Most of what you said is already the case and has been for some time, more or less.
Few people complain about having a birth certificate, social security card and driver's license. Those are also the component parts to obtain a passport.
That concert of IDs is already tied together and the latter is considered good for all of the above.
I often suspect people who complain about national ID cards are part of the embarrassingly large percentage of Americans who have never been anywhere else and whose future international travel plans were severely curtailed by the recent passport requirement for travel to Canada and Mexico.
"When you cast your vote, nobody can see it any longer."or limit it technologically (e.g. purely electronic or paper-only).
That is not a necessary condition of a voting system. In pure paper and optical scanning electronic systems, many, many people can see it for a very long time.
"The system must be provably good, without looking at its functioning."
That makes no sense, either in the abstract or current execution. You're creating "black-box" voting as a necessity, when that just isn't the case. The only condition that needs to be met is hiding the identity of the individual voter. This is done in many, many systems out there that require a disconnect between source and object (think: double-blind clinical trials where both sides must be mutually anonymous). It is not necessary to obfuscate the operation of the system during tabulation or prevent the ability to positively audit results. The presence of those qualities is represent design choices--poor ones at that.
Comparatively, to equal the level of representation in France, we'd have to have nearly 3,000 people in the House, which is roughly the number of delegates to the National People's Congress in China and they seem to be doing just fine. Granted, it's much easier to count unanimous votes...
Which part? The precinct bit or the prom bit? The precinct bit is a fact, easily established by some pretty simple math (LA County has over 5,000 precincts and 10M people, do said math) -- the prom bit was a joke.
So, my regular $192 Tuesday night tab has five cokes, thirty-seven beers, four martinis, a dozen shots of tequila and a small pizza...just so happens the networking meeting falls on that night and I happen to like coke with my pizza.
I used to have the unglamorous job of keeping an absolutely horrid, ground-up custom hack job accounting system more or less alive. This thing was written over several years by three or four people who had never met each other in a half dozen wonky relatively dead languages. I had an accounting manager roll into my office in hysterics screaming about how the internal reports and external audits varied by $112...over $250,000,000. This was obviously rounding and not even in error, but even the perceived error was on the order of 0.0000448% -- and that was considered unacceptable, which is a tad absurd when the values in question don't even have that many places. But, we're talking integers here. There is no rounding error.
I mean, come on, the average precinct BARELY record 1000 votes and the biggest don't even hit 3000, yet the voting system for the average high school prom, while equally as complicated, extensive and at risk for fraud, is more secure and less prone to error.
I'm left pretty certain that the only way someone could produce such a system for simple integer tabulation with such comparatively huge error rates is if those errors were in fact deliberate and by design. There seems little other explanation and positively ZERO excuse.
It's not just Americans. If you think our security is absurd, you've obviously never been through British or Israeli security of twenty-five years ago. Hell, not even our security has really changed that much in terms of intrusion and delay. You've had to throw your carry-on luggage through the X-Ray, walk through metal-detectors, get the magic-wand treatment and optional white glove treatment for the last quarter century at least (go rent "Airplane!" if your memory fails). Hell, in the mid-90's we had to do the ridiculous laptop/cellphone power-on test to "prove" it wasn't a bomb. Thank god that one has been pretty universally dropped.
Honestly, when I hear people piss and moan about TSA, I'm left wondering, did any of these people travel anywhere BEFORE 2001 or did they take Greyhound?
...and this is the problem with "originalism." Divining out what would have been considered "unreasonable" search in 1787 compared to what is unreasonable now is absurd--not least because inspection of personal effects at port of entry was not a matter of law for another century.
Most real computer scientists don't want to perform the work in the domains the unwashed productive masses operate using languages like Java and VB. Why is it so hard to understand that those people do not consider themselves to be computer scientists, nor do their jobs require them to be?
The problem is computer scientists having so much self respect that they're insulted by the jobs they do get, leading to a lack of respect for anyone else performing the same work without precisely the same background, but not enough self respect to go out and get the "real" jobs they think they deserve. It isn't that non-computer scientists are sullying the field, it's that there are legions of unambitious, barely qualified "real" computer scientists trying to make the low-hanging fruit jobs writing silly WYSIWYG GUIs and web applications equate to writing bare metal encryption algorithms for NSA...and then they wonder why there are so many jokes about the alienated, arrogant IT staff that are just this side of batshiat crazy.
They may not be Blood Diamonds(tm), but most of 'em sure are bloody. The vast majority of diamonds come from South Africa and Botswana where the labor record is less than glowing. Sure, it's not Congo, but only precious few diamonds come from places like Canada and Australia where labor standards are at least slightly above appalling.
See, you just proved God doesn't understand threading and has crappy exception handling leading to massive memory leaks, which should explain quite a few things about black holes, string theory and why all programming books insist on beginning with "Hello, world."/Creepy. My captcha was "Programs." Shudder.
The advertising hype doesn't claim that at all. It claims a cleaner signal capable of delivering more channels, which is true.
In practice, I've found that of the 15 or so digital channels I get over the air, I get about even thirds each 480/720/1080, all with superior quality to what is delivered over cable, since Comcast decodes, processes (over-saturates color and blows out the contrast), then re-compresses the digital feed to squeeze more out of their pipe.
Brown people surrounded by large bodies of water are better equipped to deal with being bombarded by intense solar radiation than white people surrounded by large buildings.
Email doesn't feel intrusive precisely because it/isn't/ immediate. You haven't actually contacted the person until the time they choose to allow it. It's only "any time, any place" if you choose to sit there glued to that damned screen. Put the CrackBerry down and walk away. You'd be amazed how many people will never notice you're ignoring them.
People like easily recognizable numbers to indicate status. Remove "levels" and how will people get the instant gratification of knowing they're superior without actually having to prove anything? It's like when car manufacturers went from names to alphanumerics. It was hard to tell who was better, the guy driving the New Yorker, Royal, Saratoga or Imperial. But now, obviously, my 500 must beat your measly 300.
That one person may be willing to pay a million bucks for something is less indicative of worth than the fact that a million people wouldn't pay a penny.
By definition, if you receive a DHCPOFFER, return a DHCPREQUEST and in turn receive back a DHCPACKNOWLEDGE, you are absolutely unequivocally being granted express, explicit permission.
Those who claim using a network so provided is done so "without permission" might as well have their dinner guests arrested for trespassing after seating and serving them.
The real issue is that the U.S. actually has very little control. The rest of the world could do whatever the hell they want with it and there's not much we could do about it.
When I did use NetFlix, I spent a good amount of time flagging as many movies I did NOT want and would never, ever rent as those I did or would. The result was a pretty consistent selection that reasonably matched my taste.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of what you said is already the case and has been for some time, more or less.
Few people complain about having a birth certificate, social security card and driver's license.
Those are also the component parts to obtain a passport.
That concert of IDs is already tied together and the latter is considered good for all of the above.
I often suspect people who complain about national ID cards are part of the embarrassingly large percentage of Americans who have never been anywhere else and whose future international travel plans were severely curtailed by the recent passport requirement for travel to Canada and Mexico.
These people need to get a grip.
"When you cast your vote, nobody can see it any longer."or limit it technologically (e.g. purely electronic or paper-only).
That is not a necessary condition of a voting system. In pure paper and optical scanning electronic systems, many, many people can see it for a very long time.
"The system must be provably good, without looking at its functioning."
That makes no sense, either in the abstract or current execution. You're creating "black-box" voting as a necessity, when that just isn't the case. The only condition that needs to be met is hiding the identity of the individual voter. This is done in many, many systems out there that require a disconnect between source and object (think: double-blind clinical trials where both sides must be mutually anonymous). It is not necessary to obfuscate the operation of the system during tabulation or prevent the ability to positively audit results. The presence of those qualities is represent design choices--poor ones at that.
Comparatively, to equal the level of representation in France, we'd have to have nearly 3,000 people in the House, which is roughly the number of delegates to the National People's Congress in China and they seem to be doing just fine. Granted, it's much easier to count unanimous votes...
Which part? The precinct bit or the prom bit? The precinct bit is a fact, easily established by some pretty simple math (LA County has over 5,000 precincts and 10M people, do said math) -- the prom bit was a joke.
So, my regular $192 Tuesday night tab has five cokes, thirty-seven beers, four martinis, a dozen shots of tequila and a small pizza...just so happens the networking meeting falls on that night and I happen to like coke with my pizza.
I used to have the unglamorous job of keeping an absolutely horrid, ground-up custom hack job accounting system more or less alive. This thing was written over several years by three or four people who had never met each other in a half dozen wonky relatively dead languages. I had an accounting manager roll into my office in hysterics screaming about how the internal reports and external audits varied by $112...over $250,000,000. This was obviously rounding and not even in error, but even the perceived error was on the order of 0.0000448% -- and that was considered unacceptable, which is a tad absurd when the values in question don't even have that many places. But, we're talking integers here. There is no rounding error.
I mean, come on, the average precinct BARELY record 1000 votes and the biggest don't even hit 3000, yet the voting system for the average high school prom, while equally as complicated, extensive and at risk for fraud, is more secure and less prone to error.
I'm left pretty certain that the only way someone could produce such a system for simple integer tabulation with such comparatively huge error rates is if those errors were in fact deliberate and by design. There seems little other explanation and positively ZERO excuse.
It's not just Americans. If you think our security is absurd, you've obviously never been through British or Israeli security of twenty-five years ago. Hell, not even our security has really changed that much in terms of intrusion and delay. You've had to throw your carry-on luggage through the X-Ray, walk through metal-detectors, get the magic-wand treatment and optional white glove treatment for the last quarter century at least (go rent "Airplane!" if your memory fails). Hell, in the mid-90's we had to do the ridiculous laptop/cellphone power-on test to "prove" it wasn't a bomb. Thank god that one has been pretty universally dropped.
Honestly, when I hear people piss and moan about TSA, I'm left wondering, did any of these people travel anywhere BEFORE 2001 or did they take Greyhound?
The constitution, 4th amendment included, applies to all people, not just citizens, on U.S. soil and that includes the soil beneath the customs hall.
Were that not the case, we'd have little need for N379P.
...and this is the problem with "originalism." Divining out what would have been considered "unreasonable" search in 1787 compared to what is unreasonable now is absurd--not least because inspection of personal effects at port of entry was not a matter of law for another century.
Most real computer scientists don't want to perform the work in the domains the unwashed productive masses operate using languages like Java and VB. Why is it so hard to understand that those people do not consider themselves to be computer scientists, nor do their jobs require them to be?
The problem is computer scientists having so much self respect that they're insulted by the jobs they do get, leading to a lack of respect for anyone else performing the same work without precisely the same background, but not enough self respect to go out and get the "real" jobs they think they deserve. It isn't that non-computer scientists are sullying the field, it's that there are legions of unambitious, barely qualified "real" computer scientists trying to make the low-hanging fruit jobs writing silly WYSIWYG GUIs and web applications equate to writing bare metal encryption algorithms for NSA...and then they wonder why there are so many jokes about the alienated, arrogant IT staff that are just this side of batshiat crazy.
They may not be Blood Diamonds(tm), but most of 'em sure are bloody. The vast majority of diamonds come from South Africa and Botswana where the labor record is less than glowing. Sure, it's not Congo, but only precious few diamonds come from places like Canada and Australia where labor standards are at least slightly above appalling.
See, you just proved God doesn't understand threading and has crappy exception handling leading to massive memory leaks, which should explain quite a few things about black holes, string theory and why all programming books insist on beginning with "Hello, world." /Creepy. My captcha was "Programs." Shudder.
What are the issues in designing an interface that is clean, easy to understand, and easy to use?
/Appropriately, my captcha was "miseries."
Listening to your users enough.
What are things to be avoided?
Listening to your users too much.
Really, the whole thing boils down to balancing the above and, unfortunately, it's a very subjective thing.
The advertising hype doesn't claim that at all. It claims a cleaner signal capable of delivering more channels, which is true.
In practice, I've found that of the 15 or so digital channels I get over the air, I get about even thirds each 480/720/1080, all with superior quality to what is delivered over cable, since Comcast decodes, processes (over-saturates color and blows out the contrast), then re-compresses the digital feed to squeeze more out of their pipe.
Brown people surrounded by large bodies of water are better equipped to deal with being bombarded by intense solar radiation than white people surrounded by large buildings.
It is a good day to die.
Email doesn't feel intrusive precisely because it /isn't/ immediate. You haven't actually contacted the person until the time they choose to allow it. It's only "any time, any place" if you choose to sit there glued to that damned screen. Put the CrackBerry down and walk away. You'd be amazed how many people will never notice you're ignoring them.
People like easily recognizable numbers to indicate status. Remove "levels" and how will people get the instant gratification of knowing they're superior without actually having to prove anything? It's like when car manufacturers went from names to alphanumerics. It was hard to tell who was better, the guy driving the New Yorker, Royal, Saratoga or Imperial. But now, obviously, my 500 must beat your measly 300.
That one person may be willing to pay a million bucks for something is less indicative of worth than the fact that a million people wouldn't pay a penny.
By definition, if you receive a DHCPOFFER, return a DHCPREQUEST and in turn receive back a DHCPACKNOWLEDGE, you are absolutely unequivocally being granted express, explicit permission.
Those who claim using a network so provided is done so "without permission" might as well have their dinner guests arrested for trespassing after seating and serving them.
The real issue is that the U.S. actually has very little control. The rest of the world could do whatever the hell they want with it and there's not much we could do about it.
Just because you do not understand the meaning of the classification does not mean it is void.
When I did use NetFlix, I spent a good amount of time flagging as many movies I did NOT want and would never, ever rent as those I did or would. The result was a pretty consistent selection that reasonably matched my taste.
Our fax cover sheets say that even if all that follows is a damned pizza order.
I'd FAR prefer to be run up on the $5,900 "virtual theft" charge than the Federal PMITA hacking charge.