government agency, etc...
Then I could choose to which categories of users I wish to make my (copyright protected) list of filenames available.
Napster is going to die either way. The RIAA has decided that they want Napster gone, and they've got the money to get it done. The only point that's really up for argument is how long it's going to take.
Taking that as a given, why not use the remaining time to have a little fun and point out the ridiculousness of the DMCA?
This in no way appears to protect a copyright holders rights
Sure it does.
The list of filenames of the MP3 files on my hard drive is a written work to which I own the copyright.
This protects my rights as the holder of that copyright by making it more difficult for unauthorized persons to make use of said list.
I'll even go one better.
The perfect reason for sending her to this timeframe: The Enterprise crew caused all sorts of time line problems during their assistance of Cochran in First Contact. Obviously, these need to be fixed. She's the perfect choice since she's already been tapped for the role previously, and can be trusted to follow protocol. And, of course, she'd be the perfect choice to cleanse the Earth of the bits and pieces of Borg technology that was left behind during that movie.
Maybe she simply decides to stay in order to escape the anti-Borg prejudices she encounters in the 24th century, since these people don't yet have knowledge of the Borg.
Have faith, there's all sorts of good ways to get her back there.
However, if the timeline is where I think it'll be, warp wouldn't have been discovered by that point in time!
What makes you think that? It was established in ST:FC that we made contact with the Vulcans AFTER Cochran made his first warp flight. So, how could we possibly have humans and vulcans serving on the same ship before the discovery of warp drive?
The rumours have been about the new series being pre-Federation, not pre-warp.
It does seem that they put some thought into setting a consistent stage for the 29th century during Voyager.
:) (has it ever been established how long those guys live?) Or, perhaps the Borg have by now assimilated the Founders and are capable of shape-shifting themselves. :)
They've established the "Temporal Prime Directive", several viable characters, some of the basic rules of time travel (only 4 jumps per person, then bad things happen).
Also, up to this point, new ST series have definitely had a tie-in with previous series. DS9 carried on the story of the Bajoran occupation and the Maquis, which was established during TNG. Voyager also used the Maquis tie-in.
Setting the new series in the 29th century aboard the Federation TimeShip Relativity would be a nice tie-in for the new series. Also, setting it further out in the future would (presumably) allow for much greater velocities, making galaxy-wide travel a routine matter. This could open up the gate for interaction with the species introduced in Voyager, and even a fresh conflict with the (once again powerful) Dominion. Or, perhaps the Dominion is now on the side of "good", under the leadership of Odo.
Given that there's no real evidence out there other than previous patterns, I think a "TimeShip Relativity" based show is more likely than a Pre-Federation show.
Why not?
Federation officials from the future have already "recruited" her (in "Relativity") to travel into the past and repair damage to the time line.
Seems quite simple for them to concoct a story about them tapping her one more time, then having to leave her in the past because she's already used up all of her allotted "time jumps". (A reasoning that was already established in that episode)
All corporations are more concerned with their own success than with their customers happiness. The one and only purpose they have is to make money.
Keeping customers happy is simply a tool that they use to accomplish this goal, not a goal in and of itself.
Problem is can we trust software and electronic voting?
We can trust software and electronic voting just as much as we can trust the current paper-based methods. There's plenty of room for fraud and error either way. What we need to do is PICK ONE!!! and stick with it. The current fiasco in Florida reminds me of a person who loses a coin toss and immediately wants to go 2 out of 3, then 3 out of 5, then 5 out of 7, and on and on....
What we need to avoid, at all costs, is Internet voting. Not because it couldn't be done securely, it could. It needs to be avoided because it would simply make it too easy to vote.
This election saw roughly a 50% voter turnout rate. That leaves 50% of our population that simply doesn't care enough to get off their butts and vote. These people might very well be willing to vote if they could do it from the comfort and convenience of their own home, thus increasing the voter turnout rate. Most people seem to think that this would be a good thing, it wouldn't. It would be a disaster.
While home based voting may prompt these people to vote, it would do nothing to make them less apathetic regarding the issues of the election. It would not prompt them to research the candidates, it would not assist them in casting an informed vote. Can you imagine the turmoil that would arise in our country if our leaders start being selected by people who don't even care enough to leave their house to vote under the current system?
Voting is already a simple process. To insist that it needs to be made easier is the height of laziness.
I have no idea how you get people to use the help that's available to them...
Perhaps their participation in a very close national election, coupled with the realization that their own vote was not counted due to their own carelessness/incompetence, will drive home the point that they need to seek out such help next time around.
But probably not...
It's just a question of fairness.
No, it's a question of laziness and apathy.
If the ballot was confusing, they should have put forth the minimal effort required to clear up that confusion before they cast their vote. If they are now upset because their irresponsibility at the polls may have a consequence, then I can understand their frustration, but the opportunity to do something about it existed, and they let it slip through their fingers. Perhaps they'll be more observant in 2004.
Voting is a right. Along with that right comes the responsibility to make sure you understand the mechanism used to exercize that right.
Last, I keep hearing stories of 'thousands' calling up the Gore campaign in tears saying the voted for the wrong person because of the ballot. How on Earth did you realise that at home, hours later, and not WHEN YOU VOTED? The whole thing sounds pretty suspicious.
Yes, sounds very suspicious.
Here's another point worth considering: How many of these easily confused people actually DID cast their vote properly, but after seeing the coverage on television got nervous and managed to convince themselves that they had botched it?
Personally, I think the whole Palm Beach issue is being blown out of proportion by nervous Democrats who see their 8 year reign slipping away and are willing to grasp at any available straw to try and hang on to it.
The story from his friend is what's know as an eye witness account. It's just as valid and substantiated as anything coming out of Florida.
Or, is it only the cases of fraud that end up in the media that deserve to be examined?
You know, after seeing the actual picture of the ballot (rather than the artist's renderings), it is even MORE apparent that anyone who was confused by this thing just flat out didn't care enough to slow down, take a careful look, and make sure they cast an accurate vote.
It's also worth pointing out that the electors are primarily chosen based on years of devoted and dedicated service to their party. These are people who take politics VERY seriously, and have strongly aligned themselves with one party for a good number of years.
For one of these people to choose to vote for the opposing candidate would be a very rare occurence.
As does Nebraska, if memory serves.
Add to that the disturbing number of people polled who could not name the three branches of government, or even the running mate of the candidate that they had voted for, it's quite easy to imagine 4% of the voters spoiling their ballot.
(No, I don't have links to those polls. But they're out there, if anyone cares to find them. Those who don't care to find them may feel free to ignore my comment.)
The time to correct this was while they were at the polls, or if they had to leave to use a phone, at least while the polls were still open.
Sadly, these people couldn't be bothered to go through the hassle of dealing with it at the time. But suddenly, once they found out how close the election was, they're raising hell.
Should they complain? Absolutely. These issues need to be resolved for the next election. But to say that the Florida election should be held over again, simply because some people didn't address these issues at the appropriate time is wrong.
Certain actions that you take are irreversible, even if they were a mistake. It's a fact of life.
Casting a ballot is one of those things. It NEEDS to be one of those things in order for the election process to maintain any sort of legitimacy.
Or do you think there are a lot of people who go vote just because they like punching holes/flipping levers/completing arrows, and thus punch more than one?
Take a walk through the downtown area of pretty much any large metropolitan area in the US and take a good look around. I bet lots of folks vote for precisely that reason.
Either that, or to get the free sticker.
It would be quite simple to ask for help without divulging your intended vote.
"Now, how does this ballot work?"
"So I punch this one for Bush? And this one's for Gore?"
Probably a hundred other ways to phrase it.
Besides, it's usually pretty easy to figure out who a person is voting for, anyway. At my polling place, you could be pretty certain that the people who weren't embarrassed by their vote and were filling it out in the open (because there was a HUGE line for the booths) were voting a straight Republican ticket. I hung around the polls for awhile and "eavesdropped" on the exit pollers, and with only one exception, every person they interviewed had voted exactly as I would have guessed based purely on their appearance.
Now THAT'S a rather sad thing.
If they are truly interested in checking for irregularities, why not check election procedures in all 50 states?
Why not check Iowa, too. Gore carried this state by only (roughly) 5000 votes.
In the precinct I voted in, there was quite a long line of us waiting to get a "special" ballot because our names did not appear on the rolls, even though we had all registered well (months or years) in advance. Those of us in that line also had one other thing in common, we were all registered Republicans.
Personally, I'm willing to chalk that up to an honest mistake, a simple matter of some paperwork falling through the cracks. And I did get to vote, but my trip to the polls took me over an hour, when it should have been just a few minutes.
My points are:
A.) If anyone wants to whine and cry about irregularities, then we need to go back and look at things nationwide, and...
B.) Anyone who felt there was a problem at the polls should have done as I did, and resolved the issue right then and there.
Uh, don't you have to PROVE that you are a citizen?
No. You just have to claim to be one.
I don't see that it's reasonable for one district to get to vote again (assuming that happens) and not let the whole state, or even the whole nation, vote again.
If they to allow the district to vote again, is it OK for me to go down there and cast a ballot?
I found the map confusing. I really MEANT to move to Florida, but because of the confusing layout of the map I was looking at, I ended up here in Iowa.
Clearly, I should be allowed to cast a vote in any re-vote that is held in the state of Florida.
You're trying to inject reality into a political debate with a Democrat.
It's futile.
The zero curse will be my one and only source of consolation should Gore manage to get elected.